|
Post by extreme on Feb 2, 2012 0:00:42 GMT -5
Unless these emails are published, I think it's safe to say that the people who brought this up are people claiming to be Anonymous when they are not.
|
|
facemeat
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 24, 2011 0:38:10 GMT -5
Posts: 2,891
|
Post by facemeat on Feb 2, 2012 0:04:35 GMT -5
Unless these emails are published, I think it's safe to say that the people who brought this up are people claiming to be Anonymous when they are not. Yep, my thoughts exactly; those who made the statement clearly already had a bias against Ron Paul, and as far as I know, Anonymous' views are generally in line with Paul's, so they seem like they would be the last group to be biased against him.
|
|
|
Post by Wato Stan Account on Feb 2, 2012 0:39:04 GMT -5
Ask and ye shall receive. pirasec.com/Also Anonymous isn't one group, it's several. Their campaign against the white pride movement has been running heavily since the weekend.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 2, 2012 1:58:32 GMT -5
It's funny that people always want to portray Dr. Paul as being "racist" when he has absolutely never voted racist at any point in his political career.
Also I think it's interesting to note that Anonymous has been very pro Ron Paul pretty much since day one. Now they're suddenly attacking him as being a racist?
Hard to believe.
|
|
|
Post by Wato Stan Account on Feb 2, 2012 2:19:37 GMT -5
Note, they aren't attacking him from the start; they just found information and emails. In no way does it say they endorse the idea. They found information and put it out. It's mostly linking members of various campaign staffs, and Paul speaking to organized groups from them.
I'm sorry it's hard to believe that there can be damning information about the candidate you believe in, but at the end of the day the guy is still a politician. Like any of them that I've liked, they lie.
|
|
|
Post by Tim of thee on Feb 2, 2012 3:51:06 GMT -5
so his (untarnished) record of supporting minority equality in the judicial system is null and void?
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 2, 2012 12:15:16 GMT -5
As I've said before, even if Ron Paul is the most evil, hate-filled bastard on the planet, he does not vote that way, so quite frankly, I don't give a shit.
I've met the man. I've spoken to him, I've seen him interact with people of all races. If he's racist, then he is quite literally the most self-controlled racist on the planet.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 2, 2012 12:17:39 GMT -5
I also want to point out that the text from that article doesn't match up with reality. Ron Paul is not "viciously anti-gay marriage." Anyone who knows anything about him would know that. Also, the "racist newsletters" are clearly not his writing.
Anonymous has been so strongly pro-Paul that they threatened to hack various things that oppose him, whether it be media, anti-Paul sites, etc.
Now they suddenly think he wrote racist newsletters, is anti-gay marriage and conspires with Nazi's? Come on now. That doesn't sound the least bit fishy?
This is why I remain very skeptical about the legitimacy of these claims.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Feb 2, 2012 17:35:48 GMT -5
Apparently Trump is now endorsing Romney. Maybe that means he'll finally go away (from the election).
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 3, 2012 3:02:34 GMT -5
What a RACIST. LoL.
|
|
|
Post by extreme on Feb 4, 2012 21:13:11 GMT -5
Nevada Caucus so far: 37% Romney, 28% Paul, 22% Newt, 13% Santorum.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Feb 4, 2012 22:34:16 GMT -5
Paul is not even going to be a factor in this race. That much is obvious by now. I predict he further pisses off his own party by not giving up his delegates though.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 5, 2012 8:08:17 GMT -5
I remind you again that the caucus system will favor Ron Paul. He will take second in Nevada when it's all said and done.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Feb 5, 2012 9:17:20 GMT -5
Paul is not even going to be a factor in this race. That much is obvious by now. I predict he further pisses off his own party by not giving up his delegates though. Fine with me.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Feb 5, 2012 13:54:13 GMT -5
I remind you again that the caucus system will favor Ron Paul. He will take second in Nevada when it's all said and done. So far it hasn't. He finished 3rd in Nevada by the looks of it. By Super Tuesday, he'll be out of it completely as far as delegates go. The caucus system hasn't worked for him at all by the looks of it. He doesn't even have enough support at this point to make a credible 3rd party run.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 5, 2012 16:28:17 GMT -5
How Ron Paul wins Caucuses A guide for those who keep thinking he's going to drop out
A quick breakdown of the area
In my precinct, Precinct 12 of Cottage Grove, MN; we have been allotted 10 delegate slots. The people who are chosen as delegates have to do with whoever opts to run as a delegate and are then selected to be one.
