Washington delegate discussion

[Pauliana]

I have to wonder...

If some middle eastern country ran their election process like this...


...would we nuke them???

 

[Leroy_Jenkems]

bump

 

[RonPaulFTFW]

We really have no chance to win when the HQ is so blind on strategy.
Why would they just pick one state that we could win to throw in "stealth" delegates?

Makes no fucking sense at all.

This is why we're losing support. Poor judgment, poor understanding of tactics, and poor execution.

 

[terryhamel]

We're not losing support, not from where I stand. We're gaining support. I helped canvas and organize Clark county in WA. Ron took first place at 45% in the straw poll and an overwhelming number of delegates. There were reports from our table leaders at every one of the 16 caucus locations that many people, R's and D's alike, voted for RP on the spot because of our presence. To quote one D, "I've had enough!" Ron took first in multiple counties.

Even so, you're not going to hear this on the MSM because they are threatened by Ron Paul. The MSM is the enemy. A strategy relying on the MSM is a strategy that will fail. Listen to your brothers and sisters with boots on the ground. They report the truth.

 

[defe07]

I have to wonder...

If some middle eastern country ran their election process like this...


...would we nuke them???

ASAP. How hypocritical, huh?

 

[ceakins]

Who cares about an extra 2 delegates? We won't get enough to make any real difference anyway. We needed a WIN! We need to be shown to be alive. At the very least, if they ignored a win completely, then that would be an ultimate testimate to the MSM ignoring us. We needed a win not an extra 4 delegates so we get around 50 or so as opposed to 48 or 46 or whatever.

A WIN, a WIN, A WIN! We NEED A DAMN WIN!!!

This 'ploy' if it really was a ploy (I recall people saying that we had lots of RP supporters from the people that went to the Alaska caucuses and that didn't turn out so well either) was just wrong. It's disheartening and it didn't help. Just one frikken state damnit. I just want to know if we can be acknoledged if we win one. Is that so much to ask?

Umm please read, a straw poll win doesn't mean we win the STATE! Delegates mean we win a state!

 

[4RP08inKCMO]

We're not losing support, not from where I stand. We're gaining support. I helped canvas and organize Clark county in WA. Ron took first place at 45% in the straw poll and an overwhelming number of delegates. There were reports from our table leaders at every one of the 16 caucus locations that many people, R's and D's alike, voted for RP on the spot because of our presence. To quote one D, "I've had enough!" Ron took first in multiple counties.

Even so, you're not going to hear this on the MSM because they are threatened by Ron Paul. The MSM is the enemy. A strategy relying on the MSM is a strategy that will fail. Listen to your brothers and sisters with boots on the ground. They report the truth.

That still doesn't explain the logic of writing down undecided for presidential preference if you are a Ron Paul supporter. To me it seems like we could have still gotten all our delegates and won the straw poll for once. I mean why did 2,800 people write down Ron Paul if they "were told not to by the campaign?"

 

[CrazyRonPaulSupporter]

We really have no chance to win when the HQ is so blind on strategy.
Why would they just pick one state that we could win to throw in "stealth" delegates?

Makes no fucking sense at all.

This is why we're losing support. Poor judgment, poor understanding of tactics, and poor execution.

We are winning, not the beauty contest, but phuk the popular vote because people are stupid anyway! It makes all sense in the world. At the day of the convention everything will become very clear. I have read a couple of post today that made me realize what is really happening.
And we are not losing support. In fact we are gaining support everyday. First time donor contributions are coming in to the campaign on a daily basis.


Ron Paul have even outsmarted some of his own supporters (including me before I really understood what is really happening behind the scenes). Lol!


.

 

[amonasro]

We really have no chance to win when the HQ is so blind on strategy.
Why would they just pick one state that we could win to throw in "stealth" delegates?

Makes no fucking sense at all.

This is why we're losing support. Poor judgment, poor understanding of tactics, and poor execution.

