PDA

View Full Version : "Victory...




gb13
03-18-2008, 03:04 PM
...in the conventional political sense is not available in the presidential race..." ~ Ron Paul

Could these words be hinting at a delegate revolt?

I know it may seem far fetched. But, he didn't say "We will not win this election...", he said "victory in the conventional political sense is not available..."

Is he being a bit of a politician here; covertly saying "we can still win", while it sounds like "we're going to lose"?

Just a thought.

phill4paul
03-18-2008, 03:30 PM
"conventional political sense" I believe means conventional belief that one person, POTUS, is the end-all that guides the nations politics.
So where as Dr. Paul may not be the nominee, or the president, the movement that has been created, and is even now in its' political infancy, will be the victor.
Republican delegates can set the party platform and thus have more influence in the long haul than just one man. The representatives that they pick will have a much larger influence in the long haul.
Many write here of "taking over" the Republican party. I don't think of it as much as taking over as redirecting. It's my party. I'm registered. I am not an "outsider". I am a conservative. Old school. I think the party has strayed. How did it stray? Because, those that are not as conservative as I am set the party platform, while I went about believing that my party was acting in my best interest.
No more.
So join the party. Become a delegate if you are still able. If not there is still much work and many people for you to meet before the next selection.

GoPaul08
03-18-2008, 09:42 PM
...in the conventional political sense is not available in the presidential race..." ~ Ron Paul

Could these words be hinting at a delegate revolt?

I know it may seem far fetched. But, he didn't say "We will not win this election...", he said "victory in the conventional political sense is not available..."

Is he being a bit of a politician here; covertly saying "we can still win", while it sounds like "we're going to lose"?

Just a thought.


ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Do ANY of you have a brain! Ron Paul would be PISSED at this idea if he actually cared what the people on this board have to say. Because it would DESTOY his career.

THNIK about it for a second...Ron Paul is getting 5% of the votes. And that is what he REALLY is getting. You can claim fraud all you want, but there is no proof. He really is getting 5%. John McCain is getting 40% or more in every state. Again...no matter how far removed you are from reality, that is REALLY happening.

If Ron Paul "stole" the nomination...do you HONESTLY thin that John McCain's voters would simply say "Well played old man! Here is my vote for you in the general election!"

OF COURSE NOT! Obama would win a UNANIMOUS electoral college victory. (lliterally.)

So what good does it do? He would not be president, and now EVERY opponent of Ron Paul in the future would simply have to say "Remember in 2008 when this man who claims to be for the people, and for democracy decided to undermine democracy and steal the nomination when only 5% of the people wanted him" He would lose to Chris Peden in 2010. (Hell, if this happened, you might see a Democrat decide to run for his spot THIS year.) And every single person he endorsed for office would also lose in a landslide.


Ron Paul would HATE everyone that suggests it. Becuase it is the single most asinine thing that anyone has come up with. 100% RISK, and NO reward.

Basically what you are suggestingis that we all kill his career for good.

If that is what you want, by all means, subvert democracy and hand the presidency to Obama or Hillary.

JS4Pat
03-18-2008, 10:00 PM
ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Do ANY of you have a brain! Ron Paul would be PISSED at this idea if he actually cared what the people on this board have to say. Because it would DESTOY his career.

THNIK about it for a second...Ron Paul is getting 5% of the votes. And that is what he REALLY is getting. You can claim fraud all you want, but there is no proof. He really is getting 5%. John McCain is getting 40% or more in every state. Again...no matter how far removed you are from reality, that is REALLY happening.

If Ron Paul "stole" the nomination...do you HONESTLY thin that John McCain's voters would simply say "Well played old man! Here is my vote for you in the general election!"

OF COURSE NOT! Obama would win a UNANIMOUS electoral college victory. (lliterally.)

So what good does it do? He would not be president, and now EVERY opponent of Ron Paul in the future would simply have to say "Remember in 2008 when this man who claims to be for the people, and for democracy decided to undermine democracy and steal the nomination when only 5% of the people wanted him" He would lose to Chris Peden in 2010. (Hell, if this happened, you might see a Democrat decide to run for his spot THIS year.) And every single person he endorsed for office would also lose in a landslide.