Straw Poll This happens first. It is the non-binding poll that the media reports. In my precinct, we are expecting a turnout of about 25-30 people, some of whom will be Romney supporters, some Paul, some Gingrich, some Santorum.
Each person who attends the caucus will be given one (1) straw poll vote which says who they would like to be the Republican nominee in 2012.
These votes are tallied up and may come out like this, just as an example...
ROMNEY - 10 PAUL - 6 SANTORUM - 6 GINGRICH - 5
Total - 27
If the media reported this precinct, they would say that Mitt Romney was the winner with Paul, Gingrich and Santorum essentially being in a dead-heat for second.
However...
ELECTION OF DELEGATES This is where the Ron Paul campaign has a leg-up on every other campaign. Our supporters know and understand the caucus process. We understand that what really matters is who is selected as a delegate in a given precinct.
We might only have 20% (or so) of the popular vote from the area, but if ALL SIX of us run as delegates and are elected, we suddenly have 60% (six of 10) of the thing that matters.
Keep in mind that no one knows who you support unless you actually SAY it. No one knows who is a Romney supporter, who's a Paul supporter, whatever -- all of the voting is done by secret ballot.
The vast majority of people who are attending the caucus have no idea what they are doing. In fact, in 2008, 1/3 of the people in my precinct LEFT after the straw poll. Not only that, but only eight total people even WANTED to be delegates in 2008 (because it requires going to an additional caucus-like election a couple months later -- it's a pain in the ass).
By sticking around and working together (ONLY voting for one another as delegates), Ron Paul supporters can very realistically win their precinct by taking the highest number of delegates.
Again, this is what matters.
------------------------
I will post the actual results of my precinct on Tuesday night.
We won't win the straw poll, but I am guaranteeing right now that we will take at least half of the delegates in my precinct.
As I've said time and time again, it's all about organization.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Feb 5, 2012 18:18:04 GMT -5
I'll admit thats confusing. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like if the popular vote in your precinct is Romney you can still turn your back on that and vote for Paul? Isn't that a bit undemocratic?
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 5, 2012 22:27:12 GMT -5
I'll admit thats confusing. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like if the popular vote in your precinct is Romney you can still turn your back on that and vote for Paul? Isn't that a bit undemocratic? You're not turning your back on anything. The straw poll is specifically noted as being non-binding. Keep in mind that the people that are voted as delegates are also not required to vote for who they voted for at the caucus itself. Like if I vote for Ron Paul in the straw poll and then I decide, "You know, I've lost my ing mind, I think I'll support Rick Santorum," I can do that if I become a national delegate. It's my choice. Some states (particularly many of those with primaries) do require delegates to vote a certain way, while others are allowed to vote for whoever they want. However, if no candidate receives the required number of delegates to win the nomination (which is 1144 this year), then all delegates become unlocked, even in states like Florida where Romney has currently has a lock on every single delegate. This is called a brokered convention.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Feb 6, 2012 9:21:10 GMT -5
Essentially what Paul's strategy is is to have delegates vote a different way than constituents want them to. Constituents go to the polls and vote for Romney for example and then Paul goes in and convinces/maneuvers so that the actually delegates who go to the convention vote for him. That's the strategy anyway. Bit dirty, but it's how politics is done and usually doesn't matter. Once the candidate is picked (which usually happens by Super Tuesday), the other candidates drop out making the whole point moot. Paul won't do this. He didn't do it four years ago. He doesn't play by his parties rules which is why they will unite behind him if he manages to win the nomination.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Feb 6, 2012 11:07:06 GMT -5
Seems a bit unfair to go against the popular vote, I think the system should certainly be changed to make a constituent's vote binding. Or, even better, get rid of the whole Caucus thing and just do primaries.
|
|