107 votes

Wow! WaPo: "It may be too late to stop Ron Paul's strategy"

By David A. Fahrenthold | The Washington Post
May 10, 2012

What, exactly, is Ron Paul up to?

The Texas congressman has, by all reasonable reckoning, lost his bid to be the Republican presidential nominee. Lost it big. In the GOP’s 35 primary and caucus votes, Paul has won as many as President Obama. Zero.

But now, Paul is using an unorthodox tactic to add more delegates to the national convention this summer. In Nevada, Maine, Massachusetts and elsewhere, his supporters have flooded the party’s snoozy state conventions — and then elected themselves to delegate slots.

That’s prompted a question now transfixing the GOP: What does Paul want?


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

How's the weather in Trolltown?

Delegate strategies are not "arcane." They're a part of most election cycles - very recent ones. Where are you getting your delegate count from? Tell me what you mean by "bound" delegate. I assure you Ron Paul's strategy is not electing delegates pretending to be for other candidates. I've seen video of Romney's campaign doing just that along with other actions from swapping slates to lock outs to calling police. That's quite an allegation, so where's your proof?

Also, welcome. I'm interested in whether or not you've enjoyed your 3 week membership here? I ask because you say "his supporters" - meaning not you or "us." I imagine all the Ron Paul enthusiasm would chafe you here? I hope not, but in case it does, there's salve for that: change your mind.

finally warming up

Romney has massive numbers of delegates that are bound by their state GOP rules (due to the results of the vote) to vote for him at the convention. There are some in a few places that are actually Ron Paul supporters, but currently that number is not large. I've been studying the delegate numbers and rules from places like The Green Papers, and I've done my own counting. Based on my numbers, I am confident that Romney will be fine unless Paul starts winning several primaries.

Ron Paul's strategy in Massachusetts was to elect delegates who each committed to vote for Romney at the convention but who were secretly Ron Paul supporters. Obviously, the Ron Paul supporters at the meeting knew who they were, and half of the other people in attendance did as well. But they pledged to vote for Romney and are now trying to find a way around that pledge.

I've enjoyed my membership a lot. I've had some good discussions. I think you've got some pretty smart people here but also some crazy people who sometimes speak over the others a little too much. I also think it's quite intriguing to see how you guys motivate yourselves to go on with this primary battle despite pretty much everyone else in the world agreeing that it's over.

Giggle! Yeah, get a "massive" Mitts crowd, above 200.

Then, call me. Otherwise, smell ya later. Trolly Trollerton.

You must have

shit your pants when you saw the new reality check, shazad! Scared of the Paul strategy yet?

no, not scared at all

I'd be scared to death if Paul was winning the primaries. If he wins California, that would really hurt Romney. If Romney keeps winning the primaries like this it won't matter what Paul is doing. He can get tons of stealth delegates and they can all abstain and Romney will still have more delegates than he needs.

Why are you here?

Does Romney need fresh campaign tips that badly?

I'd say everybody is welcome

I welcome you Shazad. You're unlikely to change anybody's mind here, but you may learn some things you might otherwise not be exposed to.


no particular reason

It's just interesting so I decided to stay for a while.

And why is it interesting?

Because it is "Out of the box" thinking. Ron Paul and his supporters will not follow the other sheep over the cliff. They are not blind and can actually "See" the doom that lurks ahead. Take off your blinders and you might see it too. Besides,long shots always pay the best odds.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

it's interesting in both good and bad ways

And if you're wanting a big payoff based on long odds, place a bet on Intrade for Ron Paul to win the Presidency. You could come away with tons of money.

You saw this ealier yet waited until it went second page?

This is very telling my friend and just goes to show where you stand.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

what is that supposed to mean?

I have all my threads show on a single page, anyway. So you're still on the first page for me. I wasn't aware that I was under a time constraint to respond to your comment.

Of course you are not on a time constraint

Or even under obligation to respond. Yet over the last two years I have found that the first sign of a real troll is to wait until it goes to the second page before responding to the "Common sense" questions that might show your hand. We have spoke before and I will say it is becoming very obvious that you are only here for one reason that I personally will not fall for. Your posts have been on the "Disregard" radar from the beginning. I am not going to believe you are that uneducated about worldly matters so much that you would try and sell Romney to this crew. Really, Think about it and read my new tag line.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

I don't care if you support Romney

and I'm not looking for converts. I'm also not aware of the intricacies of your personal settings and I don't know when a message suddenly drops to the 2nd page for you. Sorry for not responding soon enough.

