 |
  Ron's weekly message [5 minutes audio, every Monday] • Podcast • Weekly archive • Toll-free 888-322-1414 • |
       |
| Free Republic Ron Paul Ping List: Join/Leave |
Posted on 12/06/2007 8:44:49 AM PST by traviskicks
Charleston, WV (HNN) – An updated listing of Republican delegates who registered for the Feb. 5 statewide Charleston convention has been announced by wvgopconvention.com. The new tally adds some of the registrations that came in by mail. At least one additional update is anticipated.
Mitt Romney leads the committed delegates with 191 followed by Ron Paul at 177, Fred Thompson 157, Mike Huckabee 126, Rudy Giuliani 89, John McCain 25, Duncan Hunter 7, and Alan Keyes 5. A total of 589 delegates are listed as “uncommitted.”
After all of the delegate registrations are processed, an online vote will be conducted among at-large candidates competing for more spots than there are vacancies. The West Virginia Convention will have a total of 1,446 delegates.
According to online postings, Kanawha County will be highly contested. As of the latest count, 130 delegates will compete for 51 slots in the online balloting. In Cabell County, 50 at-large delegates will be vying for 27 slots.
|
Ron's weekly message [5 minutes audio, every Monday] • Podcast • Weekly archive • Toll-free 888-322-1414 • |
|
| Free Republic Ron Paul Ping List: Join/Leave |
With 589 uncommitted, it’s still anyone’s race.
Of course it is. We can’t give Ron Paul and credit, can we?
Should have said “any” credit.
What we're expecting is that they'll all get registered and vote! Then we're gonna change the rules and have voting only on the Internet, then we're gonna win! It's pretty amazing, some people think we started off with a plan. Ron Paul, 11-14-07
http://www.boiseweekly.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A308935
Are you kidding me?!? Limited government non interventionist policy?!? Why it's...it's...outright conservative!! And the last thing the Republican party needs is to be reminded there are limited government conservatives (although I think they're in for a rude shock come this election cycle)
yea, and I’ll have to admit, those 500 are probably not too likely to go for Paul... Paul’s supporters are generally pretty hardcore. ‘Undecideds’ I’m not sure we’ll have much luck with... we shall see..
A bit touchy aren’t we? Did I give anyone any “credit”? I didn’t mention Paul at all, why do you feel the need for the snide remarks?
why are you guys still on FR and trying to analyze Ron Paul with critical thinking? Get on the bandwagon and start calling him wacky.
Don’t worget his wacky 9/11 conspiracy theories too - That is what made up my mind about Ron Paul! I would not vote for him for dogcatcher. I question his sanity.
I can see this. He’s probably getting a lot of Robert “Sheets” Byrd supporters.
And don’t forget those who love Texas Wild Shrimp !!!!! Ron Paul proposed lots of government spending to support the Wild Texas Shrimp Industry.
We have to change our foreign policy, and ultimately, that will change their attitude. In the meantime, you treat it for what it is, and you try to keep it in perspective. This is a police matter. They attempted to blow up the towers in the early '90s, and they were caught. They were convicted under all current laws. They didn't need the Patriot Act. They didn't need to violate the civil liberties of every American citizen. It was taken care of. We're dealing with a few people. Of course, since we're doing the wrong thing, there's a lot more enemies out there now.
And displays his firm grasp of history.
I think the lessons of Vietnam are worth looking at. We had to stay there, and we had to win. We lost 60,000. But we use another 60,000 because if we leave, there will be a domino effect, and the communists will take over all of Southeast Asia. But after 20 years of the French and the Americans telling the Vietnamese what to do, they ended up being unified. The wars stopped, and all of a sudden, instead of being communists, they became westernized.
And he's as clear as I've seen him about the neocon takeover of the administration and the government.
The moral consequence should be on those who committed the errors in our foreign policy, but that's about 24 people. It's 24 neoconservatives who took over our foreign policy. They should be responsible, and they don't have to pay for it.
24 neocons took over American foreign policy.
Not 23, not 25, an even two dozen.
Naaah, Paul isn't a conspiracy nut, but it seems to me he has an obligation to name them. The Christian Science Monitor inneocon 101 only outed 12 key neocons
There's another dozen running wild out there!
Who will save the nation!
Yeah, I guess I’m touchy. I apologize.
I wonder if Paul recalls that Iraq was indicted as a co-conspirator in that attack?
Apology accepted. Now you can prepare for battle for the genuinely snide remarks you’re sure to see on this thread.
Good luck!
Honest question...foreign affairs aside, do you think neoconservatism have been a net plus for this country when it comes to domestic issues?
****With 589 uncommitted, it’s still anyone’s race.****
Unfortunately, most of the “uncommitted” are old time pols, not a very good source of votes for Ron Paul.
...Iraq? Where??!? I don't see no "foreign enemies"...
