Jump to content



Photo
gop ron paul republican candidates maine

  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 FMH

FMH

    Neowinian Senior

  • 7,168 posts
  • Joined: 18-July 10

Posted 16 February 2012 - 12:18

////
Full article at Business Insider


Ron Paul Is Secretly Taking Over The GOP — And It's Driving People Insane!

Posted Image

By now, it is clear that the Maine caucuses were a complete mess.

Evidence is mounting that Mitt Romney's 194-vote victory over Ron Paul was prematurely
announced, if not totally wrong. Washington County canceled their caucus on Saturday on
account of three inches of snow (hardly a blizzard by Maine standards), and other towns
that scheduled their caucuses for this week have been left out of the vote count. Now, it
looks like caucuses that did take place before Feb. 11 have also been left out of final tally.


As the full extent of the chaos unfolds, sources close to the Paul campaign tell Business Insider
that it is looking increasingly like Romney's team might have a hand in denying Paul votes,
noting that Romney has some admirably ruthless operatives on his side and a powerful incentive
to avoid a fifth caucus loss this month.

According to the Paul campaign, the Maine Republican Party is severely under-reporting Paul's
results — and Romney isn't getting the same treatment. For example, nearly all the towns in
Waldo County — a Ron Paul stronghold – held their caucuses on Feb. 4, but the state GOP
reported no results for those towns. In Waterville, a college town in Central Maine, results were
reported but not included in the party vote count. Paul beat Romney 21-5 there, according to
the Kennebec County GOP.

"It's too common," senior advisor Doug Wead told Business Insider. "If it was chaos, we would
expect strong Romney counties to be unreported, and that's not what's happening."

The Maine Republican Party won't decide which votes it will count until the executive committee
meets next month. But Wead points out that even if Mitt Romney holds on to his slim lead, it will
be a Pyrrhic victory.

"He will have disenfranchised all of these people," Wead said. "It could be a costly victory — it is
a mistake."

The (alleged) bias against Paul may also be the product of an organic opposition to the libertarian
Congressman and his army of ardent fans. Paul volunteers tend to be young and relatively new to
party politics, and their presence has many state GOP stalwarts feeling territorial.

"People feel threatened — they don't want to see a bunch of kids who may have voted for Barack
Obama take over," Wead said. "They feel a sense of ownership over the party — but there has to
be an accommodation."


#2 Touchadowns

Touchadowns

    [witty title]

  • 152 posts
  • Joined: 30-June 11
  • Location: North GA

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:02

Really? He can't even win a primary. A guy that consistently places 4th out of 4 isn't "taking over" anything.

#3 Tom

Tom

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,278 posts
  • Joined: 06-October 09
  • Location: Germany
  • OS: Windows 7

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:17

I'm happy to see this. He's the only republican candidate who's not bat**** insane. Additionally, he seems a LOT more believable that he'll go through with his promises than Rmoney Romney, Gingrich or Santorum are... those three are a disgrace to the American people. How they got into the positions they did is beyond me... oh wait, no. Wall Street. <_<

If I was American I would be utterly soiling myself that the next President was either going to be a known flip-flopper, a man who says his wife isn't 'first-lady' material or a man who would probably make being anything but a white, rich, straight, christian, conservative illegal and make it illegal for women to be anywhere besides the kitchen and bedroom.

What's Ron Paul for? Getting out of all the wars you're in and reducing the already significant debt AND he has an actual understanding of the constitution - other politicians these days seem to be trying to find all the potential holes in the constitution and so that they can restrict Americans nationwide so that corperations have all the power.

He'd also legalise weed :p


It's been proven many an occasion that when stuff is made illegal, it increases in popularity. Legalise it and reduce the amount of people who do it. Not only that, tax the **** out of it and decrease your debt.

Restrict people and they will find a way around it. Give them freedom and watch them flower.

#4 pack34

pack34

    Professional Electron Wrangler

  • 1,053 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 11

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:20

...

What's Ron Paul for? Getting out of all the wars you're in, reducing the already significant debt and has an actual understanding of the constitution - other politicians these days seem to be trying to find all the potential holes in the constitution and so that they can restrict Americans nationwide so that corperations have all the power.


He'd also legalise weed :p

#5 +Bryan R.

Bryan R.

