Comment: Bump for discussion.

(See in situ)


Bump for discussion.

You said:
"If Ron Paul wins on the first round then the RNC will try the rest of the night to find a way to reverse the vote but we will have legislative majority by then."

Answer: I think one problem is that we don't know if we have the numbers to win on the first round. So abstaining for certain key individuals may be important, not for personal advancement or position, but for the movement as a whole. Sort of like the "chess game" analogy that another poster mentioned. In some cases we abstain, in others we vote.

You said:
"If we abstain on the first round and we fail to get the numbers we need for a majority the entire camp will be divided with no true majority yet. The RNC will be in control of the second round and we will be too intimidated to act as a unit."

Answer: You may have a point there. I would be interested if others weighed in on this.

Btw, I gave you a +1 to remove one of your downvotes so your points could be discussed. I have leaned toward abstaining in the past but this may partly depend where we are, delegate wise, come convention time in Tampa. We have to be aware of all of our options and the ramifications of choosing one versus the other.