Email from campaign : Michigan is far from over

[kpitcher]

....there are still delegates to be won for Ron Paul in Michigan.

You might wonder "how can this be?"

Because, Santorum and Romney won different districts, and when either of them drops out, those delegates are unbound.

We are still waiting to see what the final results are. If you can believe this, the un-official results posted on the Secretary of State website were wrongly added up by the previous decade's Congressional districts!

When I called the Bureau of Elections to find out more, they informed me that the Secretary of State's office "didn't have time" to figure out which precincts were in which district, and the Republican Party was going to have the job of adding up the precinct totals and figuring out who actually won in each district.

Oh, brother!

I can tell you that Santorum won the 1st, 2nd, and 6th districts. I can tell you that Romney had to win somewhere to win the most votes statewide. But delving into Grand Rapids' 3rd district and metro Detroit's many freshly-gerrymandered districts is going to take a long, long time for the precinct results to be added up.

All we know now is that at least three Congressional districts have delegates up for grabs. (And the possibility of a brokered convention means that really all delegates are still up for grabs.)

So, the race in Michigan is still far from over.

[dancjm]

Good stuff

[ohgodno]

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT7ecEB23u9Dr2uIlKP3OrKhP3t6o_B4 QN4R1P_8pO1njKolfkXog


Real Talk: Ron needs to win a state.

[Darthbrooklyn]

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT7ecEB23u9Dr2uIlKP3OrKhP3t6o_B4 QN4R1P_8pO1njKolfkXog


Real Talk: Ron needs to win a state.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ^^THIS

[kathy88]

Hand counted ballots at the precinct level is our only option for fair elections. A rep from each candidate on hand to oversee the precinct captains, etc. I'd rather have to wait til the next day or even two days later for accurate results. This instant gratification race to call it is beyond dumb.

[economics102]

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT7ecEB23u9Dr2uIlKP3OrKhP3t6o_B4 QN4R1P_8pO1njKolfkXog


Real Talk: Ron needs to win a state.

I guess I'm a little slow but I don't understand what's going on in the picture...?

[dvalukis]

I think a candidate needed at least 15% of the popular vote to be eligible for any type of unbound delegates. The 2 that are up for grabs in Michigan and like you said, when someone drops out.

[dvalukis]

I guess I'm a little slow but I don't understand what's going on in the picture...?

Grasping at straws... It's true. Many of us on here think WAY too optimistically about delegates and the campaign. It's hard enough to actually win them when we've earned them, let alone trying to get ones we didn't.

[parocks]

Yeah. Well, we lost Michigan. Delegates are confusing, no doubt, and each state has different rules. We didn't win any Congressional Districts, whether it's the old lines or the new lines. Not even close. So, no delegates.

[floridasun1983]

....there are still delegates to be won for Ron Paul in Michigan.

You might wonder "how can this be?"

Because, Santorum and Romney won different districts, and when either of them drops out, those delegates are unbound. Serious question: why would ANYONE think either of them are going to drop out?

[Liberty74]

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT7ecEB23u9Dr2uIlKP3OrKhP3t6o_B4 QN4R1P_8pO1njKolfkXog


Real Talk: Ron needs to win a state.

^THIS

[Bruno]

Grasping at straws... It's true. Many of us on here think WAY too optimistically about delegates and the campaign. It's hard enough to actually win them when we've earned them, let alone trying to get ones we didn't.

If you don't have optimism, what do you have? Sure, people are donating and working hard to win states. But when that doesn't happen, it comes down to delegates. And the truth is, many of those delegates will be Ron Paul delegates, bound or unbound until a brokerered or open convention, and who knows what will happen.

For the way some people talk, we may as well pack it in, because we haven't won a state, won't get the media push we should have already had from winning a state, and all is lost as we play the delegate game.

Screw that. The fat lady hasn't sung, and we will continue to rack up delegates, stealthily or otherwise, until that time comes.

[flightlesskiwi]

If you don't have optimism, what do you have? Sure, people are donating and working hard to win states. But when that doesn't happen, it comes down to delegates. And the truth is, many of those delegates will be Ron Paul delegates, bound or unbound until a brokerered or open convention, and who knows what will happen.

