Carol Paul: Election fraud confirmed

[Paulie]

Rob this is the best explanation of the delegate situation right now...take 5 minutes and learn:

[youtube]q-O0jgRgo4I&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]

I already saw the video and I understand the process.

So then why do you think that because Santorum has won popular vote counts in caucus states, that half his delegates are unbound?

The video clearly points out that the only delegates we KNOW he has are the few he'll get from ND, which are BOUND, and the rest of them are from his proportional state wins, which are BOUND.

You seem very confused.

 

[Modbert]

So then why do you think that because Santorum has won popular vote counts in caucus states, that half his delegates are unbound?

The video clearly points out that the only delegates we KNOW he has are the few he'll get from ND, which are BOUND, and the rest of them are from his proportional state wins, which are BOUND.

You seem very confused.

Right now I'm using the proportional numbers and assuming Santorum will at least get some delegates from the caucus states he won. I understand that it's not concrete.

I've already said straight forward that I may be slightly confused about some of the minor details but I believe I understand the process for the most part.

However, I don't see the point of trying to have a conversation with you if all you're going to be is hostile and condescending.

 

[g5000]

If you can't make the effort to support your claims, I will not make the effort to listen to you.

Look, what kind of 'proof' do you require?

Something other than whining, for starters. Explain exactly how the fraud works, for starters. "There was fraud, confirmed" is among the stupidest of claims I have seen. As if just by saying "confirmed" it is...confirmed.

Does the fact that in Iowa Ron Paul was #1 in the polls and wound up 3rd say anything to you?

Well, let's see. That could be evidence that pollsters suck at their job. It could be evidence people say one thing and do another. We sure see plenty of that out of our politicians. It could be evidence that Ron Paul supporters answer poll questions but don't get out and vote.

Or do you need a CONFESSION??

I need EVIDENCE.

 

[Paulie]

So then why do you think that because Santorum has won popular vote counts in caucus states, that half his delegates are unbound?

The video clearly points out that the only delegates we KNOW he has are the few he'll get from ND, which are BOUND, and the rest of them are from his proportional state wins, which are BOUND.

You seem very confused.

Right now I'm using the proportional numbers and assuming Santorum will at least get some delegates from the caucus states he won. I understand that it's not concrete.

I've already said straight forward that I may be slightly confused about some of the minor details but I believe I understand the process for the most part.

However, I don't see the point of trying to have a conversation with you if all you're going to be is hostile and condescending.

What do you expect? At one time you reached out to me asking me about libertarianism because you thought you might be starting to become one, I took the time to reply back with a bunch of information for you and now during this entire campaign you've done nothing but shit on Paul and demonstrate that you're really still just a typical liberal.

Now you're trying to speak for Paul as though you know him so well, somehow better than those of us who've been studying and scrutinizing the man for YEARS. It's insulting, Rob. You don't listen to us, you only think what you want based on your own confirmation bias via media reports.

Trust me. We know more about him than you. If you want to have a decent discussion about the guy, you could start by not pretending to know him better than we do. I'll tell you right now...his supporters are not going to vote for Romney...not his delegates at the convention, and not his voters at the polls in November.

 

[g5000]

So let's start with this:

Mrs. Paul went on to say, “They said, well, they just wrote them on paper, and they can’t recount them, so they just threw them out.”

Who is "they"?

When did this "threw them out" incident occur? Am I supposed to be a mind reader?

Were votes actually hand-written on paper, and was this against the rules? What were the rules? Were other candidates' votes thrown out for the same reason?

What is the process for challenging the throwing out of ballots? Why was this not done?


This is how your prove fraud. You don't just make some claim and say "THERE! CONFIRMED!"

 

[Modbert]

What do you expect? At one time you reached out to me asking me about libertarianism because you thought you might be starting to become one, I took the time to reply back with a bunch of information for you and now during this entire campaign you've done nothing but shit on Paul and demonstrate that you're really still just a typical liberal.

Now you're trying to speak for Paul as though you know him so well, somehow better than those of us who've been studying and scrutinizing the man for YEARS. It's insulting, Rob. You don't listen to us, you only think what you want based on your own confirmation bias via media reports.

Trust me. We know more about him than you. If you want to have a decent discussion about the guy, you could start by not pretending to know him better than we do. I'll tell you right now...his supporters are not going to vote for Romney...not his delegates at the convention, and not his voters at the polls in November.

1.) I never said his supporters are going to vote for Romney at the polls in November, they'll vote for Gary Johnson or write-in Paul.

2.) I'm stating my opinion of what I think Paul is going to do. We simply disagree, however you seem to think that only your opinion can be the possibly correct one. I believe we simply have to agree to disagree on that one.

3.) You showed exactly how you're being condescending in your very post!

You don't listen to us, you only think what you want based on your own confirmation bias via media reports.

It's not that at all Paulie. You have to understand Paulie that people can have a opinion about Ron Paul that's not yours and not be brainwashed or whatever term you want to use by the MSM. You say it's insulting simply because I have a different opinion from you. It's insulting when you call me a sheep simply because I disagree.

 

[GuyPinestra]

I need EVIDENCE.

Which you completely ignored with your selective 'quoting'.

 

[Paulie]

What do you expect? At one time you reached out to me asking me about libertarianism because you thought you might be starting to become one, I took the time to reply back with a bunch of information for you and now during this entire campaign you've done nothing but shit on Paul and demonstrate that you're really still just a typical liberal.

Now you're trying to speak for Paul as though you know him so well, somehow better than those of us who've been studying and scrutinizing the man for YEARS. It's insulting, Rob. You don't listen to us, you only think what you want based on your own confirmation bias via media reports.

Trust me. We know more about him than you. If you want to have a decent discussion about the guy, you could start by not pretending to know him better than we do. I'll tell you right now...his supporters are not going to vote for Romney...not his delegates at the convention, and not his voters at the polls in November.

1.) I never said his supporters are going to vote for Romney at the polls in November, they'll vote for Gary Johnson or write-in Paul.

2.) I'm stating my opinion of what I think Paul is going to do. We simply disagree, however you seem to think that only your opinion can be the possibly correct one. I believe we simply have to agree to disagree on that one.

3.) You showed exactly how you're being condescending in your very post!

You don't listen to us, you only think what you want based on your own confirmation bias via media reports.

It's not that at all Paulie. You have to understand Paulie that people can have a opinion about Ron Paul that's not yours and not be brainwashed or whatever term you want to use by the MSM. You say it's insulting simply because I have a different opinion from you. It's insulting when you call me a sheep simply because I disagree.

I don't get what you base your opinion on. Opinions are supposed to be derived from facts. Your opinion is derived from media reports, which is clear because all the things you are saying are the hit piece bullshit reports put out lately by the MSM. The whole Paul being in bed with Romney shit. I entertained the idea that there may be some things going on behind the scenes because Romney and Paul were so off limits to each other, LONG before the media started running with it...and I still do. But to assume that it's for a fucking SPEAKING ROLE? That's ridiculous. To actually think that Paul would settle for a speaking role that amounts to NOTHING at the end of the day just tells me you don't know him nearly well enough.

 

[elvis]

So then why do you think that because Santorum has won popular vote counts in caucus states, that half his delegates are unbound?

The video clearly points out that the only delegates we KNOW he has are the few he'll get from ND, which are BOUND, and the rest of them are from his proportional state wins, which are BOUND.

You seem very confused.

Right now I'm using the proportional numbers and assuming Santorum will at least get some delegates from the caucus states he won. I understand that it's not concrete.

I've already said straight forward that I may be slightly confused about some of the minor details but I believe I understand the process for the most part.

However, I don't see the point of trying to have a conversation with you if all you're going to be is hostile and condescending.

What do you expect? At one time you reached out to me asking me about libertarianism because you thought you might be starting to become one, I took the time to reply back with a bunch of information for you and now during this entire campaign you've done nothing but shit on Paul and demonstrate that you're really still just a typical liberal.

Now you're trying to speak for Paul as though you know him so well, somehow better than those of us who've been studying and scrutinizing the man for YEARS. It's insulting, Rob. You don't listen to us, you only think what you want based on your own confirmation bias via media reports.

Trust me. We know more about him than you. If you want to have a decent discussion about the guy, you could start by not pretending to know him better than we do. I'll tell you right now...his supporters are not going to vote for Romney...not his delegates at the convention, and not his voters at the polls in November.

Obama appreciates Ron Paul's support.

 

[Defiant1]

dr. Paul can't be allowed to win. He isn't a big government nwo globalist. He's fortunate he's even still alive.

do you think that voter fraud happened in florida back in 2000?

no

 

[Modbert]

But to assume that it's for a fucking SPEAKING ROLE? That's ridiculous. To actually think that Paul would settle for a speaking role that amounts to NOTHING at the end of the day just tells me you don't know him nearly well enough.

Except I didn't say it was just for a speaking role. It's also for his son's future in the GOP. Romney may also give him some concessions when it comes to the Fed.

