Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's not about the majority of Republican voters as we've clearly proven, it's about the majority of Republican delegates. And it doesn't look like Mitt has this 100% in the bag, based on delegate math and RNC rules.
So, in other words, Paul is the candidate of some of the "party insiders" (the delegates) and Romney is the candidate of the people (the voters). Good to know.
Paul has gotten less than 20% of the vote in the vast majority of states and less than 10% in many states. And now Paulbots are trying (they will be unsuccessful) to force him getting the nomination.
It's not about the majority of Republican voters as we've clearly proven, it's about the majority of Republican delegates. And it doesn't look like Mitt has this 100% in the bag, based on delegate math and RNC rules.
For the plan to work all those delgates that had orginally been for Santorum or Newt would have to go to Paul and THAT is not going to happen. Reality, let's stick with it, it may not always be what we want but it is always the truth.
So, in other words, Paul is the candidate of some of the "party insiders" (the delegates) and Romney is the candidate of the people (the voters). Good to know.
Paul has gotten less than 20% of the vote in the vast majority of states and less than 10% in many states. And now Paulbots are trying (they will be unsuccessful) to force him getting the nomination.
It's funny how Ron Paul wins all the online polls by at least 50% but in general elections the media has Obomney winning after only 1% of the vote being counted. Pure election fraud.
For the plan to work all those delgates that had orginally been for Santorum or Newt would have to go to Paul and THAT is not going to happen. Reality, let's stick with it, it may not always be what we want but it is always the truth.
Well the reality is, Mitt is unelectable because he'll need a vast majority of the Ron Paul crowd to unseat an incumbant whose really not much worse than Mitt himself. Basically, this election should just be given to Obama, IMO. I for one, am not going to tow the party line THIS time, so good luck winning without 20% of the republican base.
Well the reality is, Mitt is unelectable because he'll need a vast majority of the Ron Paul crowd to unseat an incumbant whose really not much worse than Mitt himself. Basically, this election should just be given to Obama, IMO. I for one, am not going to tow the party line THIS time, so good luck winning without 20% of the republican base.
Actually I agree, Mitt isn't going to win, I know that I will not vote for him, but he will at least get far closer than Paul could. I said this when the candidates all first anounced and I will repeat it once again, the GOP was never serious about winning the Whitehouse in 2012, the poor quality of the candidates was all the proof one needed to know this to be a fact. I believe their sights are set on 2016 and right now my guess is it will be Christie as the GOP candidate, but who knows, that is four years from now, oh wait, since the current election bids are starting sooner and sooner the race will begin some time in early 2015, this is getting too crazy. Anyway, the more interesting races are in the House and Senate for his election, my guess is even though there will be some changes the control of each will remain the same as they are, with closer numbers of both Parties in both Houses of Congress, but shall see.
It's funny how Ron Paul wins all the online polls by at least 50% but in general elections the media has Obomney winning after only 1% of the vote being counted. Pure election fraud.
Or the mistaken belief that on-line polls are valid
Actually I agree, Mitt isn't going to win, I know that I will not vote for him, but he will at least get far closer than Paul could. I said this when the candidates all first anounced and I will repeat it once again, the GOP was never serious about winning the Whitehouse in 2012, the poor quality of the candidates was all the proof one needed to know this to be a fact. I believe their sights are set on 2016 and right now my guess is it will be Christie as the GOP candidate, but who knows, that is four years from now, oh wait, since the current election bids are starting sooner and sooner the race will begin some time in early 2015, this is getting too crazy. Anyway, the more interesting races are in the House and Senate for his election, my guess is even though there will be some changes the control of each will remain the same as they are, with closer numbers of both Parties in both Houses of Congress, but shall see.
What is Christie going to do to get the support of the 10-15% of us "Republitarians"? He'll lose that one, and you'll lose in 2020, and in 2024 and 2028.
I said this when the candidates all first anounced and I will repeat it once again, the GOP was never serious about winning the Whitehouse in 2012, the poor quality of the candidates was all the proof one needed to know this to be a fact. I believe their sights are set on 2016 and right now my guess is it will be Christie as the GOP candidate, but who knows, that is four years from now, oh wait, since the current election bids are starting sooner and sooner the race will begin some time in early 2015, this is getting too crazy.
Exactly. It's 1996 all over again. Run Mitt through to clear the queue for the next guy, and put all the money into the NRSC and RNCC and statewide contests. Doubt it'll be Christie in 2016 though unless he drops 100 pounds between now and 2014.
It's funny how Ron Paul wins all the online polls by at least 50% but in general elections the media has Obomney winning after only 1% of the vote being counted. Pure election fraud.
Well the reality is, Mitt is unelectable because he'll need a vast majority of the Ron Paul crowd to unseat an incumbant whose really not much worse than Mitt himself. Basically, this election should just be given to Obama, IMO. I for one, am not going to tow the party line THIS time, so good luck winning without 20% of the republican base.
you are putting way to much into the Paul supporters importance. Many of them are Democrats and will not support Obama either. Many didn't vote last time, Romney should get more independent support this time and many 2008 Obama voters may not vote this time. Now, if Paul supporters that say they are Republicans choose to stay home thus giving the election to Obama like you think will happen, that is the way it has to be. Do you think, this is reason for the Romney supporters to throw in the towel and get behind Paul. Are you saying Paul supporters will not support Romney so Romney supporters should support Paul. That is sorta like Obama saying the Republicans won't cooporate with us because they won't go along with my ideas.
Nita
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
