-43 votes

Regarding the OK "sweep"

Regarding the Oklahoma "sweep" tonight. I made a comment with my new account (been a long time lurker) and was basically called a Romney plant. This is what it said.

"I hate to burst everyone's bubble here but, aleph0 is right in that ALL of Oklahoma's delegates are bound for all rounds of voting at the national convention according to state party rules (disregarding rule 38 because I don't think it applies or will fly at the national convention even if it did). However, since Santorum(14) and Gingrich(13) dropped out I believe their delegates can vote for whoever they want even during the first round (though I might be wrong about this, they could possibly now be bound to Romney, I'm not sure, have to look up state party rules) . So what that means is we have picked up a POSSIBLE 27 votes in the first round and following rounds."

Romney won 13 delegates and I'm not sure how the 3 party leader delegates will vote.

I'd like to add these two points too. The talk of changing state party rules to unbind delegates so they can vote for Paul is wrong. I am pretty sure the RNC has a rule against such a thing and will not allow it. Elections have already taken place and therefore delegates are held to the state party rules that existed at the time of the election or when they were submitted to the RNC.

All of this depends on the RNC recognizing that the convention held earlier was done and adjourned illegally and that the Paul convention later (lets call it what it is) was done legally and they recognize it. I believe in 2008 in Nevada when a similar thing happened, the RNC did not recognize the Paul convention.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Let's start a chip-in

So we can get a medal for Mr. P. Slevin. I bow to your awesomeness Lord Slevin. You help Dr. Paul's campaign, congratulations. You are so arrogant it makes me sick, literally. I haven't posted since our last discussion, but I've "been around" and all I read ( yes I learned how to since last time) was negative thumbing your nose at people type of stuff. So if somebody is talking to friends about liberty and freedom and trying to open their eyes, that's not good enough for YOU Lord Slevin. They have to have a website or "connections". IMO you're the small kid in a group of big one's who craps himself when the biggest guy gets knocked out. All this is my personal opinion of course. You get under my skin with your snotty, arrogance but such is life, huh? Keep on truckin with your fabulous contributions and I look forward to you pointing out when the "nothings" get out of line.

" But I must say tonite that I know that justice is indivisible- injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
MLK

you're an anonymous moron

Captain Obvious,

What kind of an adult uses an alias? Hides behind it and claims to be imparting knowledge?

Who would accept wisdom from a creature afraid to reveal himself/herself?

Only a moron buys into accepting as wise or loyal to Ron Paul, to an ideology the keyboard strokes of some unknown...some creep unwilling to accept responsibility.

I don't ask for your acceptance; I have no respect for you.

You, and the conspiracist do nothings here in comments at Daily Paul exist only here.

The comments contained in the original post are valid and do nothing conspiracist morons like yourself never will get it.

There's a large subset of pure morons who lurk in comments here at Daily Paul and it isn't my style to let it go unremarked.

They, like you, do nothing.

What voter would accept the ravings of an anonymous twit?

ANY of the thousands here at Daily Paul who post twiddle like you, like so many others and do so only in anonymity?

You do nothing; nothing that is except to criticize the many who are your betters.

You never could open anyone's eyes or mind. You have none to offer.

Go back to lurking; adults don't require your idiocy.

I like how

you act as if to know what others do, and state it as fact. That, coupled with the needless insults tells me you're not only wrong, but a piss-poor debater as well.

As for "what kind of an adult uses an alias?" Umm...gee let's see, how about the vast majority of adults who have ever used the internet and/or ham radio? I mean, are you really so arrogant that you think registering with your real name somehow puts you above others? LOL whatever it takes to keep that smokescreen going, eh?

Go ahead, keep right on needlessly throwing around insults while boasting about yourself to make it seem as if you actually have something insightful to say when the reality is that you're just looking to piss and moan. I know you're not an idiot, but your juvenile arrogance isn't very becoming.

What? Are you going to scream "nobody understands me!", go to your room and slam the door now?

A signature used to be here!

and keep being a moron

Discussion in comments on Daily Paul IS NOT activism for Ron Paul.

And, anyone attempting honest, intelligent communication via comments on Daily Paul is overrun, often, with complete whackos like you.

