If the election was today, who would you vote for?

[KALKAM]

Ron Paul can still be considered an option.

I'm surprised actually, at the state of affairs in Conservative America, that Paul's not more of a factor in the GOP race. For crying out loud, he's running against Romney, the bumbling, flip-flopping, free healthcare loving, pro-socialist, American job outsourcing, tax evading, draft dodging, closeted Democrat.

Yep...a democrat is a fine upgrade over an incompetent radical leftist....

I mean if you handed Clinton this congress he would have out tea-partied them...bigger cuts, slashed the deficit and ran a surplus...he was practical and not just an amateur idealist...he also had some experience in such things...governor I believe.

Ron Paul got hurt for following reasons....

1) GOP base is strong on the military...he is the old time isolationist...the 2 parties flipped...used to be the left were the interventionists and the right isolationists.

2) ALEX JONES....really really hurt him....his big catch on was with the conspiracy theorists...it became popular and Alex Jones would have him on...so Ron Paul was associated with them....this really killed him.

3)The RNC is really what the DNC was...big spending, pet projects, etc etc...Ron Paul has no part of it.

4)Media...the left wing media gave him way more exposure...using and playing up his "dissension" on foreign policy...they used him to legitimize their points against GOP defense rhetoric.

5)His rabid followers...like the Alex Jones connection...his followers were so rabid, so "pure blooded" that it turned off your average "I just want to live my life and not get so worked up over every damn thing" voter.

6)His refusal to play the game....by that I mean you would love what you hear from him and then BAM! He would say something that would shut you down and force a knee jerk dismissal of him...

For example he believes, correctly, that our current overreach of power in handling terrorism and it's vague language (you can define any citizen as a terrorist now) as unconstitutional...

Like that loser who shot up the theater...Ron Paul would say, correctly, that like it or not he must stand trial like any loser criminal...and not a member of AL-Queada.

He said it in a way that just handed editors a headline quote....something like "Ron Paul wants terrorists to have rights and stand civilian trial" (total paraphrasing...too lazy to find the articles right now).

What kills me Cranky is Ron Paul shouldn't be so special....MOST IF NOT ALL should agree with his positions...but he stands out like a sore thumb because so few politicians adhere to the constitution.

[thatmfguy]

Maybe i'll just vote for nobody. Nobody loves you when you're down and out. Nobody will understand. Nobody will get it right.


Yep, Nobody 2012!

[thatmfguy]

Looks like Obama is winning. You just can't see all the "dead" votes.

[KALKAM]

Looks like Obama is winning. You just can't see all the "dead" votes.

I see em...and calculate by subtracting those that voted for him in 08 and are now disappointed with him.

Don't let up though...the House and the Senate is where the real work is...where the real spending comes from...where the law is perverted.

[crankyhead]

I don't think that there are enough delegate votes where they legally have the ability to switch from what the voters decided.

Legally, the delegates are only required to vote the way their primary decided, on the first ballot. If there's a second ballot, everyone can vote their conscience.

Which is why I said:

Only if he can get it to a second ballot.

[OccupyPolitifake]

JESUS 2012!!!!!!!!!

[arnnatz]

I don't think that there are enough delegate votes where they legally have the ability to switch from what the voters decided.

Legally, the delegates are only required to vote the way their primary decided, on the first ballot. If there's a second ballot, everyone can vote their conscience.

Which is why I said:

Only if he can get it to a second ballot.

You have obviously not understood the delegate process

States are free to make their own rules about whether or not the delegates can switch votes. For instance:

Colorado rules state: if a delegate has pledged support for a candidate, then that pledge is valid until the candidate to whom that delegate is pledged withdraws from the race, releases his or her delegates or is not nominated.

Pennsylvania delegates are unbound


Rules from the Republican Party Nominating Process (2008 rules used in 2012):
Each delegation are made up of up to three kinds of delegates. Party members, delegates from the congressional districts and delegates from the state at-large. They can either be bound, meaning that they are legally or morally bound to vote for a candidate for at least the first ballot at the National Convention, or they can be unbound, meaning that they are free to vote for any candidate at the National Convention. Some delegates are only morally bound, meaning that they are allocated to a candidate or elected on his ticket but are not legally bound to vote for him. Some delegates are unbound but are elected at their local conventions because they are strong supporters of a candidate. This means that the binding status of a delegate only become of importance if no candidate have reached an majority of delegates before the National Convention. If a candidate suspends his campaign the delegates allocated and/or elected to him may become unbound depending on state rules. Five delegations have been penalized for breaking RNC election guidelines, meaning that their number of delegates have been cut in half and their party leaders have been banned from voting. Ten delegations have chosen to bind their party leaders to the result of the allocating event instead of leaving them unbound.

[KALKAM]

JESUS 2012!!!!!!!!!

Only after the anti-christ comes to power....oh wait.

I think you are right!