Page 48 of 51 FirstFirst ... 343536373839404142434445464748495051 LastLast
Results 1,881 to 1,920 of 2034

Thread: ron paul=awesome/kickass?

  1. #1881
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Well, I think doing them all as primaries on the same day would cause a few weird side effects:

    1. The expense of trying to compete everywhere would crush many candidates, consolidating more power with the wealthy
    2. Some candidates could try different regional strategies to see if they could focus their time and money for the most bang
    3. I'm not sure all the candidates would be that well vetted until it was too late
    4. Media would become even MORE powerful in the nominating process because they could effectively pick who should win or lose, "report" on the field and then in 1 day, it's all over.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  2. #1882
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:17 PM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,783
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,438
    Thanked 4,015 Times in 3,250 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Historically the majority of the society just cruise. They go with the flow. They only get motivated if their comfort zone gets invaded and at that they usually back the guy selling a chicken in every pot. The cruisers can be a dangerous lot actually.

    The educated and motivated are actually the minority and let's be honest, the decent, fair ones of this group are the ones you want in power. The only problem is they are damn hard to find.

    It's in shitty times that great leaders shine. People in history are remembered for two things. Either how horrible they were or how great they were. The great ones are rare. Very rare. I don't think there has ever been a great leader in the White House since I've been alive. Most just continued to empower the war, oil, and banking establishments. I've watched the country steadily decline my whole life. There was a brief glimmer of hope in the 1980's when some American entreprenures started what became the personal computer industry and that brought in a whole new dynamic that the establishment didn't see coming but in time they outsourced that too. Then the internet happened. But now that is being turned into a spy network for the government.

    I would say the last real leader we had in the White House was John F. Kennedy. He issued a challenge to put a man on the moon before the decade was out. We did this. He moved to put the Federal Reserve Bank out of business. He tried to break up the corrupt CIA. When his own generals were screaming to launch a nuclear strike he held off, avoided World War III, and ended the Cuban Missle Crises. He was the leader and he made his own decisions. He stepped on toes trying to do the right thing for the country and that is what probably ended getting him killed. The last great Democratic president and the last great president period.
    Last edited by Nitro Express; 04-29-2012 at 05:07 PM.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  3. #1883
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:17 PM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,783
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,438
    Thanked 4,015 Times in 3,250 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    I actually see Ron Paul as someone trying to break the grip the old oil, banking, and war establishment have over the Republican Party. He's more popular with the the people than the Republican Party or the media in general are admitting to. The establishment are pulling out all the stops to see if they can sink his ship. He still might be able to pull it off and even if he doesn't get the nomination he has shown everyone how the corrupt media and Republican Party no longer follow the will of the people in general.

  4. #1884
    Rice Cooker
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    knuckleboner's Avatar
    Member No
    120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-07-2024 @ 03:10 PM
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    2,927
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 241 Times in 190 Posts


    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    Well, I think doing them all as primaries on the same day would cause a few weird side effects:

    1. The expense of trying to compete everywhere would crush many candidates, consolidating more power with the wealthy
    2. Some candidates could try different regional strategies to see if they could focus their time and money for the most bang
    3. I'm not sure all the candidates would be that well vetted until it was too late
    4. Media would become even MORE powerful in the nominating process because they could effectively pick who should win or lose, "report" on the field and then in 1 day, it's all over.
    all valid points.

    but at the end of the day, i still say that too many voters don't feel part of the nominating process. and weeding out candiates before most people even have a chance to vote for them i don't think helps. it leaves people with options they don't feel they really had a say in.
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  5. #1885
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Well over half the delegates haven't even been alotted yet in the GOP contests. People still have the ability to make a huge impact in the race. If they want to change things, they should be contributing to campaigns and getting out to vote for who they want (like we are). The only reason Romney is the "presumptive nominee" is because the other campaigns ran out of money (except the Paul campaign) and didn't want to continue for their own political reasons. Romney doesn't even have a hard delegate count that meets the 50% mark of what he needs and the GOP has already sighed, shrugged their shoulders, and given up.

    I think if people want a say, they can easily send a message - vote him down in favor of other people. Nominate and elect delegates that aren't bound to him. It would be incredibly easy to change the 'narrative' of this race. And it was incredibly easy to do so state after state so far this year.