Sad sacks who have absolutely NO activity which reaches actual voters, but whose entire concept of the campaign is as something they can use to draw attention to their anonymous handle.

You are a moron.

What are you going to do you idiot? Make another comment.

My record on this IS public.

You are a nutjob.

Goosfraba

Bottom line is we don't get along. We do support Dr. Paul so I'll set differences aside and support you. Please don't attack people's level of significance to the Revolution, though. I'm just encouraging you not to. Have a nice day.

"To disagree, one does not have to be disagreeable" -Goldwater

I agree.

" But I must say tonite that I know that justice is indivisible- injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
MLK

You're so poetic with your insults! Truly inspiring

I've been waiting for your response Mr. John P. Slevin. You think what you think and I do the same. Computer screens are very convenient. You IMO are a cancer to this site. I don't care who you know or what you do. I will let this go because I'd like to walk the walk as far as what I believe in. Any "contributions" you make are voided by the way you talk down to people. You are no better than anyone on here. I really want to thank you for testing my patience and truly pissing me off to no end because I have realized that I have some things I need to remedy as far as my temper goes. I don't like you, I think you are of very low intelligence and I think you try to compensate for it by trying to seem like you're a "big deal". I would place a 10,000 dollar bet that the Revolution would be just fine without your "efforts". You are a contradiction. I don't want to imagine how many curious people you have turned away. I will "lurk" around so I can call you out every time I read one of your rude comments. All the money in the world could'nt buy me a second of trust or one ounce of faith in anything you're about. Let' see how many people you can turn away from the Revolution today. That's all, now I have to repair my feelings because you really hurt them.

" But I must say tonite that I know that justice is indivisible- injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
MLK

The thing is

A lot of Santorum/Gingrich delegates are actually RP supporters! Even some Romney delegates from the early states are RP supporters (the ones on the slates). I know it seems underhanded, but I know for a fact that some delegates for Romney are secretly RP supporters, but which ones? It's going to be close in Tampa, and we have a lot more advantages than Romney does in the delegate count. It's just how the RNC plays the rules. They want to avoid a delegate fight at all costs.

A lot of Santorum/Gingrich

A lot of Santorum/Gingrich delegates are RP supporters? Where did you hear this or get this information from? I'm skeptical that there are many so called "stealth" delegates.

Pretty Sure? I Think? Blah-Blah

Look, if you're going to be a debbie downer, at least bring some truth. If you THINK and you are PRETTY SURE, then confirm it! I am tired of people distorting the message. C'mon man!

Let's Fight the Good Fight

This isn't a research paper I

This isn't a research paper I just was thinking about it while watching the UStream. I got the information from The Green Papers. I'm not trying to depress people, just be realistic so we know where we really stand.

BUT?

Whats there to think about? You want them to think that they will lose, albeit ignorantly at best. Why post unfounded negativism? If people are running, they need water, not salt. I respect your right to post opinions, as I hope you will respect mine.

Let's Fight the Good Fight

According to the RNC's

According to the RNC's lawyers, the RNC doesn't recognize any state's attempts to bind their delegates. As far as they're concerned, every delegate is a free agent. What's unclear is what penalties can be applied to delegates by their state Republican committees or even state laws.

That was ONE lawyer's OPINION

That was ONE lawyer's OPINION in 2008. This is wishful thinking in my humble opinion to depend on this.

In any event it throws doubt on the Romney delegation

The credentials committee will have to rule and we will have supporters on that committee. In fact so many delegates may be under question from many states that some understanding will have to be reached between Romney and Paul forces before the convention. As someone pointed out earlier, Romney doesn't want a prolonged credentials fight in Tampa.

Who cares what Romney wants? What about what PAUL wants?

.

SequoiaTrees4RonPaul

Well considering

how the RNC is breaking it's own rules, we are not obligated to acknowledge them as a qualifier. Rule # 11 were they bypassed proper procedure and named rombama the presumptive candidate while the primaries were still underway and Ron Paul is still a candidate..

The point that they don't

The point that they don't follow their own rules is a reason I think it's possible the convention won't be recognized like in 2008 in Nevada. Although, as someone pointed out to me in chat this convention was done completely legally and the alternate Nevada one in 2008 was not.

Unchained

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P1d8BVvY-I

"I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_enlistment

There is no duration defined in the Oath