Ron Paul would HATE everyone that suggests it. Becuase it is the single most asinine thing that anyone has come up with. 100% RISK, and NO reward.

Basically what you are suggestingis that we all kill his career for good.

If that is what you want, by all means, subvert democracy and hand the presidency to Obama or Hillary.

No, I don't see it that way at all.

The 5% number is partly a reflection of the media and establishment blackout.

If we could pull off some kind of amazing delegate takeover - I assure you his support would rise considerably. Maybe not amongst the warmongering party hacks in the GOP but I could care less about them - THEY ARE TO BLAME FOR THIS MESS!

Many people would be awakened and a real debate would take place. It would be the best possible thing for American Democracy in 2008!

AJ Antimony
03-18-2008, 10:05 PM
ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Do ANY of you have a brain! Ron Paul would be PISSED at this idea if he actually cared what the people on this board have to say. Because it would DESTOY his career.

THNIK about it for a second...Ron Paul is getting 5% of the votes. And that is what he REALLY is getting. You can claim fraud all you want, but there is no proof. He really is getting 5%. John McCain is getting 40% or more in every state. Again...no matter how far removed you are from reality, that is REALLY happening.

If Ron Paul "stole" the nomination...do you HONESTLY thin that John McCain's voters would simply say "Well played old man! Here is my vote for you in the general election!"

OF COURSE NOT! Obama would win a UNANIMOUS electoral college victory. (lliterally.)

So what good does it do? He would not be president, and now EVERY opponent of Ron Paul in the future would simply have to say "Remember in 2008 when this man who claims to be for the people, and for democracy decided to undermine democracy and steal the nomination when only 5% of the people wanted him" He would lose to Chris Peden in 2010. (Hell, if this happened, you might see a Democrat decide to run for his spot THIS year.) And every single person he endorsed for office would also lose in a landslide.


Ron Paul would HATE everyone that suggests it. Becuase it is the single most asinine thing that anyone has come up with. 100% RISK, and NO reward.

Basically what you are suggestingis that we all kill his career for good.

If that is what you want, by all means, subvert democracy and hand the presidency to Obama or Hillary.

You'd have a good point if you didn't fail to realize what Ron Paul supporters are doing at conventions is nothing but FOLLOWING THE GOP RULES.

The term "dark horse" exists for a reason. Learn some history.

Oh yeah and also there's that thing called the economy. Many think it's going to get worse and I think Republicans will want a smart economist rather than one who admittedly knows nothing about the economy.

idiom
03-18-2008, 10:19 PM
By the time the convention comes around the collapsing economy may have caused a serious amount of buyer remorse about McCain.

Plus the 'evangelicals' still won't for McCain.

RP4EVER
03-18-2008, 10:57 PM
In order to get the evagelical vote Ron Paul must say he is a Christian that still has moral values; he cannot alienate the non Christian base; but if they know he is a christian that is Pro Life then many will look to him.

mczerone
03-18-2008, 11:06 PM
Do ANY of you have a brain! Basically what you are suggestingis that we all kill his career for good.

If that is what you want, by all means, subvert democracy and hand the presidency to Obama or Hillary.

Do you have anything nice to say? I've replied to your negative comments in a few threads now, but haven't seen any suggestions for a course of action, just deriding this tactic or Convincing people not to become delegates.

I applaud those who took the time to become delegate, for if they didn't, 'the system' would be the same group of people next POTUS cycle, and whoever runs like Paul has would be fighting the same fight that we've already lost once.

gb13
03-18-2008, 11:31 PM
ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Do ANY of you have a brain! Ron Paul would be PISSED at this idea if he actually cared what the people on this board have to say. Because it would DESTOY his career.

THNIK about it for a second...Ron Paul is getting 5% of the votes. And that is what he REALLY is getting. You can claim fraud all you want, but there is no proof. He really is getting 5%. John McCain is getting 40% or more in every state. Again...no matter how far removed you are from reality, that is REALLY happening.

If Ron Paul "stole" the nomination...do you HONESTLY thin that John McCain's voters would simply say "Well played old man! Here is my vote for you in the general election!"

OF COURSE NOT! Obama would win a UNANIMOUS electoral college victory. (lliterally.)

So what good does it do? He would not be president, and now EVERY opponent of Ron Paul in the future would simply have to say "Remember in 2008 when this man who claims to be for the people, and for democracy decided to undermine democracy and steal the nomination when only 5% of the people wanted him" He would lose to Chris Peden in 2010. (Hell, if this happened, you might see a Democrat decide to run for his spot THIS year.) And every single person he endorsed for office would also lose in a landslide.


Ron Paul would HATE everyone that suggests it. Becuase it is the single most asinine thing that anyone has come up with. 100% RISK, and NO reward.

Basically what you are suggestingis that we all kill his career for good.

If that is what you want, by all means, subvert democracy and hand the presidency to Obama or Hillary.

Calm the fuck down, buddy. I didn"t say any of the shit about fraud contained in that batty conclusion you so prematurely jumped to, you did. You said it. All I did was bring up a hypothetical supposition.

Listen, I have never advocated using prescription drugs before, but you need to take a damn Quaalude or something.

gb13
03-19-2008, 12:02 AM
"conventional political sense" I believe means conventional belief that one person, POTUS, is the end-all that guides the nations politics.
So where as Dr. Paul may not be the nominee, or the president, the movement that has been created, and is even now in its' political infancy, will be the victor.
Republican delegates can set the party platform and thus have more influence in the long haul than just one man. The representatives that they pick will have a much larger influence in the long haul.
Many write here of "taking over" the Republican party. I don't think of it as much as taking over as redirecting. It's my party. I'm registered. I am not an "outsider". I am a conservative. Old school. I think the party has strayed. How did it stray? Because, those that are not as conservative as I am set the party platform, while I went about believing that my party was acting in my best interest.
No more.
So join the party. Become a delegate if you are still able. If not there is still much work and many people for you to meet before the next selection.

Sounds about right to me. Well said.

uncollapse
03-19-2008, 12:04 AM
GoPaul08 is a typical trollish nick, one that does not require much creativity, a mere attempt to gain access to the board to start trolling.

puppetmaster
03-19-2008, 12:18 AM
ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Do ANY of you have a brain! Ron Paul would be PISSED at this idea if he actually cared what the people on this board have to say. Because it would DESTOY his career.

THNIK about it for a second...Ron Paul is getting 5% of the votes. And that is what he REALLY is getting. You can claim fraud all you want, but there is no proof. He really is getting 5%. John McCain is getting 40% or more in every state. Again...no matter how far removed you are from reality, that is REALLY happening.

If Ron Paul "stole" the nomination...do you HONESTLY thin that John McCain's voters would simply say "Well played old man! Here is my vote for you in the general election!"

OF COURSE NOT! Obama would win a UNANIMOUS electoral college victory. (lliterally.)

So what good does it do? He would not be president, and now EVERY opponent of Ron Paul in the future would simply have to say "Remember in 2008 when this man who claims to be for the people, and for democracy decided to undermine democracy and steal the nomination when only 5% of the people wanted him" He would lose to Chris Peden in 2010. (Hell, if this happened, you might see a Democrat decide to run for his spot THIS year.) And every single person he endorsed for office would also lose in a landslide.


Ron Paul would HATE everyone that suggests it. Becuase it is the single most asinine thing that anyone has come up with. 100% RISK, and NO reward.

Basically what you are suggestingis that we all kill his career for good.

If that is what you want, by all means, subvert democracy and hand the presidency to Obama or Hillary.

Relax gheesh...

Remember it's the message we are spreading here. So I think if this is what it takes to spread the message then so be it, as long as we play by the rules:p. Think of the volume of coverage this would get....it would be breathtaking!

TruthAtLast
03-19-2008, 12:27 AM
wow, this got crazy really quick.

In reference to what the OP was suggesting.... though I don't necessarily think Ron Paul was alluding to a win by the trojan horse delegate strategy, I also don't think he would turn DOWN the nomination if it somehow happened. Really I think he is hoping for a strong showing of strength in our Movement and hopefully to set the direction for the platform as well (basically laying the foundation for future success).

But for the sake of argument, let's say that he actually DID win the nomination.

Yes, some people would be upset but screw them. Dark times call for Drastic measures. Even though Romney and Huck have endorsed McCain, their supporters haven't. In fact, many feel betrayed because they were voting for "their guy" because they were the anti-McCain. So if they had to support Ron Paul as the next best thing, then yeah, they would in a heart beat. Even the media is starting to get a little bored with McCain. I know many people who are just now finding out about Ron Paul well after their primaries where they voted for someone else and are wishing there was a do-over.