Haven't a clue, I not aware of any coherent neoconservative domestic agenda. The word has largely lost it's meaning, but when it had one it was largely foreign policy related.
Do you know who the 24 hijackers are?
Didn't remember that, still, as irrelevant as the Iranian's indicted for the Beirut bombing. We were occupying their country, after all.
It consists of liberals who have seen the light on foreign policy but still have liberal opinions on size of government/individual freedoms, etc. I'm just trying to get a sense of where the average anti-Paul poster is coming from. Is it strictly based on his foreign policy views, or are some of them afraid of the rugged individualism Paul advocates on a domestic level?
Out of curiosity, where do you fall on this? Who represents your views on domestic issues such as the 2nd Amendment, abortion and size of government more, Paul or Giuliani?
You really get your knickers in a bind over that shrimp thing, don’t you? Let me try (probably a futile attempt) to explain it to you.
Congress had a bill before it to spend a bunch of money. Ron Paul voted against the bill but was outvoted and the bill passed. Since his constituents were already taxed to pay for it he ‘earmarked’ a portion of the ALREADY PASSED bill to go back to them via the shrimp industry in his district. It seems to me he was just making as much good out of a bad thing as he could.
What would you have done differently had you been in his place?
..isn't it great then that we have choices where we don't have to make that choice, we have candidates who represent all three legs of the Conservative stool- Economic, Social, and Security, not just one or two like Paul or Giuliani.
Yes! We could be doing a lot worse.
I've posted numerous times about 2nd amendment issues, abortion, as well as "size of government" issues like taxes and spending, even immigration.
Sorry you missed my posts.
The idea that anyone is afraid of Paul's "rugged individualism" is ludicrous.
BTW, he has no true domestic positions, as you know he's acknowledged that postions like abolishing the IRS or getting the federal government out of education can't be achieved, so he'll concentrate on getting the troops out of Iraq.
Domestic issues, as a candidate he's a soundbite guy, no substance, no ability to accomplish a thing.
No we don't, it's Ron Paul or the highway.
Remember jmc813 is a Paul cultist, regardless of what he says. He knows the answere to these questions, but, well, there's a conspiracy afoot out there. Anti Paul posters are actually undercover Rudy supporters. Here to infiltrate Freerepublic, a hotbed of Paul support.
Do, pray tell, apprise us of his “wacky 9/11 conspiracy theories”.
It’s true that some of supporters have fantasies of 9/11 conspiracy that involved the Bush Administration but, to my knowledge, Rep. Paul has not expressed that he believes such nonsense.
In fact, Rep. Paul has said that he believes many findings in the final report of the 9/11 Commission. He has clearly said that 9/11 was executed by Middle Eastern thugs who hate America because of their objections to US foreign policy. Just because Rudy Guiliani was unaware of this finding by 9/11 Commission doesn’t make this this a “wacky conspiracy theory”.
Then came the cold war. And then the Pentagon got a New Map.
I routinely post my disagreements with the guy and encourage people all over FR to support Fred Thompson.
He knows the answere to these questions, but, well, there's a conspiracy afoot out there.
There's no conspiracy. Paul isn't going to win the nomination. It's because he can't gather enough support. It's that simple.
Anti Paul posters are actually undercover Rudy supporters.
Most of the people on FR who oppose Paul are not. There is, however, a very large contingent of of people who are liberal-moderate Republicans who are supporting Rudy who disagree with Paul domestic stances as well as his foreign ones. You're the one who hangs out on those other Republican forums with them. You of all people should know who I'm talking about.
FreeRepublic is hardly a hotbed of Paul support, but I suppose that was a sarcastic throwaway comment.
I used think that FreeRepublic was a conservative forum where social conservatives and libertarian conservatives were welcome. However, the flaming comments responding to favorable postings or comments regarding Ron Paul make it seem like national-greatness conservatives and neo-conservatives like Guiliani want it for their exclusive domain. Perhaps that explains jmc813 suspicions.
And furthermore, what’s with the hostile tone lately? We seemed to get along fine until a few days ago, and now you’re bringing name-calling into it. We really don’t disagree on a hell of a lot.
And just to clear up the record, despite what SJackson seems to believe, I do not think that most freepers who oppose Paul are Giulianites. Most of them are like me. They like Paul's positions on the 2nd Amendment, abortion and size of government, but find him unacceptable on foreign policy, so they support either Thompson or Hunter.
The anti-Paul venom comes from an extremely small minority of freepers. Being that we're in the late stages of a VERY competitive primary in which there is a very good chance that someone like Rudy might win it and screw up the GOP beyond belief, I find it amusing and almost pathological that someone would devote so much of their time digging stuff up on a guy who has no chance whatsoever of winning.
And hardly any of these people have someone they're strongly supporting this late in the game. You get a milquetoast response like, "I haven't made up my mind, but I like Thompson, Huckabee and Hunter". I just find the whole thing weird and fascinating, pretty much the way I find poltics on the internet in general.
