The Real Delegate Count - it's not over

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

You either do not understand a direct question or your tin foil hat has slid too far down...

I SAID I DO NOT agree with EITHER ONE of THEM and WILL NOT be VOTING for EITHER ONE of THEM. Is that plain enough for you?

[aegsm76]

Where's that icon that shows me putting my thumbs in my ears, wiggling my fingers and sticking my tongue out....

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

Where's that icon that shows me putting my thumbs in my ears, wiggling my fingers and sticking my tongue out....

Well, anywhere you want to stick it is fine with me. ORomney can do the same.

[aegsm76]

No humor, no humor at all.
About what I would expect from a Paul supporter...

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

No humor, no humor at all.
About what I would expect from a Paul supporter...

You just proved that you do have issues with reading comprehension. Let me help you out again. Of course, if you are comfortable lying, then I can't help you.

I am not a Ron Paul supporter and have stated that many times. I am following the story on the delegate count because, it's interesting for this election cycle.

[CC1]

PO, on a serious note I am really praying that you reconsider your determination not to vote for Romney this November. Romney at his worst is much better than Obama at his best.

Look at it this way - Romney is going to be pushed somewhat to the right during a first term because he knows he has to get re-elected with the support of conservative Republicans. For that reason I think that his Federal court appointees will be conservative to moderate where we all know that Obama's will be hard left liberals.

Since Federal judges are appointed for life the judical picks in the next four years could well shape our country more than any other thing. In addition to regular Federal judges we have several Supreme Court Justices in their 80's who will most likely be replaced during this next Presidential term.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

You just proved that you do have issues with reading comprehension. Let me help you out again. Of course, if you are comfortable lying, then I can't help you.

I am not a Ron Paul supporter and have stated that many times. I am following the story on the delegate count because, it's interesting for this election cycle.

C'mon PO lighten up!!!
Have some fun!!!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by CC1

PO, on a serious note I am really praying that you reconsider your determination not to vote for Romney this November. Romney at his worst is much better than Obama at his best.

Look at it this way - Romney is going to be pushed somewhat to the right during a first term because he knows he has to get re-elected with the support of conservative Republicans. For that reason I think that his Federal court appointees will be conservative to moderate where we all know that Obama's will be hard left liberals.

Since Federal judges are appointed for life the judical picks in the next four years could well shape our country more than any other thing. In addition to regular Federal judges we have several Supreme Court Justices in their 80's who will most likely be replaced during this next Presidential term.

When Romney was Governor, at the advice of his chief legal counsels, he implemented unconstitutional policies, i.e., implementing gay marriage without legislative authority and forced Catholic hospitals to dispense the morning after (abortion) pills.

In Romney's appointments, is diversity and non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation still a core value of his? His record certainly didn't indicate any commitment to conservative judicial philosophy.

"Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents -- including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights, a Globe review of the nominations has found. Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats."
- Boston Globe 7/25/2005

Before you try to talk about bi-partisanship, Gov. Perry is very strict on his judicial picks, so you can't go there with the argument.

When Romney has the chance to leave conservative picks after his term, he doesn't. Same thing he did with the same-sex marriage. If he had left it alone, his state wouldn't have been the first to give out same-sex marriage licenses. He set the precedent in our country forever. He did that alone. Someday, he was thinking, he might need the gay vote.

Governor Mitt Romney pledged yesterday not to make a flurry of lame-duck judicial appointments in the final days of his administration . . . David Yas, editor of Lawyers Weekly, said Romney is "bucking tradition" by resisting the urge to fill all remaining judgeships. "It is a tradition for governors to use that power to appoint judgesaggressively in the waning moments of their administration," Yas said. He added that Romney has been criticized for failing to make judicial appointments. "The legal community has consistently criticized him for not filling open seats quickly enough and being a little too painstaking in the process and being dismissive of the input of the Judicial Nominating Commission," Yas said.
- Boston Globe 11/2/2006

I am very sure that something in the economy will turn around if he gets the nomination, it is a given. But, under all of the other information, I'm just not all that enamored with the guy. He is a progressive and that will destroy us, maybe a little slower, but we will get there just like we will with Obama.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

C'mon PO lighten up!!!
Have some fun!!!

I actually was having fun. Being really serious is a great deal of fun. You'd have to get that type of humor.

[Pressing-On]

Okay, this is where we are at with the delegate count.

According to rule 38 delegates are not bound. And according to the federal law interpretation, federal law trumps any other rule at the convention. It is for the presidency, which is a federal issue at that point. Federal law says delegates can not be coerced to vote any way.

At the convention of 1920, Harding started at 6.25% of the delegates and ended up at 70% and won, then went on to win the presidency. So, yes, we may end up a brokered convention. I can't give you odds, but it is still a possibility.

There is a lawsuit already being filed by a group of Paul supporters. They can also abstain from the vote and if there are enough of them that may deny Romney the win. I haven't researched past the two points; Rule 38 and the Federal law. They may have it all ironed out with Paul by the convention, but I don't think so. Paul is still gaining delegates, they haven't stopped. I listened to a message yesterday with him saying they are still plowing ahead to gain as many delegates as possible. Nobody can predict what will happen at this convention, but a lot of people don't like Romney, including the delegates or he would already have the 1144 unopposed delegates.

Until that first vote takes place and is counted, nobody knows the outcome. All of Romney's posturing is to try and make it look inevitable. Pretty weak way to run a campaign. And if Newt wasn't out there doing his thinking and speaking, Romney would look weaker. You heard the FOX commentators talking about it that I posted earlier? If not, please listen to it.

And this is interesting, especially the last sentence: In 1976, the Republican primaries gave President Gerald Ford a slight lead in the popular vote and delegates entering the Republican National Convention but not enough delegates to secure the nomination. A brokered convention was predicted, but Ford managed to receive the necessary support on the first ballot to edge Ronald Reagan. This is the last time a Republican presidential convention opened without the nominee having already been decided in the primaries- goes to the previous statement about a candidate obtaining the 1144 before the convention.

There is always a vote at Convention. McCain had 1144 before the convention last time and there was still a vote. That is why all this info is flying around,law suits being files, and Santorum preparing for a floor fight, etc.

Anyway, still wondering the turn out. It's a very different election year. Lots going on. Many not liking Romney and many afraid of Obama.