|
Post by extreme on Feb 12, 2012 20:06:39 GMT -5
The Freedom Watch is now cancelled by Fox. Fox News networks have now become completely unwatchable.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 12, 2012 20:51:21 GMT -5
No you havnt. All you've been doing is going on and on about how much of a stud you think Ron Paul is. And how he can fix all our problems. And how he's not crazy. You've got one heck of a man crush there. Apparently you don't understand that a human is capable of liking a candidate and yet not thinking they're going to win. Somehow I'm not surprised that you are incapable of making this distinction. Pretty much falls in line with the perception everyone has of you. DERRRRRRRRRRRRRP.
|
|
|
Post by Halloween King on Feb 13, 2012 0:02:47 GMT -5
No you havnt. All you've been doing is going on and on about how much of a stud you think Ron Paul is. And how he can fix all our problems. And how he's not crazy. You've got one heck of a man crush there. Apparently you don't understand that a human is capable of liking a candidate and yet not thinking they're going to win. Somehow I'm not surprised that you are incapable of making this distinction. Pretty much falls in line with the perception everyone has of you. DERRRRRRRRRRRRRP. I think its funny how people say "I want to further my arguement". There is no arguement here.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 13, 2012 4:44:39 GMT -5
I think its funny how people say "I want to further my arguement". There is no arguement here. What the are you even talking about? No, there is no argument. I've said ALL ALONG that I don't THINK Ron Paul is going to win. The people here who actually have brains can all vouch for that. I've said ALL ALONG that I believe Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee and that Barack Obama will be re-elected. Again, sorry to hit you with the facts. I know how much you like completely baseless, blind speculation. ... The thing is that I don't support Ron Paul because I think he's going to win. I support him because I believe he's RIGHT. I believe that his message is by far and away the closest to MY beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 15, 2012 1:58:36 GMT -5
.............. No seriously...
SHENANIGANZ!
|
|
facemeat
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 24, 2011 0:38:10 GMT -5
Posts: 2,891
|
Post by facemeat on Feb 15, 2012 4:02:25 GMT -5
.............. No seriously... SHENANIGANZ!What a load of bulls***. It seems that every caucus thus far has been wrought with fraud, and what pisses me off the most is that they can get away with it because they're "just straw polls that don't mean anything". And that may be true, but you would never know that based solely on their media exposure.
|
|
|
Post by extreme on Feb 15, 2012 4:28:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 17, 2012 13:04:10 GMT -5
Fast forward to 7:35 for the good stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Feb 17, 2012 15:20:05 GMT -5
Santourum's beating Romney by 4 points in Michigan (I think thats the state next?), seems to be putting up stronger opposition than Gingrich did to Romnay's mudslinging. So much changes so quickly in this race though, I doubt he'll win the primary.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 17, 2012 15:21:44 GMT -5
Yeah, the next two states are Arizona and Michigan, which are both primaries, on Feb. 28.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Feb 18, 2012 8:57:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 18, 2012 14:17:04 GMT -5
An update on the link you just posted, ARR. ... Seriously, anyone questioning that this crapis rigged, at this point, is a ing moron.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Feb 18, 2012 15:39:44 GMT -5
Thanks for that. Rigged or not rigged, people just don't give a
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 19, 2012 7:51:05 GMT -5
Ron Paul more than doubles Mitt Romney's votes in Washington County, Maine
Other - 2 Gingrich 4 Santorum - 57 Romney - 80 Paul - 163
Hmm, I wonder why they didn't want these votes to count.......... HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Seriously, people, the fix is in. Mitt Romney is being HANDED this election and unless people stand up to the screwjobs that are happening, it's going to be Obama vs. Romney in 2012.
Might as well have Obama vs. Obama.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 23, 2012 17:42:18 GMT -5
For those who might be interested in how the delegates are allocated on Super Tuesday...
Alaska – 27 (straight fractional delegate allocation based on state-wide vote)
Idaho – 32 (weird “elimination” voting system where the winning candidate in each county gets the delegates for that county. This will very likely mean that one candidate will take the vast majority of the delegates in this state, if not all of them.)