    They have the power but they've been told by the media so many times that Romney was going to win it (before it ever even started) that they gave up.

    I have no sympathy for them.

  6. #1886
    Rice Cooker
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    knuckleboner's Avatar
    Member No
    120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-07-2024 @ 03:10 PM
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    2,927
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 241 Times in 190 Posts


    Rep Power
    25
    under the current system, if you lose the first 4 primaries, regardless of whether or not those particular electorates are representative of the overall voters, the media and the money will begin to desert the candidate before most peope ever get the chance to vote.

    the current system does not encourage people to get involved. there's fairly ample evidence.

    mind you, i'm NOT attacking ron paul's supporters or campaign. they're operating under the current system. i just don't like the current party nominating system.

  7. #1887
    ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

    Seshmeister's Avatar
    Member No
    11
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 06:12 PM
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    35,130
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    2,823
    Thanked 9,397 Times in 6,054 Posts


    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by knuckleboner View Post
    under the current system, if you lose the first 4 primaries, regardless of whether or not those particular electorates are representative of the overall voters, the media and the money will begin to desert the candidate before most peope ever get the chance to vote.
    I'm no expert but is it not true that Iowa, New Hampshire and North Dakota are particularly not representative of overall voters?
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  8. #1888
    Loon
    SUPER MODERATOR

    Nickdfresh's Avatar
    Member No
    8719
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:45 AM
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    49,110
    Status
    Online
    Thanks
    3,480
    Thanked 4,580 Times in 3,459 Posts


    Rep Power
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by knuckleboner View Post
    oh, i know it's legal. private political party nominating processes need not be democratic at all. caucuses really aren't.

    i'm just saying i think it's kind of funny that some ron paul supporters would support (completely legitimate) tricks to change delegates elected in an open primary to one candidate to their guy, instead. they would go apeshit if romney somehow convinced the delegate paul accumulated by winning the texas primary to vote for him, nonetheless. the cries of, "THIS IS WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE SYSTEM!!" would be deafening...
    One-hundred percent correct...
    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  9. #1889
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by knuckleboner View Post
    under the current system, if you lose the first 4 primaries, regardless of whether or not those particular electorates are representative of the overall voters, the media and the money will begin to desert the candidate before most peope ever get the chance to vote.

    the current system does not encourage people to get involved. there's fairly ample evidence.

    mind you, i'm NOT attacking ron paul's supporters or campaign. they're operating under the current system. i just don't like the current party nominating system.
    I don't know that I agree ... if people believe in a campaign, they will donate time, effort and money to support it.

    What you're describing is the tendency to want to "go with the winning team". When people do that, it's not because they believe in a candidate or their platform, it's because they want someone else (in the other party) to lose.

    And that's just for voters registered in those parties ... the majority of the population aren't in either party.

    The "majority" doesn't bother to wake up and pay attention to the campaign until convention time, when it's well past due for any real choice to go on. They are too complacent and let small portions of the population pre-select the two choices they have.

    That's not a result of the primary system, that's a result of a complacent population that does not bother nor care to change things.

    I have no sympathy for them. They believe in the fallacy of a two-party system and are willing to accept the consequences too easily.

  10. #1890
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    One-hundred percent correct...
    based on what?

  11. #1891
    Rice Cooker
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    knuckleboner's Avatar
    Member No
    120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-07-2024 @ 03:10 PM
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    2,927
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 241 Times in 190 Posts


    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    I don't know that I agree ... if people believe in a campaign, they will donate time, effort and money to support it.

    What you're describing is the tendency to want to "go with the winning team". When people do that, it's not because they believe in a candidate or their platform, it's because they want someone else (in the other party) to lose.

    And that's just for voters registered in those parties ... the majority of the population aren't in either party.

    The "majority" doesn't bother to wake up and pay attention to the campaign until convention time, when it's well past due for any real choice to go on. They are too complacent and let small portions of the population pre-select the two choices they have.

    That's not a result of the primary system, that's a result of a complacent population that does not bother nor care to change things.

    I have no sympathy for them. They believe in the fallacy of a two-party system and are willing to accept the consequences too easily.
    i think it is the primary system. the primary system is NOT designed to give the average voter the chance to determine the party's nominee. it's designed to allow the party to shape how it wants its nominee chosen. caucuses are awful for selecting candidates. they are NOT designed for the voters. they're designed to energize the hardcore party faithful.

    regardless of why, it should be embarrassing for the U.S. that our voter participation is so low. and leaving the system completely as is will not improve it.

