Texas style party for RON PAUL!! - Ft. Worth June 7th before we take the establishment down. (Congress, wage)
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.
The question to ask is: How did government get so big?
The answer is: Somebody suffers, and somebody benefits. More voters benefitted than suffered as the size of government grew.
Someone who did better when the government grew probably looks at you as being the stupid one, especially if you could have done the same.
Force and coercion don't enter into it. If a mechanic can make more money working on a government project than he can at a local garage, which job is he going to take? Once he has it, is he going to give it up arbitrarily because you believe you're getting picked on? I don't think so.
Would you give up a good Fed job if I moaned and hollered because I think I'm being forced into something? i don't think so.
I can't say I really agree with this. Overall I think we have all suffered as govt gobbles more and more. Making it harder to maintain rights and a standard of living. Since the govt has pretty much got control of most things I think it has been more about go along to get along than benefit.
True many would love a cushy govt job, but this same mentality that is robbing the economy is the one going after the govt worker pension funds and indebting everyone. So those thinking they will be looked after may very well be mistaken. However, there are valid points to how people have been enticed.
Ron Paul came up with the idea in the first place. He knew delegates elect the nominee not the popular vote. Those are the rules.
I had heard a memo went out to that effect, but wasn't sure that it came from Paul. Do you have any information that the idea was generated by Paul? And can you cite the legal rules that delegates can, covertly, apply to represent a candidate that they have no intention to vote for? I must be honest and say I don't believe that is a fair way to win an election.
I have a question for the Paulbots - why do you think of yourselves as the "little people" and RNC as the "establishment" when you're the ones who want to circumvent the will of the voters...who, in Texas, voted for Romney over Paul by a 6-to-1 margin (not to mention in all the other states where Paulbots became Romney delegates)?
I would like an actual answer to this question from one of the Paul supporters.
I should mention...I am not trying to imply that Romney beat Paul by a 6-to-1 margin every state where Paulbots became Romney delegates (though Romney/Santorum/Newt combined certainly beat Paul by a margin of around that large or more in virtually all of these states and Paul won the popular vote in just one primary/caucus - the one in the US Virgin Islands).
As far as who delegates must vote for, Paul supporters should take a look at this...
It's on "The Daily Paul" site. I can't wait to hear the Paulbots - many of whom likely go to that site multiple times a day and read virtually everything on it as gospel - explain why even something posted on that site is wrong.
Our system depends on the full faith of our delegates, whoever they may be, from local county delegates all the way up to the electoral college, will follow the will of the voters.
To betray this faith is just like a person who enters a bank, pretending to make a deposit, and then robs the bank. It is both robbery and a theft from others, who deposited their money in good faith.
That is why people who rig elections can be convicted of a felony and go to jail.
While I doubt any Paulista who does this would go to jail, gloating over a betrayal like this is something that is as stupid as a bank robber who walks in and says "I'm gonna rob this bank!" If someone becomes a delegate for the purpose to corrupt our process, it is criminal intent. It is ironic how quickly the Paul followers holler everyone but them are idiots, while they proudly announce their plans to rob the Bank of Public Faith.
There is nothing noble or pure in thinking and acting like a criminal. Once that thinking starts, everything that follows- trying to cover up, denying, lying, or trying to pass the blame just becomes more criminal behavior. In time, a once-honest man becomes a crook because it turns to a habit.
Just ask Richard Nixon. He didn't start out to become one, but he WAS a crook by the time he resigned. He made himself a crook.
If Paul's movement is ever to become a viable political force, it must shed itself of this kind of thinking. The public might not be informed. It might be stupid. It might be nothing but a flock of sheep. But it still knows a crook when it sees one. Even the most stupid sheep knows what a coyote's intentions are.
Like him or not, Ron Paul is an honest man who wants to win fair and square. Far too many of his followers lack his honesty. They are more than willing to jump into the cesspool of cheating, fraud and dishonesty, and seem happy wallowing in the sewage.
Last edited by banjomike; 06-12-2012 at 02:18 PM..
Who lied? There were a whopping handful of Romney supporters there. Certainly not with enough fight in them, to fill his delegate count.
Romney was a minority in the crowd. He was to ashamed(or overwhelmed) to speak up. What a train wreck.
!