Martins kid, you are misinformed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul
Rejection of conspiracy theory
Paul does not believe the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks were a government conspiracy and has explicitly denied being a 9/11 truther, arguing the issue is not a conspiracy but a failure of bureaucracy.[81][82] He believes the 9/11 Commission Report’s main goal was “to protect the government and to protect their ineptness - not ... to do this so they can use this as an excuse to spread the war .... Some who did want to spread the war would use it as an opportunity. But, it wasn’t something that was deliberately done.”[81][84] He does not think the government would have staged such an attack.[85] When asked whether “9/11 was orchestrated by the government”, Paul emphasized, “Absolutely not.”[86]
John Gibson of Fox News confronted Paul about being interviewed by conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. Gibson asked Paul to “say right here and now that you completely disavow the 9/11 truth movement and the whole idea that the U.S. government was in on the 9/11 attack”, which Paul immediately did.[87] Gibson later expressed doubts over Paul’s explicit disavowal, claiming Paul does believe the government staged the 9/11 attack: “9/11 truthers evidently raised millions for Ron Paul. Why doesn’t he just admit that he’s with them, blaming the U.S. government for the 9/11 attacks?”[88] Paul says both Jones and Gibson “try to put words in my mouth”[87] and “try to twist what I say and turn it into that, and I think some of my supporters lean in that direction, but that’s not my position.”[81]
You seem to overlook this little fact. If they are buying Paul's spin now, they aren't going to. He has peaked.
Read the rest of the comments. The Paul supporters on this thread have already acknowledged that.
That a segment of the fringe is all enamored of him because he relentlessly demagogues on this favorite hot button issue or that hot button issue of their is not enough to elect him President.
I'm well aware that he has no chance in hell. Unlike some people around here, I don't suffer from cognitive dissonance when it comes to politicians I like.
how our Constitutional Republic works etc etc etc to be taken serious by rational minds.
...As opposed to that Constitutional scholar Bush.
You're welcome to review my posting history as several Paul supporters have, both here and other forums, I've thousands of posts out there. Come back and show me the unfair attacks on Paul supporters, or the support for Rudy.
Simple task.
I never said that you were a Rudy supporter! I used to think that, but you corrected me and I take you at face value. Is there a big contingent of Rudy fans who can't stand Paul on other forums? Absolutely! It makes logical sense that people who like a gun-grabbing pro-abortion candidate would dislike a pro-gun pro-lifer. I just enjoy playing around with your cognitive dissonance which prevents you from even acknowledging that Paul's positions on those issues are 100% right. That's pretty much why I go to political chat sites. Psychological/sociological observation.
travis, I’m not a Gulianni supporter, but I was completely put out when I received a post card from Paul’s campaign saying that I had “mis-registered” to vote in the online caucus, and that I should go back and fill out the form with Ron Paul in a certain place on the form. I didn’t make a mistake. I put in the person that I would be voting for. I thought that trick to be underhanded and it made me P.Od.
There was indeed a 9/11 conspiracy, and I don’t think any reasonably well-informed, sane person would deny it.
The core of the conspiracy involved a few dozen persons of Middle East origin, primarily nationals of Saudi Arabia. According to the 9/11 Commission report, “the operational leader of the 9/11 conspiracy” was Mohamed Atta, an Egyptian national. The 9/11 terrorism was organized by al-Qaeda, “a loose, far-flung,nebulous conspiracy” according to the 9/11 Commission report.
Like you wrote, Ron Paul has repeatedly said that he believes these findings of the 9/11 Commission.
Ron Paul obviously agreed with more of the Commission’s findings than Rudy Guiliani did a couple of months ago. When Rep. Paul explained root cause of 9/11, his answer was entirely consistent with the Commission Report. Rudy was both ignorant of and offended by the most elementary of the Commission’s findings.
I’d posit that anybody that the 9/11 Commission Report is a good baseline for the wackiness of 9/11 conspiracy theories. Based on his public statements, Rudy Guiliani’s theories are objectively “wackier” than Ron Paul’s.
I'd encourage anyone to go back to say 2001/2002 or so and look up any Paul thread here on FR. 80% the people who used to thrash about him back then were the ones who bitched out of here after the Schiavo murder which they supported or were thrown out for supporting Rudy.
Of course, according to some people, this means that I believe that "anyone who opposes Paul is a stealth Rudy suppporter".
As long as Rudy loses.
well that is certainly shameful, im sorry to hear that.
Naahh. Rudy? Who cares about him. What? He has a chance to actually win this primary and split the GOP so it'll be neutered for the next 15-20 years? Who the hell cares? Ron Paul said something and it's much more important to post that to FR 83 times. C'mon man, priorities.
Another inane, off topic comment from a Paul groupie.
Go Ron Go!
Well, Ron Paul should know better than to try any subtle humor here on Free Republic!
Everybody knows that, fer cryin' out loud! Sheesh!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.