  12. #1892
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Most people aren't members of either party.

  13. #1893
    Rice Cooker
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    knuckleboner's Avatar
    Member No
    120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-07-2024 @ 03:10 PM
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    2,927
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 241 Times in 190 Posts


    Rep Power
    25
    which is exactly the problem. by and large, the 2 party primary system sets up the only 2 candidates who have a chance of winning the presidency.

    by the time it gets to the general election, the current primary system's already turned OFF a decent amount of potential voters. that's not an ideal system.

    the first step, i think, is get rid of caucuses. they are DESIGNED to weed out non-party faithful. if i'm not an obama fan, but not really a hardcore republican, i might want to have a say in who's going to go against him, but i'm probably not going to get invovled in a caucus. nor do they want me involved.

    but put up a slate of candidates, and say, "here, you select which one you like best," and i might do it.

  14. #1894
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Romney pulls in large crowds at his recent campaign stop in South Carolina:



    That's what victory looks like

  15. #1895
    Builder of Sites
    DIAMOND STATUS
    LoungeMachine's Avatar
    Member No
    6584
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Last Online
    02-08-2016 @ 02:28 AM
    Location
    Milan to Minsk
    Posts
    32,555
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    4,111
    Thanked 3,705 Times in 2,513 Posts


    Rep Power
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitro Express View Post
    You really seem to like the hope and change. Obama has spent more money on welfare so I guess you might be benefitting?
    *facepalm*

    Yes, you're right....

    The reason I choose Obama over Mitt Romney is because I'm on welfare....



    Brilliant retort.

    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  16. #1896
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:17 PM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,783
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,438
    Thanked 4,015 Times in 3,250 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Maybe you have some student loan debt you want wiped out so tax payers like me have to pay it? 46% of this nation aren't paying any income taxes and it's not just the rich connected fucks like Timothy Geithner that aren't. I would say people enjoying goods others have to pay for is flat out theft. Obama is a license to steal.

  17. #1897
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:17 PM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,783
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,438
    Thanked 4,015 Times in 3,250 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    I really don't like delegates because they are middle men who at the end of the day will vote the way they want. Like I said before we have the technology to allow the people themselves to cast the votes themselves directly. Eliminate the middle men. Really delegates and political parties are obsolete. All they do is limit choices. I don't think any of us here really like the choices we are given in these political races.

  18. #1898
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:17 PM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,783
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,438
    Thanked 4,015 Times in 3,250 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Seshmeister View Post
    I'm no expert but is it not true that Iowa, New Hampshire and North Dakota are particularly not representative of overall voters?
    In the US the overall voters evenly fall into the conservative or liberal camps. I think Iowa is a mix of the two. North Dakota is most certainly conservative. I'm not sure about New Hampshire. I actually hate this two party system because the American public is more diverse than the system shows. Some of us may be liberal on some issues and conservative on others. I never felt I fit into any camp and would consider myself part of the swing voter population. I would rather just see a bunch of people go up for a general vote and then have several elections weeding the candidates down to a few finalists and at the last election the president is chosen. Screw the parties and screw this whole caucus and nomination system. We could vote directly as citizens voting a president in kind of like how judges pick the finalists in a dancing contest. Maybe have a year will several elections and then you have the finalist election and the one with the most votes becomes president.

  19. #1899
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by knuckleboner View Post
    which is exactly the problem. by and large, the 2 party primary system sets up the only 2 candidates who have a chance of winning the presidency.

    by the time it gets to the general election, the current primary system's already turned OFF a decent amount of potential voters. that's not an ideal system.

    the first step, i think, is get rid of caucuses. they are DESIGNED to weed out non-party faithful. if i'm not an obama fan, but not really a hardcore republican, i might want to have a say in who's going to go against him, but i'm probably not going to get invovled in a caucus. nor do they want me involved.

    but put up a slate of candidates, and say, "here, you select which one you like best," and i might do it.
    so I'm not sure if you're saying everyone should join one of the parties or if we should have no party system at all...

