Comment: I think it

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Great energy (see in situ)

I think it

is all to easy to post comments and then when you realize that based on new information you may not have been 100% correct- to ignore it. I know this post is buried now, but in the spirit of integrity, I will say that if the definition of plurality is what is being reported by Ben Swann, I was not fully correct in my judgement. I was under the impression that the binding part was in play for the nomination part. Whilst I have always recognized that at the RNC the binding was irrelevant I also did not know that the nomination form takes place at the national convention. That is where some of my frustrations came from, however, it is still clear that we do not have a plurality in many of the states this gentleman listed, but I do still have hope that Ron Paul will be on the ballot.