North Dakota – 28 (caucus, fractional delegate allocation based on state-wide vote)
Tennessee – 58 (half are fractionally split by Congressional District [if two candidates get 20% or more] unless one candidate gets 2/3 of the vote, then they get all the delegates in that district – the other half are determined by the state’s results as a whole, which are also fractional [if two candidates get 20% or more] unless one candidate gets 2/3 of the vote, then again they would get all of that half’s delegates [28])
Virginia – 49 (ONLY PAUL AND ROMNEY ARE ON THE BALLOT HERE – 33 of the delegates are split by congressional district with the primary poll winner getting 3 delegates in each district they win – The other 13 would NORMALLY be interesting because they’re awarded proportionately if no candidate gets over 50%. But because there’s only two candidates in the state and write-in votes are not accepted, either Romney or Paul will reach over 50%, thus meaning that they will get all 13 of the remaining delegates)
Vermont – 17 (11 are given out proportionately among candidates who receive at least 20% of the vote, 3 are given out to whoever gets the highest number of total votes in the state)
Georgia – 76 (42 are determined by Congressional District. Each district gets 3 delegates. If a candidate achieves 50% of the vote in a district, they get all 3. Otherwise the top vote-getter gets 2 delegates and second place gets 1… 31 delegates are determined by the state-wide vote. Each candidate receiving 20% or more of the state-wide vote will receive a corresponding fraction of the delegates)
Massachusetts - 41 (Essentially split proportionately among candidates receiving at least 15% of the state-wide vote… It’s a bit more complicated than that because a committee decides how they are going to appropriate the delegates, but that’s what they have done in the past.)
Ohio – 66 (48 are split among the congressional districts with the winning candidate receiving 3 delegates for each CD that they win – 15 are given to the candidate who gets the highest number of total votes in the state)
Oklahoma – 43 (15 are split among congressional districts. If a candidate achieves 50% of the vote in a district, they get all 3. Otherwise the top vote-getter gets 2 delegates and second place gets 1. – 25 are allocated by the state’s total primary vote. If any candidate gets more than 50% of the total vote, then he wins all 25 delegates. Otherwise the 25 are divvied out based on percentage of vote received, provided that they get at least 15% of the state-wide vote).
----
Some of these don’t add up, I know. That’s because a bunch of states give their top party leaders an automatic National delegate spot, and I believe they all get to choose whoever they want. So a lot of states have 3 or so votes that don’t have anything to do with the primary/caucus process.
----
A total of 437 delegates are up for grabs on Super Tuesday. While this is a huge number (about 1/5 of the total number of delegates throughout the country), it is not enough to guarantee a winner for any candidate unless one COMPLETELY dominates. As we have seen throughout the process, however, that is unlikely to happen.
Most of the states here utilize some sort of fractional delegate allotment. This means that it is THEORETICALLY possible that a candidate could not “win” any states, but come in second place in enough states that he still gets the highest number of delegates on Super Tuesday.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Feb 23, 2012 17:52:54 GMT -5
Santorum is running neck and neck with Romney in national polls. I find this disturbing to be honest. Paul's libertarian message is not one that people care about. That one is obvious. Either that or they like the message, but don't care for him at all. Santorums right wing, nutjob message is apparently resounding with the populace and Romney is the media darling of the more moderates. There are more right wing nutjobs out there than libertarians apparently.
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 23, 2012 18:13:16 GMT -5
Santorum is running neck and neck with Romney in national polls. I find this disturbing to be honest. Paul's libertarian message is not one that people care about. That one is obvious. Either that or they like the message, but don't care for him at all. Santorums right wing, nutjob message is apparently resounding with the populace and Romney is the media darling of the more moderates. There are more right wing nutjobs out there than libertarians apparently. According to what poll? Romney was backed by 29 percent of Republican voters in the telephone poll conducted February 2-6, down from 30 percent in a survey in early January, although the change was within the poll's margin of error.
Support for Ron Paul, a U.S. congressman from Texas, grew by 5 percentage points to 21 percent. That moved him into second place and ahead of former House of Representatives speaker Newt Gingrich, whose support slipped to 19 percent from 20 percent.
Support for Rick Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, rose by 5 percentage points to reach 18 percent, putting him just behind Gingrich, according to the poll.- Reuters News------------- Sure that article is from two weeks ago, but I find it very hard to believe that Ron Paul has LOST support. Maybe Romney dropped off a bit and Gingrich did a bit, and that might bump up Santorum to second; but it'd still be a very close race with Ron Paul.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Feb 23, 2012 19:58:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Feb 23, 2012 20:53:12 GMT -5
Every poll has different numbers. I find it extremely hard to believe that Paul's support fell 5%. We've seen his numbers steadily rise since the beginning.
But regardless, Paul's numbers are always going to be skewed in polls like this. They're only polling registered Republicans. How many REGISTERED REPUBLICANS actually support Paul? 16 sounds about right.
Now how many INDEPENDENTS or even DEMOCRATS support Paul? That's the interesting one. That's the one that makes his numbers go up in the head-to-head polls with Obama.
|
|
|
Post by Tim of thee on Feb 27, 2012 20:34:24 GMT -5
|
|