vauge

I do not know what upsets me more. The fact that I had to read this in a University website out of the MSM or the fact that the rules were changed halfway into the game.

:rant on:
This **** is getting old. Ok, so you don't like Ron Paul - no problem - give him a fair shake. In the primaries vote who you believe is best for this country. In the general start using tactics and lesser evil voting. Stop trying to cut the man off at the pass. You're only spitting on our election process and completely hurting the integrity of our democracy.
:rant off:

More here: Caucus results upset state Paul supporters - News

Zyphlin

I hope this gets looked at, as something does seem fishy.

That said, I've seen Paulites crying "Rigged" after every single caucus and primary held so far. Its not to much of a surprise to think that people are mostly ignoring stories about a guy whose at best in 4th place, who has a number of supporters that cry foul every time he loses.

This does look very odd though...need to look into how LA actually does things a bit ot beter understand.

Binary_Digit

Maybe if he wasn't left out of debates, left out of polls, and generally railroaded by the MSM machine, Ron Paul voters wouldn't complain so much. Ya think?

I hate this stupidity. Ron Paul has been bona fide **** blocked repeatedly so far in this process, and all they can do is label his followers as "loony" and "whiny" when they complain about it. Well guess what? Maybe they actually have legitimate complaints! Ever stop to think about that?

__________________
"Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing.” -Dwight D. Eisenhower

rivrrat

While I agree that it should be looked into, and it pisses me off that "they" keep trying to push Paul out of the way using unethical tactics, I do get some amount of amusement out of this.

Why, you might ask?

Because obviously Ron Paul scares "them" THAT much. The fact that he could come out on top terrifies some people so much that they don't even bother with negative campaigns against him, or digging up dirt on him. No, no. He's more scary than that. He requires assurance that he won't win. They won't just try to slander him, they'll just make it downright impossible for people to vote for him. That's how afraid they are that he'll get into office and make so many government jobs unnecessary. That's how scared they are that they won't be able to suck as much money out of the American people any longer. That's how afraid they are of losing their mansions and expensive cars. That's how afraid they are that he'll make the government smaller, and smaller, while increasing the average person's freedom, liberty, and income (by lowering/eliminating income taxes). We can't have that, ya know! If the people get empowered and get more money, they just might join the same fancy golf clubs and that would be an abomination.

I just find it amusing that he's that scary to other government folks. It's also pretty god damned telling. Everytime I see crap like this, I just think to myself, "He's the one. If they're THAT afraid of him, he's the one I want in office."

__________________
A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.

vauge

It is pretty easy to understand. Ron Paul won so they changed the rules.

There is a lot of corruption going on in the US. It sickens me that people do not seem to care if it doesn't seem to apply to them or their cause. Some people do not like Ron Paul and are willing to sacrifice their liberty to keep him from getting a fair deal. This is not the ideals that I learned in high school.

We are a republic democracy where everyone has an equal ability to be successful - right?

Zyphlin

Did I say they didn't have legitimate complaints? No, I did not. But that doesn't change the fact that, legitimate or not, when someone is constantly complaining time and time again it tends to cause people to tune them out after a while.

And yes, I do call them whiney.

He gets left out of a fox debate, i look at Paul sites and they're whining.

He gets put INTO the fox debates, and low and behold, they're whining.

Polls don't include Paul, they whine.

Polls DO include Paul, but he's not talked about enough in regards to the poll to their liking. They whine.

Unless the media is salvating over Ron Paul as much as they do, and its simply not goin to happen, it seems a large amount of his supporters are just going to whine and complain about how "unfair" it is to him.

Congratulations, you found out the MSM can be unfair. Shock and Awe. This hasn't been the case for ages now?

Paul does have a lot of VERY out of the main stream ideas. The very fact that its outside of the main stream makes it something that the...wow...MAIN STREAM media is not going to take much time in focusing on. Why? Because if a large majority agreed with him, it wouldn't be outside of the main stream. You have an interview with someone polling at 30% nation wide out of a race of 6 and you're probably going to grab more ratings than interviewing someone polling at 4% and who has a number of fans that can't stand your network on principle anyways.

I absolutely love, LOVE, Ron Paul followers that will talk about blowback in the whole War on Terror but somehow things "Its not faaaaaair" or are shocked and appalled that the Main Stream Media would look at him as a fringe person when he has 9/11 truthers, NWO, anti-zionist conspiracy theorists as some of his louder supporters. That the Main Stream Media would ignore someone that's calling for the outright removal of a number of long standing departments of the government...something rather unheard of for most Americans. That the main stream media would ignore someone polling for a long time at under 5% nation wide. That hte main stream media would ignore someone who seems to lapse into long conspiratorial rants when asked questions. I'm just shocked by this.

The things in LA are questionable and should looked into...doubly so as it DOES involve first and 2nd place which is major. The cries of foul in Iowa seemed to me a lot less likely, and NH's was being made to be absolute fact when there were a lot of possible factors there.

the makeout hobo

Wait, how did LA have their caucus before Feb. 5? I thought they were going to be after super tuesday?

__________________
The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).Vague is a man of honor

Binary_Digit

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to come across like I was after you personally. I just have little tolerance for the MSM deciding for everyone who the "important" candidates are and only reporting about them. They should include every single candidate in all their polls and debates. In another post it was pointed out that Gulliani was left out of the poll reporting, and I think that's equally disgusting.

I don't care if a candidate is in 2nd place or 22nd place, and I don't care if he's my candidate or not, there is absolutely no excuse for the MSM to leave them out of the process. It's information pruning, plain and simple, and it circumvents the entire point behind the democratic process.

the makeout hobo

With a regard to polling, Binary, the purpose of polling is to accurately predict the outcome of an election. Since earlier, it's been obvious that certain candidates would either drop out or become irrelevant after early state voting. That's why it wouldn't really make sense to poll for Dodd, for instance, in California.

vauge

The caucus is for delegates.