Uh...I assume you lied.Are you saying you went in and ran as a delegate and told the people you intend to vote for Ron Paul and they just said ,"Oh ok, well we don't have enough Romney supporters here to fill the delegate slots so we would like you to go to the convention as a Romney delegate although you don't intend to vote for him"??Is that what happened??
You were the one who stated,"I'll let you in on a little secret.I'm going as a Romney delegate.Hahahahaha!The plan worked flawlessly and the establishment is totally clueless that we are not voting for Romney"......it sounds to me that you are not only admitting intentional deception to become a delegate but actually gloating about it.Plenty of people on the Daily Paul were doing the same thing....... i'm sure Ron Paul and your mom would be very proud!
Another poster claims that the lieing was Ron Pauls idea in the first place!.....I guess for some of you the end justifies the means.
I would like an actual answer to this question from one of the Paul supporters.
I should mention...I am not trying to imply that Romney beat Paul by a 6-to-1 margin every state where Paulbots became Romney delegates (though Romney/Santorum/Newt combined certainly beat Paul by a margin of around that large or more in virtually all of these states and Paul won the popular vote in just one primary/caucus - the one in the US Virgin Islands).
As far as who delegates must vote for, Paul supporters should take a look at this...
It's on "The Daily Paul" site. I can't wait to hear the Paulbots - many of whom likely go to that site multiple times a day and read virtually everything on it as gospel - explain why even something posted on that site is wrong.
Not sure I would characterize things the way you have. Also not sure if your question is rhetorical. However, I will attempt to offer my view on the delegate thing. I am not a supporter of the bound idea. Ideally, I would like to see it removed. This hopefully explains why.
The "bound" issue simply means currently, as I understand, that different localities have different penalties for not being "bound" so it is important to know what those consequences are.
This attempts to state how I see the delegate process and it's role as a representative process from a prior discussion with imbob on LA delegate thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDusr
No. Let me try to clarify. I am not a fan of primaries so for clarity sake lets nix that. Caucuses present a process whereby "local" reps are chosen based on the process. It is known, as part of the process what the rep believes and where he stands. As a result of that process I believe the rep that is chosen should vote his conscience. Essentially, you are electing a "free agent" rep to vote his conscience.
I was also referring to this democracy meme everybody gets "brainwashed" by, isn't even a "good" thing in my view and it doesn't exist.
Even if you say a few go vote and their votes are really counted. I say so what, they don't represent everybody else. The little choice you actually get to even vote on in our current controlled system of vanilla and french vanilla is a joke, it isn't real.
The "majority" deciding isn't an ideal I think is good.
I see our system as a process that elects a rep from "grass roots" to go vote his conscience further up for a rep of his choice.
As I mentioned before we really don't have many choices anyway, so that is limited.
I believe in "choice" and "free will" though certainly you can debate the limits of either.
OK CDusr,you wrote that "it is known,as part of the process what the rep believes and where he stands" so what is your opinion of someone volunteering to be a Romney delegate although they have no intention to vote for Romney?
OK CDusr,you wrote that "it is known,as part of the process what the rep believes and where he stands" so what is your opinion of someone volunteering to be a Romney delegate although they have no intention to vote for Romney?
I don't know all the details. So can't really judge. I think voting your conscience is the most important. Someone can change their mind, for example anytime. Can't say I see that as being an approach I would choose.
Not sure why somebody would say they support someone or what bearing it had on their situation in regard to them becoming a delegate.
The fact that so many RP supporters have been traumatized and abused creates a very scary environment. If someone felt threatened in some way I can't really blame them for such behavior. As I said I can't see it being my choice, but that is why the GOP needs to be held accountable for treating people this way. This lawsuit against the GOP will hopefully protect RP supporters.
Generally, like everybody I think being transparent is the best way to go, but if somebody holds a "gun to your head" or you are in an extreme situation I could view the situation differently. I don't like to be judge and jury of others. I don't try to practice condemnation. Just attempt to be personally responsible.
Since they are not bound, most Romney delegates are voting for Ron Paul.
Quote:
Originally Posted by imbobbbb
"MOST" huh? BornToRun/N_M_156 did you change your screenname again??
I was thinking the same thing.
I think "DrinkingAgain" is a VERY fitting username though. It's obvious that something is causing the disconnect with reality.
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.
.....I guess for some of you the end justifies the means.