You think the MSM would even report Washington if he won it? They have a bad track-record for things like this, just look at Louisiana.

Come on, the blackout has been relentless, you think the media would do a 180 and suddenly start singing Ron's praises/ They would have mentioned it once (maybe) and downplayed it somehow. Then they'd bring out the racist smear newsletter stories again because he's more of a threat.

I think HQ did the right thing.

 

[rtil]

I actually went back and changed my sign-in entry to say "ron paul" instead of "republican" after we were done nominating delegates. if i had known they were going to use that to poll us, i would have put RP on it beforehand.

 

[4RP08inKCMO]

I actually went back and changed my sign-in entry to say "ron paul" instead of "republican" after we were done nominating delegates. if i had known they were going to use that to poll us, i would have put RP on it beforehand.

Well hopefully your vote got counted towards Ron Paul. Why didn't you think you should put his name down the first time? I'm just trying to understand all this.

 

[literatim]

They aren't even using entry sign-ins, they are using primary absentee ballots to determine 'caucus results'.

 

[rtil]

Well hopefully your vote got counted towards Ron Paul. Why didn't you think you should put his name down the first time? I'm just trying to understand all this.

it did, because they didnt' count them until we all left.

there's nothing to understand except the fact that nobody knew they were going to use those sign-in sheets to tally results. i found out halfway through the caucus and changed it later.

 

[4RP08inKCMO]

They aren't even using entry sign-ins, they are using primary absentee ballots to determine 'caucus results'.

I believe you, but how do you know this?

 

[rtil]

They aren't even using entry sign-ins, they are using primary absentee ballots to determine 'caucus results'.

if that's the case, then thousands of people who showed up didn't even get counted - because i am not sending in an absentee ballot, i'm voting on the 19th.

 

[literatim]

I believe you, but how do you know this?

http://www.sendspace.com/file/h9nyx6

if that's the case, then thousands of people who showed up didn't even get counted - because i am not sending in an absentee ballot, i'm voting on the 19th.

I am talking about the media.

 

[4RP08inKCMO]

there's nothing to understand except the fact that nobody knew they were going to use those sign-in sheets to tally results. i found out halfway through the caucus and changed it later.

I'm starting to get the picture, but just one more thing. What did everyone think was the purpose of putting down undecided or Republican instead of RP on the sign-sheet? Did you think that everyone at the caucus would be able to know what you put down and not elect you as delegate? Thanks for helping me understand even though "there's nothing to understand."

http://www.sendspace.com/file/h9nyx6

Alright cool, I feel a little better.

 

[literatim]

Alright cool, I feel a little better.

Why? I don't. It just shows that the media will twist and skew results against Ron Paul no matter the actual results.

 

[4RP08inKCMO]

Why? I don't. It just shows that the media will twist and skew results against Ron Paul no matter the actual results.

True, but I'm used to the media skewing things against Ron Paul. I thought the results being released were a result of a mistake by the campaign and that would bother me more than typical media bias.

 

[brianf31]

Yes.

The man is a great debater. He has a great organization, and has been able to capitalize every positive thing that has happened to his campaign.
Much more than I can say of Ron Paul.

He opposed the war, and has promised to withdraw the troops from Iraq since day one of his administration, and take less than 18 months to bring everyone home.
War is my main concern.

But above all, he seems able to get things done. He has taste. His ads, his website, his carefully chosen words, and his speeches, are top notch.
Ron Paul has proven time after time a complete lack of taste. His ads are tacky, his speeches are loud, and unnecessarily complex. His debating skills are lacking.

There is much more to a true leader than good ideas. The ability to materialize those ideas is what really counts.

And in that arena, Obama beats Ron Paul hand over fist.

Recognizing Obama's strengths is one thing. Praising him is another. I think you're on the wrong forum.

The Socialist Obama, like Hillary, is the antithesis of liberty.

I wondered how long it would take for the more leftist supporters to show their true colors