 

[Paulie]

But to assume that it's for a fucking SPEAKING ROLE? That's ridiculous. To actually think that Paul would settle for a speaking role that amounts to NOTHING at the end of the day just tells me you don't know him nearly well enough.

Except I didn't say it was just for a speaking role. It's also for his son's future in the GOP. Romney may also give him some concessions when it comes to the Fed.

What guarantees are there for Paul in "concessions"?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

It's over for Ron Paul. I wish he would just drop out now and go retire and enjoy himself instead of hanging round for a bunch of assholes to shit on him. In the end, he's right about the economy, the dollar, foreign policy, constitutional government, war and state rights.

but it doesn't matter to people any more. He should retire and enjoy the remainder of his days. He did far more for the cause of liberty than anyone else has in the last 100 years. He deserves to break it off and enjoy. Yes, i realize he must enjoy spreading the message.

 

[Paulie]

Right now I'm using the proportional numbers and assuming Santorum will at least get some delegates from the caucus states he won. I understand that it's not concrete.

I've already said straight forward that I may be slightly confused about some of the minor details but I believe I understand the process for the most part.

However, I don't see the point of trying to have a conversation with you if all you're going to be is hostile and condescending.

What do you expect? At one time you reached out to me asking me about libertarianism because you thought you might be starting to become one, I took the time to reply back with a bunch of information for you and now during this entire campaign you've done nothing but shit on Paul and demonstrate that you're really still just a typical liberal.

Now you're trying to speak for Paul as though you know him so well, somehow better than those of us who've been studying and scrutinizing the man for YEARS. It's insulting, Rob. You don't listen to us, you only think what you want based on your own confirmation bias via media reports.

Trust me. We know more about him than you. If you want to have a decent discussion about the guy, you could start by not pretending to know him better than we do. I'll tell you right now...his supporters are not going to vote for Romney...not his delegates at the convention, and not his voters at the polls in November.

Obama appreciates Ron Paul's support.

I don't see any difference in Romney and Obama so this means nothing to me.

 

[elvis]

What do you expect? At one time you reached out to me asking me about libertarianism because you thought you might be starting to become one, I took the time to reply back with a bunch of information for you and now during this entire campaign you've done nothing but shit on Paul and demonstrate that you're really still just a typical liberal.

Now you're trying to speak for Paul as though you know him so well, somehow better than those of us who've been studying and scrutinizing the man for YEARS. It's insulting, Rob. You don't listen to us, you only think what you want based on your own confirmation bias via media reports.

Trust me. We know more about him than you. If you want to have a decent discussion about the guy, you could start by not pretending to know him better than we do. I'll tell you right now...his supporters are not going to vote for Romney...not his delegates at the convention, and not his voters at the polls in November.

Obama appreciates Ron Paul's support.

I don't see any difference in Romney and Obama so this means nothing to me.

And Barack appreciates that.

 

[Modbert]

What guarantees are there for Paul in "concessions"?

None. However, if Paul wants to use his influence at the convention then he's going to get concessions at some point. Virtually nothing will be guaranteed.

Do you expect him to win at the convention?

 

[Paulie]

Obama appreciates Ron Paul's support.

I don't see any difference in Romney and Obama so this means nothing to me.

And Barack appreciates that.

I can't wait til Romney doesn't repeal Obamacare, doesn't repeal the NDAA since he said he would have signed it, doesn't eliminate any wasteful cabinet departments, doesn't reduce spending...basically doesn't do SHIT differently than Obama.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Romney wont win without Paul supporters and he wont get them. The GOP is shit out of luck.

Congrats to the racist marxist for the default win.

 

[Paulie]

What guarantees are there for Paul in "concessions"?

None. However, if Paul wants to use his influence at the convention then he's going to get concessions at some point. Virtually nothing will be guaranteed.

Do you expect him to win at the convention?

No I don't expect him to win. I don't think it's possible. Santorum and Gingrich delegates are not going to vote Paul if it goes to a 2nd round. They'll hold their nose and either go to Romney or pick some other establishment candidate that gets shoved down their throats...like a Jeb Bush or some other fucking loser that isn't really a conservative.

I do believe he has an endgame. I just have no idea what it is.

 

[Paulie]

The establishment saw just how easy it is to move the herd in the GOP during the course of the primary cycle. Look how quickly they were able to herd the sheep from one candidate to the next. How easy would it be to bring in a Jeb Bush or a Mitch Daniels to a brokered convention and get the sheep herded right to them?