Comment: when your premise is...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: The process (see in situ)

when your premise is...

When your premise is that Romney didn't ACTUALLY get almost 5 times as many votes as Ron Paul but that the government rigged the whole election, faked the polls, faked it all, I can see how you'd come to such conclusions. Keep telling yourself that the election results were faked. Tell other people too, and see if anyone actually takes you seriously outside the group of individuals who thinks everything in life is a conspiracy against them. It truly is a fantasy world. Just because something like rigging a voting machine is physically possible and you have a YouTube video to prove it, it doesn't mean it's actually happening in this election and they (who is THEY, exactly?) are doing it to cheat Ron Paul. The evidence people have tried to produce on that point is a complete joke.

I'd still love for you to answer the questions in my final paragraph. I don't think someone can be intellectually honest and say that they would be rooting for binding rules to be broken if it was their candidate to whom delegates were originally bound.