  20. #1900
    Builder of Sites
    DIAMOND STATUS
    LoungeMachine's Avatar
    Member No
    6584
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Last Online
    02-08-2016 @ 02:28 AM
    Location
    Milan to Minsk
    Posts
    32,555
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    4,111
    Thanked 3,705 Times in 2,513 Posts


    Rep Power
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitro Express View Post
    In the US the overall voters evenly fall into the conservative or liberal camps. I think Iowa is a mix of the two. North Dakota is most certainly conservative. I'm not sure about New Hampshire. I actually hate this two party system because the American public is more diverse than the system shows. Some of us may be liberal on some issues and conservative on others. I never felt I fit into any camp and would consider myself part of the swing voter population. I would rather just see a bunch of people go up for a general vote and then have several elections weeding the candidates down to a few finalists and at the last election the president is chosen. Screw the parties and screw this whole caucus and nomination system. We could vote directly as citizens voting a president in kind of like how judges pick the finalists in a dancing contest. Maybe have a year will several elections and then you have the finalist election and the one with the most votes becomes president.
    just wow....



    Really wish I cared enough tonight to pick this apart line by line....

    Maybe tomorrow.

  21. #1901
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:17 PM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,783
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,438
    Thanked 4,015 Times in 3,250 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    A lot of the old ways of doing things made sense when the speed of transportation was a guy on horseback. Hell we could just keep our Senators and Congressmen in their home states and let them vote electronically instead of being in Washington DC. It would make it more difficult for the lobbyists to get to them. When they are all in Washington at the same time it makes corrupting them so much more easier.

    Hell just let the citizens vote on the bills. The congress doesn't bother to read them anyways. The public probably couldn't do anymore damage.

  22. #1902
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:17 PM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,783
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,438
    Thanked 4,015 Times in 3,250 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    so I'm not sure if you're saying everyone should join one of the parties or if we should have no party system at all...
    We live in a country now that we have a lot of choices on things that don't matter. If you want ice cream you have a huge selection of flavors. If you want jelly beans there is a huge selection. In fact we have more choices on some of these things than ever before. But on the things that matter we have had our choices whittled down to nothing. We went from over 50 media companies to 5. We only have two political parties that can win the White House. We have fewer oil companies than we used to have. So on the unimportant shit we have choices on the things that shape our future we have very little and the trend is for it to get worse.

    I mean there's the joke of calling the Republican and Democrat parties the Republocrat Party because there is no real choice there. Both are owned by the same people. In other words we have the illusion of choice but there really isn't any real choice.

    So what many people now want is a system that gives us more choice. So many people get eliminated because they don't have the party blessing. So much of this caucus voting is just a bunch of nothing anyways. It's the delegates who have the actual voting power and they can vote any way they want to. Then we the public get to vote on who the delegates picked. Not much choice there and it's an easy system to corrupt.

    Wouldn't it just be better if we put all the candidates in a big pool, then the public vote on them and a certain number who get the highest votes go onto the next election. Make it like a tennis tournament then the winner of the final match becomes president and the people had a voice in all of the process. I doubt most voters even know who their delegates are and these are the people who decide who your party nomination will be. It really seems undemocratic because that whoe process is so behind the scenes.

  23. #1903
    Rice Cooker
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    knuckleboner's Avatar
    Member No
    120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-07-2024 @ 03:10 PM
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    2,927
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 241 Times in 190 Posts


    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    so I'm not sure if you're saying everyone should join one of the parties or if we should have no party system at all...
    neither. just that the current system doesn't lead to great choices for the average voter. i think a viable 3rd party could help. but that's a much bigger change.

    in the interim improve the process so more people get involved.

  24. #1904
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Louisiana Shocker: Ron Paul Wins
    By Doug Wead

    Well, the cat is out of the bag. Saturday’s district conventions in Louisiana gave the Ron Paul campaign 74% of the delegates heading into the June state convention where the delegation to the Republican National Convention in Tampa will be finally determined. Another state, another unseen victory for the Texas congressman. And, it should be noted, another embarrassment for the apparent nominee, former Governor Mitt Romney. Now, the question is this. How many other states have their own surprises coming?

    Months ago the Ron Paul campaign looked at Louisiana and decided that the best strategy was to concentrate on the caucus. The rules in Louisiana apportion 20 of the states delegates from the votes in its statewide primary, which was held last March and 24 delegates from it caucus system which elects delegates at the precinct level to go to district conventions where they elect delegates to go to the state convention where the final delegation will be chosen.

