| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On January 22 2012 11:13 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: MSNBC is bashing Ron Paul right now. Laruarance O"Donnell isnt really blasting Paul so much as hes saying that he isnt going to win and his goal is to get his issues talked about. Rachel Maddow is saying that he is going to have a lot of delegates and could probably make some demands with them to unify the party. He probably wont do this though because the party can essentially bury his son in the senate. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
| ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
| ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
On January 22 2012 11:21 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: What happens if Gingrich doesn't show up? It's taking him long enough to start the speech lol | ||
|
Derez
Netherlands6068 Posts
We all know he's crazy enough for it. | ||
|
SuperFanBoy
New Zealand1068 Posts
Also Ron Paul sucks because hes old and not a good speaker, his message is great but his delivery isn't.. either way I can't see him beating Mitt Romney or Gingrich even though I would want him to.. | ||
|
Corvette
United States433 Posts
On January 22 2012 11:19 GGTeMpLaR wrote: I really hope he runs 3rd party and does well enough to be in the debates with Obama/Republican. I'm just not interested at all in following the general election if it's just going to be Obama vs Gingrich or Obama vs Romney. I hope he does too, If the "Americans Elect" thing works then Paul will have a chance to make a 3rd party run. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
NtroP
United States174 Posts
On January 22 2012 11:19 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Counting the delegates I think Paul should at least spend some money in Florida for the sole purpose of spoiling Santorum and he is only five delegates from being tied. Florida is completely black box voting. No accountability. Due to that, Ron Paul's campaign isn't spending any money there. I'm working with the Ron Paul campaign in MN, and that's the word on the street. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
On January 22 2012 11:24 Corvette wrote: I hope he does too, If the "Americans Elect" thing works then Paul will have a chance to make a 3rd party run. I'm actually really curious about the idea of Paul as a third party candidate. It's obvious he has a deep following on both sides of the spectrum and this could cause huge ruptures in the National Election. The thing is, if Paul runs, the Republican Nominee is basically fucked, but Obama might not be. BUT, if Paul can pull enough votes off of Obama there is a very large posibility that no one wins the majority and the election goes to the House of Representatives for deciding, something we haven't seen in over 100 years. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On January 22 2012 11:30 1Eris1 wrote: I'm actually really curious about the idea of Paul as a third party candidate. It's obvious he has a deep following on both sides of the spectrum and this could cause huge ruptures in the National Election. The thing is, if Paul runs, the Republican Nominee is basically fucked, but Obama might not be. BUT, if Paul can pull enough votes off of Obama there is a very large posibility that no one wins the majority and the election goes to the House of Representatives for deciding, something we haven't seen in over 100 years. That would be a good prospect. I want to see an election that isn't just Rich Guy No. 1 vs. Rich Guy No. 2, something like a neo-Andrew Jackson. But the richer one always wins due to funding. | ||
|
INeedSpoons
Colombia41 Posts
| ||
|
Derez
Netherlands6068 Posts
On January 22 2012 11:30 1Eris1 wrote: I'm actually really curious about the idea of Paul as a third party candidate. It's obvious he has a deep following on both sides of the spectrum and this could cause huge ruptures in the National Election. The thing is, if Paul runs, the Republican Nominee is basically fucked, but Obama might not be. BUT, if Paul can pull enough votes off of Obama there is a very large posibility that no one wins the majority and the election goes to the House of Representatives for deciding, something we haven't seen in over 100 years. You don't need a majority for president? Or at least, Clinton got elected with a plurality not a majority. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Housemd
United States1407 Posts
| ||
|
Corvette
United States433 Posts
On January 22 2012 11:30 1Eris1 wrote: I'm actually really curious about the idea of Paul as a third party candidate. It's obvious he has a deep following on both sides of the spectrum and this could cause huge ruptures in the National Election. The thing is, if Paul runs, the Republican Nominee is basically fucked, but Obama might not be. BUT, if Paul can pull enough votes off of Obama there is a very large posibility that no one wins the majority and the election goes to the House of Representatives for deciding, something we haven't seen in over 100 years. Well if it goes to house of reps then the republican nominee would win right? and yeah, if he makes a 3rd party run sadly dont think that he could get 51%, but he would definitely make an impact. Thats why we need to use the Alternative Vote that the British tried to change to last year. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
On January 22 2012 11:32 Derez wrote: You don't need a majority for president? Or at least, Clinton got elected with a plurality not a majority. I'm 99% positive you need a majority of electoral college votes but you do not need a majority of votes. brb wikipedia edit: yup, I am correct If no candidate receives a majority of the electoral vote (currently at least 270), the President is determined by the rules outlined by the 12th Amendment. Specifically, the selection of President would then be decided by a ballot of the House of Representatives. For the purposes of electing the President, each state only has one vote. A ballot of the Senate is held to choose the Vice President. In this ballot, each senator has one vote. Congress has chosen the victor of the election only twice, in 1800 and 1824. | ||
|
Derez
Netherlands6068 Posts
On January 22 2012 11:33 Housemd wrote: Just a quick question: If a Republican candidate is to get 1144 delegates, then there is a 100% chance that he will become the nominee correct? Not 100%. Delegates are pledged, not bound. In theory, pledged delegates can choose not to vote for the candidate they're pledged to. This could happen in the case of something like a major scandal. | ||
| ||
|
|
WardiTV Winter Champion…
Classic vs Rogue
Solar vs Gerald
Bunny vs Nicoract
ByuN vs Zoun
herO vs Clem
MaxPax vs Cure
AI Arena Tournament
Patches Events
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
RSL Revival
Classic vs TriGGeR
Cure vs Cham
WardiTV Winter Champion…
OSC
BSL
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