Now picture for a moment what would happen if Ron Paul ACTUALLY got equal time in debates. It is one thing for the media to black out Ron Paul in a field of other Republican candidates, or black him out if he tried to run Independent or third party, but if he somehow WAS the nominee for the GOP, they can't just NOT include the nominee for one of the two major parties. Who would Obama debate? Nader? And what exactly would Obama have against Ron Paul? He can argue the war all day long with McCain. He can't do that win Ron Paul. Suddenly, you have an economic expert who is running during one of the worst economic crisis in American history. The Democrats are licking their chops at the idea of going against McCain. I'm not sure they would really know WHAT to do about Ron Paul. They might try to pass him off as a radical that would be a little harder to do at that point.

I think many people have felt that had Ron Paul actually had the ability to explain his policies better (instead of always trying to defend himself in the 30 seconds they give him to speak) then people would begin to understand and open their eyes. If name recognition was the problem, it wouldn't be anymore. If a blackout was the problem, it wouldn't be anymore.

Though I don't think it is really likely that Ron Paul will get the nomination, it would absolutely be the best thing that could happen. It is probably even the best thing for the Republican party (even though they don't now it yet). McCain doesn't even have the ability to raise the required funds to run an effective General Election campaign, but if Ron Paul somehow got the nomination.... holy shit.... if you think he broke records before, I bet he would raise $150 million.

Whatever happens, there is still a lot of good that can come out of this process and the delegates are doing an awesome job. Now if we would also (in parallel) focus on other Liberty Candidates we'd really start to get this Movement on a roll.

american.swan
03-19-2008, 12:35 AM
"conventional political sense" I believe means conventional belief that one person, POTUS, is the end-all that guides the nations politics.
So where as Dr. Paul may not be the nominee, or the president, the movement that has been created, and is even now in its' political infancy, will be the victor.
Republican delegates can set the party platform and thus have more influence in the long haul than just one man. The representatives that they pick will have a much larger influence in the long haul.
Many write here of "taking over" the Republican party. I don't think of it as much as taking over as redirecting. It's my party. I'm registered. I am not an "outsider". I am a conservative. Old school. I think the party has strayed. How did it stray? Because, those that are not as conservative as I am set the party platform, while I went about believing that my party was acting in my best interest.
No more.
So join the party. Become a delegate if you are still able. If not there is still much work and many people for you to meet before the next selection.

Just a note concerning "setting the party platform". This is important but yet just "ink on paper". What good would it do to change the platform if the politicians in DC don't change the way they vote and continue to follow the Israeli lobby and the CFR? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. So, let it be noted, that by changing the party platform, it is vital that WE stay in power in the party AND kick out the members who don't abide by the platform. This is dangerous. Kicking out some popular members would cause serious backlash.

wowabunga
03-19-2008, 12:53 AM
If Ron Paul "stole" the nomination...do you HONESTLY thin that John McCain's voters would simply say "Well played old man! Here is my vote for you in the general election!"



And what might happen if WE stole the hearts of the voting populace between now and the election ?

Are you in a "doubting funk" and are telling us you'll be back to thinking constructively on what needs to be done next ? Elaborate please... meanwhile...

WE have all Spring and Summer to "shake and wake" the population of this country. In December we pecked on these computers, raised money, waved signs and felt great. Mid February we saw the big boys win big... cloudy times. Now here we sit in March and we are seeing some eye opening events with the delegate wins. It feels good to win, to see the sunshine again... I knew it was there.

NOW... we need to give Mr. McCain some payback in the shape of a few stormy cloudy days, months, a whole half a years worth...!!!!!!!! How do we win ??????

We Wake Everyone Up. WE let the Sunshine in...!

Fields
03-19-2008, 01:12 AM
weak.

pinkmandy
03-19-2008, 08:40 AM
I think if we actually pulled this off it would get pretty interesting in the country (as in revolution interesting?). I also think it would be hard to do but not totally impossible. A delegate revolt would open up the dialogue and if people STILL wanted to vote for McSunshineWar he could always run 3rd party, lol.