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,617 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 07
  • Location: Palm Beach, FL

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:21

I'm happy to see this. He's the only republican candidate who's not bat**** insane. Additionally, he seems a LOT more believable that he'll go through with his promises than Rmoney Romney, Gingrich or Santorum are... those three are a disgrace to the American people. How they got into the positions they did is beyond me... oh wait, no. Wall Street. <_<

If I was American I would be utterly soiling myself that the next President was either going to be a known flip-flopper, a man who says his wife isn't 'first-lady' material or a man who would probably make being anything but a white rich straight christian conservative illegal and make it illegal for women to be anywhere besides the kitchen and bedroom.

What's Ron Paul for? Getting out of all the wars you're in, reducing the already significant debt and has an actual understanding of the constitution - other politicians these days seem to be trying to find all the potential holes in the constitution and so that they can restrict Americans nationwide so that corperations have all the power.

It's a good sight seeing someone from the UK have this point of view for a change.

It is beyond unfortunate that we can't get proper simple elections done without corruption rearing it's ugly head.

#6 citan

citan

    Neowinian

  • 232 posts
  • Joined: 25-January 10

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:24

i've been following this guy for a while, very interesting, to me he's the only person that actually wants to deal with the problems of USA - like the federal reserve and policing other countries. I hope he wins :D

#7 +Bryan R.

Bryan R.

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,617 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 07
  • Location: Palm Beach, FL

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:25

Not this round he won't, but maybe next... Things surely aren't going to get any better with anyone else.

#8 Jason S.

Jason S.

    Neowinian Senior

  • 12,180 posts
  • Joined: 01-September 03
  • Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:28

it's fairly obvious that the Elite have already chosen Romney. If any of this fraud is actually true, i wouldnt be in the least surprised.

#9 +Frank B.

Frank B.

    Member N° 1,302

  • 24,229 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 01
  • Location: Frankfurt, DE
  • OS: OS X 10.10
  • Phone: iPhone 6

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:29

Ron Paul is 76. There's no way he'll be running for president in 2016. This year is his last chance.

#10 Charisma

Charisma

    e-1337-ist

  • 4,569 posts
  • Joined: 02-May 10
  • Location: Galactic Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:32

I'm happy to see this. He's the only republican candidate who's not bat**** insane. Additionally, he seems a LOT more believable that he'll go through with his promises than Rmoney Romney, Gingrich or Santorum are... those three are a disgrace to the American people. How they got into the positions they did is beyond me... oh wait, no. Wall Street. <_<

If I was American I would be utterly soiling myself that the next President was either going to be a known flip-flopper, a man who says his wife isn't 'first-lady' material or a man who would probably make being anything but a white, rich, straight, christian, conservative illegal and make it illegal for women to be anywhere besides the kitchen and bedroom.

What's Ron Paul for? Getting out of all the wars you're in and reducing the already significant debt AND he has an actual understanding of the constitution - other politicians these days seem to be trying to find all the potential holes in the constitution and so that they can restrict Americans nationwide so that corperations have all the power.



It's been proven many an occasion that when stuff is made illegal, it increases in polularity. Legalise it and reduce the amount of people who do it. Not only that, tax the **** out of it and decrease your debt.

Restrict people and they will find a way around it. Give them freedom and watch them flower.

Quit being so brilliant and perceptive for your age and nationality ;)
Seriously, +100000000000, you're spot on.

#11 +Bryan R.

Bryan R.

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,617 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 07
  • Location: Palm Beach, FL

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:33

Ron Paul is 76. There's no way he'll be running for president in 2016. This year is his last chance.

Suppose that's true.. Sad but true.

#12 Jason S.

Jason S.

    Neowinian Senior

  • 12,180 posts
  • Joined: 01-September 03
  • Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:36

Ron Paul is 76. There's no way he'll be running for president in 2016. This year is his last chance.

Rand Paul? i dont know anything about the guy though!

#13 OP FMH

FMH

    Neowinian Senior

  • 7,168 posts
  • Joined: 18-July 10

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:43

Rand Paul? i dont know anything about the guy though!


Senator Rand Paul's views are completely similar to his father. I'd vote for him if he ran, and if his father wasn't running.

#14 protocol7

protocol7

    It's Fumbles. It was always Fumbles.

  • 2,519 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 09

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:46

I'd love to see Ron Paul win too, but I'm a realist. Or a cynic (is there a difference any more?).

So it's gonna be "four more years" for Obama.

#15 MurkWorks

MurkWorks

    Neowinian

  • 79 posts
  • Joined: 09-April 07

Posted 16 February 2012 - 20:53

Sadly most of the voters in the primaries are the people on the far left or far right in the parties, and also contain the voters who give the most money to their candidate. The candidates that win the party nomination are the ones that will pander to those extremes sides and then come back to the center where the majority of the population's beliefs are for the general election.