WRONG. The terms "Suspending" and "Withdrawing" a campaign have specific meanings under election law, and Ron did neither of those in the 2012 race. Rather, faced with diminishing resources:
(emphasis mine)On May 14, Paul's campaign announced that due to lack of funds (though despite financial backing from financiers Peter Thiel and Mark Spitznagel[118]) he would no longer actively campaign for votes in the 11 remaining primary states, including Texas and California, that had not yet voted.[9][119] He would, however, continue to seek to win delegates for the national party convention in the states that had already voted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul
Ceasing active campaigning is NOT the same as suspending.
The whole point of having delegates is to have them nominate you and vote for you. If Ron didn't want to be nominated why did he fight to attain and retain delegates right up to the convention?
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Connect With Us