Ron Paul Delegates: ZERO in Florida but he may win Maine

[melensdad]

Ron Paul has pretty much skipped the state of Florida.

Good choice, as Florida's primary is a "winner take all" for delegates. Mitt and Newt are spending millions, one will walk away with all the delegates. The other, along with Santorum and Paul will get ZERO.

So what does Ron Paul do? He goes up to Maine and strengthen his base in the PROPORTIONAL caucus state. Why waste money in Florida when you can take roughly half the delegates in the state of Maine.

Good choice Ron

I'm really hoping that he has enough delegates at the GOP convention to ensure that a FISCAL CONSERVATIVE is put into the VP slot on the ticket.

 

[steveh_131]

I'm really hoping that he has enough delegates at the GOP convention to ensure that a FISCAL CONSERVATIVE is put into the VP slot on the ticket.

Could you please explain how his number of delegates affects who is placed into the VP slot?

I'm not really clear on the delegate process.

 

[melensdad]

Could you please explain how his number of delegates affects who is placed into the VP slot?

I'm not really clear on the delegate process.

The people who stay in the race and gather up delegates have some level of influence over the entire party. They don't actually control anything, but their strength is measured by the number of delegates they control. So if someone sticks around and has enough delegates, and they are of a different political philosophy than the actual candidate, they can exert some level of power over the party platform, and potentially over the selection of the VP choice.

For example, Sarah Palin was a no name but brought balance to the ticket with McCain since he was known as a moderate/liberal member of the GOP. Now we will likely have Romeny as our "choice" (at least based on polls) and he is a moderate/liberal within the GOP. If Ron Paul can accumulate enough delegates then we very likely will NOT get someone like Chris Christie on the ticket with Romeny, yet many are predicting a Romeny-Christie ticket. Both are east coast liberals who oppose guns.

If the party is divided then even someone like Romney will have to bow down to the fiscal conservative/libertarian wing of the party and choose someone who acts as a balance to him.

So no direct control over the VP selection, but there is some serious potential to having indirect influence.

 

[Prometheus]

The only way I'd vote for romney is if he had a conservative VP and then he killed himself the morning of the election, ensuring he couldn't take office.

Doubly so for moonbase gingrich.

 

[ikky68]

The only way I'd vote for romney is if he had a conservative VP and then he killed himself the morning of the election, ensuring he couldn't take office.

Doubly so for moonbase gingrich.

LOL. You guys in INGO have a wonderful sense of humor.

 

[RMOR]

I saw this the other night and it really made me happy. I'm sure the other campaigns thought about this, but the fact that the Paul campaign followed through on this strategy shows me that he is on the ball, trying to win, and committed to seeing this thing through. He is not bowing down, or out. RP 2012.

 

[Prometheus]

I saw this the other night and it really made me happy. I'm sure the other campaigns thought about this, but the fact that the Paul campaign followed through on this strategy shows me that he is on the ball, trying to win, and committed to seeing this thing through. He is not bowing down, or out. RP 2012.

Kali is another state Paul could actually win. It isn't entirely out of the realm for Paul to win the most delegates...

Of course from there where do you go? It would be a long shot for him to get 50.1% and in that case, which blowhard will bow out and give their delegates to the other?

How many of those delegates will be bound to abide by the other windbags request?

Interesting times indeed.

Theater for the masses. Nothing more.

 

[melensdad]

I saw this the other night and it really made me happy. I'm sure the other campaigns thought about this, but the fact that the Paul campaign followed through on this strategy shows me that he is on the ball, trying to win, and committed to seeing this thing through. He is not bowing down, or out. RP 2012.

I honestly believe that he knows damn well he can't win. I think I've even heard him say as much. He is not in it to win, but rather to see it to the end and try to influence the party to bring it back on track with fiscal constraint and individual liberty.

 

[sepe]

LOL. You guys in INGO have a wonderful sense of humor.

I saw no humor or joking in that post. I agree with him 100%.

 

[rbsangler]

I thought Ron Paul looked tired during his speech after the Florida primary.

 

[ikky68]

I saw no humor or joking in that post. I agree with him 100%.

It's not whether you agree or disagree. It's the application of the English language and the choice of words. The absurdity of the condition for getting his vote is very humorous.

I'm in complete agreement with him. If Ron Paul was VP I'd buy the gun and bullet(s).

 

[dross]

I honestly believe that he knows damn well he can't win. I think I've even heard him say as much. He is not in it to win, but rather to see it to the end and try to influence the party to bring it back on track with fiscal constraint and individual liberty.

It's always been clear as day that he knows he can't win. I saw an interview with Rand Paul that made it pretty clear that he knows it. Which is comforting, actually. I'd hate to think he was as naive about politics as his supporters.

He has my vote and I hope lots of people do the same all the way through the primaries. Then I hope he turns his influence into something useful.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

^^^^^^this

dross is spot on. And I plan to follow the same course.

Instead of excoriating people and making ENEMIES of people by calling them all manner of names - Ron Paul is reasonably laying out his agenda and pushing forward what he believes in. Now if those who support him would do the same, instead of shouting down all opposition, they would actually see some of what they want IMPLEMENTED.

Vote for him in the primary - give him the ammunition to go to the convention and make the case. The larger that number the better.

 

[dross]

^^^^^^this

dross is spot on. And I plan to follow the same course.