    What would you do? Spend your money trying to win the 20? Or spend your money trying to win the 24? Former Pennsylvania Senator, Rick Santorum, former Speaker, Newt Gingrich, and former governor, Mitt Romney, spent their money competing for the publicity of the statewide primary, which Santorum won and which he proudly and tearfully acknowledged before a national television audience last March. Our hapless New York Times and Associated Press duly reported that the delegates in Louisiana would be awarded 15 to Santorum and 5 to Romney. Ron Paul was not even a mention. But as Lee Corso would say, “Not so fast.”

    The actual delegates will be chosen at a state convention in June which Ron Paul supporters will now dominate. Not just by a bare majority but by 74%. It means that they will not only get their 24 delegates to Santorum’s 15 and Romney’s 5, but they will also decide who the delegates representing Santorum and Romney will be. Ain’t it sweet? And it is the brainchild of Jesse Benton – John Tate’s masterful delegate strategy run by our intrepid, Dimitri Kesari.

    Shortly after the Newt Gingrich victory in South Carolina the hope for Louisiana seemed like a long shot. There was even talk of helping Gingrich there, to blunt Romney and Santorum. But the campaign surged and the moneybombs came through (thank you) and men and women at the grass roots refused to give up in the face of sometimes hostile party operatives.

    Saturday, it all paid off and Ron Paul won majorities in contests in Congressional Districts 1, 2, 5 and 6. The decision in district 4 was close, with Ron Paul winning almost half.

    What does it mean? It means you should review some of the posts written on this blog and read carefully what was predicted. As of now, the Ron Paul campaign is ahead of anything anticipated and is doing more with less than any modern presidential campaign in recent memory. It means that there are more surprises coming. It means that Ron Paul will be a factor in Tampa.

    Onto Texas, where liberty may once again make its last stand on May 29, 2012 in the Texas Primary. Remember the Alamo.

    Notation Update: It gets better. This from a member of our Louisiana team.

    Doug can you please correct something in your post (even better than you state). Because of the allocation rules of bound delegates in the beauty contest primary – only 15 of the 20 primary delegates were awarded!! The other 5 get awarded at state convention WE now control!

    So…only 10 delegates are bound to Santorum and 5 delegates bound to Romney (from Primary). No other delegates are bound.

    To summarize:

    -20 delegates (all can be Paul backers, 5 bound to Paul, 5 bound to Romney and 10 bound to Santorum)
    -18 CD Delegates (Paul can easily get 12, could get up to all 18 if we work with Santorum/Gingrich people)
    -5 by “executive committee” – no clue if we have supporters on this thing and they go to RNC as uncommitted.
    -3 party leaders.
    http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2012/0...ron-paul-wins/

    Again, there's the Paul strategy... get as many pledged delegates as you can, and get your own supporters elected as pledged delegates to someone else if they can't pledge to Paul.

    Every delegate out of Louisiana may very well wind up being a Paul supporter.

  25. Thanked Dr. Love for this KICKASS post:

    ELVIS (04-30-2012)


  26. #1905
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    There's some claim that the rules set forth by the RNC in 2008 and 2010 state that delegates are not officially bound at the national convention and can vote their conscience. Interesting if true!

    Anyway, to get to the point, I found some information that may be helpful...

    "As set out in the Rules of the Republican Party, delegates have the ability to vote according to the delegates’ preference, even if that is contrary to the outcome of each state’s primary. According to one source, the legal counsel for the Republican National Convention in 2008 stated: “[The] RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose.” Thus, if a delegate were to challenge his or her ability to vote as a free agent, he or she would have grounds under Rule 38."

    This comes from: http://www.fairvote.org/response-to-...nvention-how-g...

    RULE NO. 38
    Unit Rule
    "No delegate or alternate delegate shall be bound by any attempt of any state or Congressional district to impose the unit rule."

    Directly from: The Rules of the Republican Party
    As Adopted
    by the 2008 Republican National Convention
    September 1, 2008

    *Amended by the
    Republican National Committee
    on August 6, 2010

    Please exercise your due diligence and obviously don't take my word for anything, but I just wanted to share what I thought was relevant.