It's not the first time...

You have done this. I have been watching you do this with several other users asking the hard questions my friend.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

I don't think you even asked me a question in the first place

You presented a rhetorical question and then answered it yourself. There wasn't actually a question waiting for me at the end, let alone a hard one. Glad to have you standing guard and making sure I answer people, though. I'm completely willing to engage people in discussion, but just like you pick the topics you want to talk about, I'll pick the topics I want to talk about. If I'm discussing delegate strategy on a thread about delegate strategy, and someone jumps in and tells me I'm a moron because Romney said he would sign the NDAA, I'm probably less likely to care to respond. If I'm having a good discussion with someone and it naturally leads to other topics, then I'll be more inclined to talk about those other subjects.

all personal opinions on the posters here aside

What do you think of the ideas behind the liberty movement? You've probably seen plenty of info on the generally big government facilitator role of the central banking system (both here and abroad) Also some commentary on the nature of our current foreign policy, and whether or not we generally are shooting ourselves in the foot there. How about the legitimate power that our FEDERAL government is allowed to exercise? What do you think of the ideas? Whether or not Paul has a chance at the nomination....should he, is he (mostly) correct? More so than Romney? Your thoughts Shazad?

Josh Brueggen
Jack of all Trades
Precinct Commiteeman Precinct 5 Rock Island Co Illinois


There are certain things Ron Paul says that I agree with but regardless of the electability question, I still disagree with a lot of his opinions and he's not the guy I want elected President. You guys certainly make good points on some issues (for example, on pointing out excesses of the federal government). I think having your voice heard has great value for the nation. But I also don't think it's the right governing philosophy for this country (at least at this point in time). As for Ron Paul himself, I think he fits the role of congressman quite well and I may even vote for him if I lived in his district. I think he would fit a role as an adviser or cabinet member reasonably well. I don't see him as having the right skill set for President.

What IS The *Right* Skill Set

...for President that your candidate has and ours does not. Just 1,2,3 them briefly. I'm interested.


diversity of executive experience

The core of it is diversity of executive leadership in many different arenas. There's a reason why in the United States we rarely elect Presidents from among the body of the House of Representatives (I don't think there's a single example in the past century). Prior to Barack Obama, there were 8 Presidents in a row that had served as either Governor of a state or Vice President of the US. I think Mitt Romney fits the leadership role far better than Ron Paul does. Ron Paul has ideas but not practical leadership skills. A good role for him is one that takes advantage of that skill set.

Yeah no leadership skills

I guess that's how he got every single Republican and a nice chunk of Democrats to sign HR 1207. They knew what they were signing.

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

I think that actually argues my point

Was that not just the 2nd bill in his nearly quarter century in Congress that he had sponsored and eventually got passed? He doesn't exactly have a track record of leadership in Congress.

See, you do not understand

Do we really need more "Lawmakers"? You probably violate a dozen laws a day without even knowing it. There are so many laws on the books they cannot even be counted with a computer. Most laws are unconstitutional and the one law Ron had passed is only because he felt it was truly constitutional. Everything before and everything after was not. I would pay my representitive his wages to "Repeal unconstitutional laws" rather than make more "unconstitutional laws" we really do not need. May I ask? are you a law enforcement officer? By law you have to respond to that one or it will come back to bite you later because of your participation in a public forum.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

there's nothing wrong with what you said

I'm not arguing in favor of just making more laws for the heck of it. But if someone points to Ron Paul successfully pushing a bill through Congress as an example of his leadership, I'll point out that he's tried that hundreds of times and that a couple years ago was the first time he was actually successful. I wasn't the one that set the premise that getting a bill through Congress equals leadership. I just showed that if that premise is accepted, Paul has not been overall very successful at it.

I would pay them to just party

Through their terms if they could not bring themselves to reduce the amount of unconstitutional laws on the books. Much better than what we have now with the "Lawmakers". Now you understand why we are upset at both sides and the "Status Quo" and business as usual. Time for a change. Ron paul.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

And that's a fine position to

And that's a fine position to take. I wouldn't say I'm 100% opposed to that myself.

"trolling for the lulz.

People keep feeding me so I decided to stay for a while."

Fixed it for you.

Disregard government. Acquire liberty.

optimystic's picture

Where's the Link?

to the Wa Post article?

Different title, same crap

Ron Paul campaign: Will his delegates influence Republican National Convention?
By David A. Fahrenthold

optimystic's picture


I wanted to read the comments. I couldn't get through more than 30 of the 342....