Instead of excoriating people and making ENEMIES of people by calling them all manner of names - Ron Paul is reasonably laying out his agenda and pushing forward what he believes in. Now if those who support him would do the same, instead of shouting down all opposition, they would actually see some of what they want IMPLEMENTED.

Vote for him in the primary - give him the ammunition to go to the convention and make the case. The larger that number the better.

But you see, what we're doing isn't good enough. We're part of the problem. What we SHOULD do is refuse to vote for anyone but Paul, because somehowor other in a way I can't quite understand, not participating is the most effective way of participating, or something. What I do know for sure is that even though we're voting for Paul, we're bad people and part of the problem.

 

[melensdad]

But you see, what we're doing isn't good enough. We're part of the problem. What we SHOULD do is refuse to vote for anyone but Paul, because somehowor other in a way I can't quite understand, not participating is the most effective way of participating, or something. What I do know for sure is that even though we're voting for Paul, we're bad people and part of the problem.

That is a sad commentary but seems to be very true.

Even though I am a Ron Paul supporter and will vote for him in the primary, if I then vote for anyone (but him) in the general election there are those here who believe that I am evil and a traitor.

What I don't understand is why those people who believe that are even supporting Ron Paul. Should they not be supporting Gary Johnson on the actual Libertarian ticket?

By supporting Ron Paul it seems that you are committed to change the Republican Party from within. That tacit consent to change from within must have some logical secondary action if Dr Paul does not win a majority of the delegates.

• Given that even Dr Paul does not believe he will win, AND,
• given that Dr Paul is committed to change the GOP from within the current system, then it seems that
• those of us who support Dr Paul must be willing to support his cause of changing the GOP from within

Those who would vote for Ron Paul in a primary and then sit out or vote for a different party in the general election are logically betraying a Paul candidacy because they are not following what he actually advocates during this campaign (which they claim to support).

How can those folks who support him (and presumably his ideals) in the primary then not support his wishes after the results of the primary are determined?

.
.
.

 

[steveh_131]

The people who stay in the race and gather up delegates have some level of influence over the entire party. They don't actually control anything, but their strength is measured by the number of delegates they control. So if someone sticks around and has enough delegates, and they are of a different political philosophy than the actual candidate, they can exert some level of power over the party platform, and potentially over the selection of the VP choice.

For example, Sarah Palin was a no name but brought balance to the ticket with McCain since he was known as a moderate/liberal member of the GOP. Now we will likely have Romeny as our "choice" (at least based on polls) and he is a moderate/liberal within the GOP. If Ron Paul can accumulate enough delegates then we very likely will NOT get someone like Chris Christie on the ticket with Romeny, yet many are predicting a Romeny-Christie ticket. Both are east coast liberals who oppose guns.

If the party is divided then even someone like Romney will have to bow down to the fiscal conservative/libertarian wing of the party and choose someone who acts as a balance to him.

So no direct control over the VP selection, but there is some serious potential to having indirect influence.

Thanks for the info. I always wondered how that works.

Kali is another state Paul could actually win. It isn't entirely out of the realm for Paul to win the most delegates...

Of course from there where do you go? It would be a long shot for him to get 50.1% and in that case, which blowhard will bow out and give their delegates to the other?

How many of those delegates will be bound to abide by the other windbags request?

Alright, more education is required here. You're saying that if he wins the most delegates, the other two could decide to share theirs so that he can't win anyways? Do the candidates decide what the delegates do?

 

[ATM]

...
How can those folks who support him (and presumably his ideals) in the primary then not support his wishes after the results of the primary are determined?

Easy. I never planned to cast my vote according to Ron Paul's wishes.

It will certainly be cast for him if he is a candidate, but it's not like I'm giving up my personal vote for him to cast as his own.

 

[melensdad]

You're saying that if he wins the most delegates, the other two could decide to share theirs so that he can't win anyways? Do the candidates decide what the delegates do?

Realize there is no chance he can win the most delegates. He has already stated he can't win and won't win.

His goal is to win enough to influence the party platform, to raise the level of respect given to his son Rand (which is why he will NOT run 3rd party), and push forth the agenda of constrained government.

As for the answer to your question, delegates "pledge" to vote for the candidate that won the votes, however if a candidate leaves the race and has delegates he can exert SOME influence over "his" delegates and encourage them to cast their vote for a surviving candidate. They do NOT have to follow the recommendation, but most likely will do so.

Easy. I never planned to cast my vote according to Ron Paul's wishes.

It will certainly be cast for him if he is a candidate, but it's not like I'm giving up my personal vote for him to cast as his own.

Then why not simply support Gary Johnson as the real Libertarian? That makes more sense, is intellectually honest, and is clearly the consistent vote.

 

[steveh_131]

As for the answer to your question, delegates "pledge" to vote for the candidate that won the votes, however if a candidate leaves the race and has delegates he can exert SOME influence over "his" delegates and encourage them to cast their vote for a surviving candidate. They do NOT have to follow the recommendation, but most likely will do so.

What have past delegates done historically when their candidate drops from the race? Do they typically follow his recommendation or do they vote for whoever they want? Or has this even happened?

 

[ATM]

...
Then why not simply support Gary Johnson as the real Libertarian? That makes more sense, is intellectually honest, and is clearly the consistent vote.

Because I don't favor him over Paul.

I'll weigh the choices available when the general election gets here and vote however I please. I owe my allegiance to no particular party.