For the way some people talk, we may as well pack it in, because we haven't won a state, won't get the media push we should have already had from winning a state, and all is lost as we play the delegate game.

Screw that. The fat lady hasn't sung, and we will continue to rack up delegates, stealthily or otherwise, until that time comes.

this thread needs

NO ONE BUT PAUL!!!!!

[Ivash]

Serious question: why would ANYONE think either of them are going to drop out?

At (or near) the end of the race one might drop out if the other has a commanding lead.

Edit: Also, if Ron Paul were able to gather enough delegates stealthily to win the nomination without winning a state (or winning only a small handful) then the GOP would never, ever let him take the nomination. And frankly, in that set of circumstances, they shouldn't. Not just Ron Paul, I mean, but anyone who somehow got enough delegates to win the nomination without winning (or almost winning) the popular vote. It would be undemocratic, and it would guarantee a loss in the general election (since a large segment of the base would revolt and refuse to vote for the nominee).

[roversaurus]

If the best we can hope for is a ton of delegates at the convention and being the king maker then, sure a slow delegate accumulation is what we should do... Then we just use those delegates to get ... something. I'm signed up to be a delegate. If I make it in my state there will be an out of pocket expense for it ... I don't really want to spend that money if all we get is a prime time speaking slot. That's worthless. Now, VP that's something.

But we have a chance to WIN ... IF we win Washington. I'd like to spend some resources (and candidate time) on Washington/ND,ID,AK to make the difference between second and first. Than preserve those resources so that we can make a difference between 8% and 15% in one of the later primaries. Because if we don't win a state that's what it's going to be. We will consider ourselves lucky to get 15% in April and May if we don't win one of these next states.


If you don't have optimism, what do you have? Sure, people are donating and working hard to win states. But when that doesn't happen, it comes down to delegates. And the truth is, many of those delegates will be Ron Paul delegates, bound or unbound until a brokerered or open convention, and who knows what will happen.

For the way some people talk, we may as well pack it in, because we haven't won a state, won't get the media push we should have already had from winning a state, and all is lost as we play the delegate game.

Screw that. The fat lady hasn't sung, and we will continue to rack up delegates, stealthily or otherwise, until that time comes.

[The Free Hornet]

Grasping at straws... It's true. Many of us on here think WAY too optimistically about delegates and the campaign. It's hard enough to actually win them when we've earned them, let alone trying to get ones we didn't.

As I understand it, there are 2286 people that determine the nominee. The point is to be one of those 2286 or have them convinced Ron Paul is the only one who can beat Obama.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Republican_National_Convention#Delegate_Count (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Republican_National_Convention#Delegate_Count )

The campaign is working hard on those fronts. I wish I had worked to become a delegate. People trust me.

With a four-way race, this could be a very interesting process. Hearts and minds are about all we have and it seems Ron Paul is kicking ass in that regard. Old-fuddy-duddies that control the GOP may not be in control August 27th 2012.

Added: It is an unbelievable accomplishment that Ron Paul is leading in the "vs Obama" polls. Amazing, Amazing ;)

[kathy88]

At (or near) the end of the race one might drop out if the other has a commanding lead.

Edit: Also, if Ron Paul were able to gather enough delegates stealthily to win the nomination without winning a state (or winning only a small handful) then the GOP would never, ever let him take the nomination. And frankly, in that set of circumstances, they shouldn't. Not just Ron Paul, I mean, but anyone who somehow got enough delegates to win the nomination without winning (or almost winning) the popular vote. It would be undemocratic, and it would guarantee a loss in the general election (since a large segment of the base would revolt and refuse to vote for the nominee).

We would be playing by the rules THEY set up.

[Feelgood]

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT7ecEB23u9Dr2uIlKP3OrKhP3t6o_B4 QN4R1P_8pO1njKolfkXog


Real Talk: Ron needs to win a state.

BAM!!!!

+rep awesome pic

[satchelmcqueen]

rules are rules. if paul got the most delegates , i say paul should win.

[Scott_in_PA]

I think the only service we will get from the media is on the delegate front.

I noticed the news outlets have begun to talk about the delegate specifics and last night cnn was trying their best to explain how the Michigan delegates would pan out. All the talk of a NEW face, like Jeb or Chris, will do well to sell the public on something unexpected.

