Nothing false about my "dichotomy" at all. Ron Paul LOST because not enough voters agreed with his message.... PERIOD end of discussion. He may have the right message, but he is the wrong messenger. Besides he lost the race LONG ago, not recently so why the problem now all of a sudden at convention time?
That's the thing, he didn't necessarily lose the race a long time ago, and he didn't necessarily do it without help. Why all of a sudden at convention time? Maybe because (if you'd review the linked story in the OP) many of the delegates he didn't get screwed out of at the state level, he got screwed out of just now, at the national convention.
I have no beef with Ron Paul, or Johnson. It is this false premise that no one but their supporters has any intelligence, understanding of where we are as a nation, etc... and they and ONLY they understand and have the answers, sorry that is just a load of crap. And you guys wonder why you can't convince anyone to join your side. Continue to settle for 5% and continue blame it on everyone else, it's been working SO well for you so far.
If this is directed at me, you're barking up the wrong tree. There are plenty of folks that get where we are and disagree with Paul, Johnson, et al whom I consider to be intelligent and genuinely concerned about the direction in which the country is headed.
It is those who can participate in, condone, or even simply ignore the likely (at least in some cases) and consistent rigging of the game in the name of party unity who cause me to question their intelligence or at least their genuine concern for the country.
I go back to an earlier post. The winners get to write the history books, AND make the rules. Just the way life is. Besides, Ron Paul "died" long ago, can't remember the last time I've seen anything in the media about him.
Find someone like a Ronald Reagan to deliver the message THEN we could make some headway!
"The winners from last cycle get to write the history books AND remake the rules on the fly to ensure the desired outcome this time around."
FIFY
This is what happened...it didn't happen everywhere, but it happened enough throughout the primaries and caucuses to be of concern, and to make your dichotomy false. Paul may have won (per the rules) had the rules not been changed or simply ignored in the middle of the game (newsflash: Romney STILL not Republican Nominee). I think being on the ballot at the convention and having one's delegates seated "might" make a difference.
If you're waiting on this to be reported, you're likely also turning blue waiting for a MSM Romney love fest.
Quite honestly, it's not your citation of the idea that might makes right is often a reality that is so disturbing; it is the fact that you seem willing to accept it, warts and all, so long as it suits your preferred outcome.
I, for one, would be quite pissed about party officials playing shenanigans with the ballots or seating of delegates at the conventions, even had they occurred against the presumptive nominee, Mr. Romney. I believe in fair play.
Last edited: