Ron Paul Beats McCain in Maine Caucus

Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Ron Paul Beats McCain in Maine Caucus; Ron Paul appears to closely trail Romney
Topic Started: Feb 4 2008, 03:58 PM (231 Views)
Reggie_perrin	Feb 4 2008, 03:58 PM Post #1
Posts: 478 Group: Members Member #130 Joined: 01/19/08	Go Ron Go ..... --------------- http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ Ron Paul Beats McCain in Maine Caucus, Primed to Win Over 1/3 of State Delegates (2/4/08) In the race for delegates, Ron Paul appears to closely trail Romney for first place FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 4, 2008 ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – While most reports about this past weekend’s Maine Caucus focused on the purely symbolic presidential preference poll, in the meaningful race to secure delegates to the state convention Ron Paul is primed to finish second with likely 35 percent of the total delegates. Delegates to the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis are elected by the state delegates. Internal results from 10 of 16 counties, including the largest cities of Portland, South Portland, Lewiston, Auburn, Augusta, Waterville, Bangor, and Brewer, show Ron Paul picking up 215 of 608 State Convention delegates so far reported, or 35%. “Ron Paul’s strong second place finish in Maine, in which he beat John McCain, is proof that this race is far from over,” said Ron Paul campaign manager Lew Moore. “We’ll continue to battle for every delegate in this wide-open race for the Republican nomination.” In the presidential preference poll, with 70 percent reporting, Ron Paul is in third place just two percentage points behind John McCain. However, the Maine preference poll is purely a beauty contest, and in the actual election of state delegates the so-called “frontrunner” McCain is far behind Ron Paul. Edited by Reggie_perrin, Feb 4 2008, 03:58 PM.
Posts: 478 Group: Members Member #130 Joined: 01/19/08


Rich	Feb 4 2008, 04:37 PM Post #2
Posts: 99 Group: Members Member #31 Joined: 01/15/08	The article on Prison Planet said that he had come in 3% behind McCaine, but if the official site says he beat him then that has made my day even more better XD
Posts: 99 Group: Members Member #31 Joined: 01/15/08


Reggie_perrin	Feb 4 2008, 04:40 PM Post #3
Posts: 478 Group: Members Member #130 Joined: 01/19/08	Rich Feb 4 2008, 04:37 PM The article on Prison Planet said that he had come in 3% behind McCaine, but if the official site says he beat him then that has made my day even more better XD That was the presidential preference poll apparently, but the race for the delegates is a different one, in which RP beat McCainiac.
Posts: 478 Group: Members Member #130 Joined: 01/19/08


Reggie_perrin	Feb 4 2008, 04:43 PM Post #4
Posts: 478 Group: Members Member #130 Joined: 01/19/08	they need to get this news up ASAP.
Posts: 478 Group: Members Member #130 Joined: 01/19/08


look-up	Feb 5 2008, 02:26 PM Post #5
Posts: 1,642 Group: Admins Member #63 Joined: 01/15/08	Good news is bad news. didn't you hear? No one in the mainstream is reporting this at all. Not one mention of Ron Paul during lunch on MSNBC. Not one.
Posts: 1,642 Group: Admins Member #63 Joined: 01/15/08


Reggie_perrin	Feb 5 2008, 02:32 PM Post #6
Posts: 478 Group: Members Member #130 Joined: 01/19/08	I've just heard something thats actually made me feel ill, get ready for this, John McCain is going to get the nomination and it's not even republicans who are voting for him, but wait it gets worse, he's getting the fucking anti war vote as well, WTF is going on ? anti war undecided voters are voting for JOHN MCCAINIAC how is he doing this ? are these people stupid or what ?
Posts: 478 Group: Members Member #130 Joined: 01/19/08


Sam Handwich	Feb 5 2008, 05:09 PM Post #7
Posts: 9 Group: Members Member #216 Joined: 01/26/08	Reggie_perrin Feb 5 2008, 02:32 PM I've just heard something thats actually made me feel ill, get ready for this, John McCain is going to get the nomination and it's not even republicans who are voting for him, but wait it gets worse, he's getting the fucking anti war vote as well, WTF is going on ? anti war undecided voters are voting for JOHN MCCAINIAC how is he doing this ? are these people stupid or what ? First we need to define what "anti-war" means to certain groups....becuase the closest the typical deluded rethuglican voter can get to being "anti-war" is by supporting a candidate who has established a history of merely offering mild criticism of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld's handling of the war. Face it - in the real world there's nothing anti-war about singing "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bom Iran" and then getting a good chuckle out of it. Additionally, a vote for Ron Paul is, in the minds of most republicans, an admission of utter failure over not only the past 7 years, but the last few decades, in terms of foreign policy, economic policy and beyond. And no one, especially thick skulled GOPers, will easily admit having made a mistake. McCain will be easy for either Obama (or Shillary) to beat. He's old, stiff, grumpy and half his party hates him. This election is for the democrats to lose.
Posts: 9 Group: Members Member #216 Joined: 01/26/08


Reggie_perrin	Feb 6 2008, 07:37 AM Post #8
Posts: 478 Group: Members Member #130 Joined: 01/19/08	Sam Handwich Feb 5 2008, 05:09 PM Reggie_perrin Feb 5 2008, 02:32 PM I've just heard something thats actually made me feel ill, get ready for this, John McCain is going to get the nomination and it's not even republicans who are voting for him, but wait it gets worse, he's getting the fucking anti war vote as well, WTF is going on ? anti war undecided voters are voting for JOHN MCCAINIAC how is he doing this ? are these people stupid or what ? First we need to define what "anti-war" means to certain groups....becuase the closest the typical deluded rethuglican voter can get to being "anti-war" is by supporting a candidate who has established a history of merely offering mild criticism of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld's handling of the war. Face it - in the real world there's nothing anti-war about singing "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bom Iran" and then getting a good chuckle out of it. Additionally, a vote for Ron Paul is, in the minds of most republicans, an admission of utter failure over not only the past 7 years, but the last few decades, in terms of foreign policy, economic policy and beyond. And no one, especially thick skulled GOPers, will easily admit having made a mistake. McCain will be easy for either Obama (or Shillary) to beat. He's old, stiff, grumpy and half his party hates him. This election is for the democrats to lose. But according to the exit polls it wasn't even republicans voting for McCainiac, it was anti war undecided voters who went for him, the only explanation is that when they hear John McCainiac say "i was critical of the way Bush went to war" it was misconstrued as him being against the war, when in actual fact he just means he would have sent more troops, although Im not quite sure when McCainiac started criticizing troops levels, probably only after things started to go tits up. Agree thats it's there for the democrats to lose, the Bush admin has practically destroyed the republican party with 8 years of hubris/warmongering/blundering/scandal/ and out right nazification of US foreign policy IE preemptive wars/torture/lying about wmd's/fabricating evidence etc, of course the dmes have played there part especially hillary whos been a loyal cheerleader of most of Bush's most draconian policies and laws, IE patriot act/military commissions act/Iraq war/designating the Iranian revolutionary guard as a bona fide terror group, thats why people like Anne Coulter are now talking about voting for her, shes just as hawkish as most neo-cons when you dig a little deeper into her record, then there's Obama, says he's against the war yet voted in favor to fund it.
Posts: 478 Group: Members Member #130 Joined: 01/19/08


look-up	Feb 7 2008, 11:40 AM Post #9
Posts: 1,642 Group: Admins Member #63 Joined: 01/15/08	yes, people are largely very stupid. but I think part of the strategy employed by some democrats (in states with open primaries) is to help a pro-war candidate get nominated on the GOP side, so that when their Democratic candidate goes up against them, the war issue will be the thing that does him in. For instance, McCain stands litterally NO CHANCE against Obama on this issue. It will be easy to beat him by focussing on that issue alone. I'm not an Obama supporter, but I sure as hell would vote for him over McCain. But I have to say that this strategy, while logical from a party-centric ideology, is very ILLOGICAL from an anti-war perspective. The best thing to do would be to vote for an anti-war republican, AND an anti-war democrat. That way, no matter which party wins, the war ends. Obviously, people are more attached to their allegence to parties than they are to anti-war issues. And that, like you so eloquently said, is very "stupid". Edited by look-up, Feb 7 2008, 11:49 AM.
Posts: 1,642 Group: Admins Member #63 Joined: 01/15/08


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty · Next Topic »