If we have the numbers, which is a long shot, we deserve the nomination as well as anyone. Even more so because Ron is an actual contender.

[specsaregood]

rules are rules. if paul got the most delegates , i say paul should win.

I'm currently of the opinion that the economy is gonna have a big problem before the GOP convention. If it really goes bust, all current rules are out the window, paul is THE guy when it comes to the economy problem.

[bronxboy10]

Rick Santorum told Wolf Blitzer today on CNN that he won Detroit. Is this true? I thought I heard that Ron Paul won Detroit.

[Aratus]

we are getting the delegates we can

[Ender]

At (or near) the end of the race one might drop out if the other has a commanding lead.

Edit: Also, if Ron Paul were able to gather enough delegates stealthily to win the nomination without winning a state (or winning only a small handful) then the GOP would never, ever let him take the nomination. And frankly, in that set of circumstances, they shouldn't. Not just Ron Paul, I mean, but anyone who somehow got enough delegates to win the nomination without winning (or almost winning) the popular vote. It would be undemocratic, and it would guarantee a loss in the general election (since a large segment of the base would revolt and refuse to vote for the nominee).

We are not a democracy- we are a republic. The rules are a little different.

[Ivash]

We are not a democracy- we are a republic. The rules are a little different.

I realize that- but I guaranteeing you that the rules will be ignored if the choice is between 'follow the rules' and 'nominate a person who got less than x% of the vote' (x being a suitably high number- 30-50+%). And (while many would accuse them of cheating) they would be right to 'cheat'. Not only would nominating such a person be a slap in the face of all the supporters of other candidates, but those supporters would almost certainly not vote for such a candidate in the general. The party would be smashed, absolutely slaughtered. Why would voter x, who was a supporter of the candidate who got the most votes, go for someone who voter x sees as having stole the election?

If Ron Paul wants to win the nomination, he has to win by winning states. His path is hard, but not impossible, and it runs squarely through Washington. If he doesn't win there, I don't think he even has a chance of winning. If he does, and does well on Super Tuesday, then things become interesting,

[J_White]

I am positive about the delegate strategy, but unfortunately in this rigged system even if we managed to have more delegates than other not-Romneys, what are the chances that they will not play their tricks to rob us ?
the only thing that can save us is outright wins and getting momentum.
WA is our next best chance and could give us the momentum for Super Tuesday.
Please help out in the Phone from Home.

[jemuf]

At (or near) the end of the race one might drop out if the other has a commanding lead.

Edit: Also, if Ron Paul were able to gather enough delegates stealthily to win the nomination without winning a state (or winning only a small handful) then the GOP would never, ever let him take the nomi...

...d refuse to vote for the nominee).

If Ron Paul were the nominee then many Republicans would refuse to vote? I seriously doubt that. BUT...any that do refuse would be offset many times more by those that decide to participate.

Apparently you don't see it. You think Ron Paul is just some guy running and saying cool things. Ron Paul has an X factor, something undefinable; he's the right man at the right time.

The reason people don't know it is because of a lazy electorate, media bias, and the good 'ol boy network. America will be a lot less lazy when they see a man of character as the Republican nominee.

"In 2012 all you have to do is let your voice be heard."

[Ivash]

Apparently you don't see it. You think Ron Paul is just some guy running and saying cool things. Ron Paul has an X factor, something undefinable; he's the right man at the right time.

No, I don't. Don't get me wrong, I like Ron Paul (though I disagree with him on a variety of policy questions). But I think that any candidate (no matter who it is) would find it impossible to win under those circumstances: not only would the base revolt, but the GOP elite would as well. You'd have a split party on your hands, and the media would talk about literally nothing else. I don't see how anyone could win in those circumstances.

[danielboon]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/politicaltheatre/2012/02/ron-paul-won-detroit/ :cool:The results:

Ron Paul: 5,525
Rick Santorum: 4,047
Mitt Romney: 1,338

[amonasro]

Rick Santorum told Wolf Blitzer today on CNN that he won Detroit. Is this true? I thought I heard that Ron Paul won Detroit.

He really said that?

Sanatorum is a lying scumbag. He's done this on other msm interviews as well. It's probably part of his strategy, but it speaks volumes about his character.