    To all of you, God Bless!

    A pretty good summary of delegate rules and binding:
    http://www.fairvote.org/response-to-...1#.T54GZFLOuSr

  27. #1906
    Rice Cooker
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    knuckleboner's Avatar
    Member No
    120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-07-2024 @ 03:10 PM
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    2,927
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 241 Times in 190 Posts


    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    There's some claim that the rules set forth by the RNC in 2008 and 2010 state that delegates are not officially bound at the national convention and can vote their conscience. Interesting if true!

    how does taking delegates people thought were pledged to a different candidate make the ron paul campaign MORE appealing to the average voter?...

  28. #1907
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Are these the same average voters you were just saying didn't get a voice and got stuck with Romney before they even had a chance?

    Or the ones that are turning out in droves to try to get the one they are passionate about elected?

  29. Thanked Dr. Love for this KICKASS post:

    ELVIS (05-01-2012)


  30. #1908
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Here's why Romney doesn't have to worry about RP people at the national convention:

    Romney's Former Lt. Governor Loses Delegate Bid In Massachusetts

    posted Apr 30, 2012 11:11am EDT

    Mitt Romney's former Lieutenant Governor, Kerry Healey, lost her delegate bid to a Ron Paul supporter at the Massachusetts Republican convention Saturday, an alarming sign about Romney's organization in his old home state.

    With the nomination in hand, Romney had put together a slate of Mass. delegates to represent him at the Republican National Convention in Tampa — but a surge of libertarian activists at the convention resulted in the defeat of many of Romney's picks.

    More than half of the 27 delegate slots went to Paul supporters, the Globe reports. One of the casualties was Healey, who remains a top Romney supporter.

    The defeat is symbolic: Under state rules, all delegates will still be bound to vote for Romney at the national convention, which Romney won handily last month. But the Massachusetts delegates will have the opportunity to make mischief with votes on the party platform and to elect a chairman — a suggestion that Paul could play an outsized role at the convention this spring.

    BuzzFeed's phone calls to the Romney and Paul campaigns went unreturned.
    http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins...elegate-bid-in

  31. #1909
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Ron Paul Supporters Focus on State Delegations
    By Danny Yadron

    Undaunted by a GOP primary that is effectively over, Rep. Ron Paul’s supporters are now working to take over state Republican parties and delegations to the Republican National Convention this summer.

    This weekend, Mr. Paul’s backers effectively captured the Alaska GOP, won the Louisiana caucuses and beat out delegates picked by Mitt Romney in Massachusetts, the presumptive nominee’s home state.

    None of this, of course, is expected to alter the outcome of the GOP primary, but it is a notable illustration of the movement Mr. Paul built this election season, despite failing to win a single state’s nominating contest. It’s a network another Republican with libertarian views, such as Mr. Paul’s son, Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.), could tap in future elections.

    Mr. Romney needs to amass 1,144 delegates to mathematically clinch the Republican nomination. He currently sits at 847, according to the Associated Press, while Mr. Paul has 80.

    In Alaska on Saturday, Republicans voted a pair of Paul supporters as the state party’s chairman and co-chairwoman. While Rick Santorum won Louisiana’s GOP primary last month, Mr. Paul won the state’s party-controlled caucuses Saturday. That means Mr. Paul will have a majority of the delegates at the state party’s convention in June, which, in theory, would lead to more delegates at the Republican National Convention this summer, local TV reports.

    In Massachusetts, where Mr. Romney won with 72% of the vote in last months’ primary, the Boston Globe reports that less than half of Mr. Romney’s delegates won spots this weekend.

    Once again, it may not matter much for Mr. Paul. Since Mr. Romney overwhelmingly won the Bay State’s primary this month, even the delegates supporting Mr. Paul will have to back the former Massachusetts governor at the national convention this summer, though they will be able to shape the party platform, the Globe noted.
    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/0...e-delegations/

    There's a bigger picture that I think the guy missed.

  32. #1910
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:17 PM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,783
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,438
    Thanked 4,015 Times in 3,250 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    What a useless rag the Wall Street Journal has become. They missed a lot. Just read the comments.

  33. #1911
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:17 PM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,783
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,438
    Thanked 4,015 Times in 3,250 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    The delegate system is based on trust. That delegate can vote any way they want too at the end of the day. It's why a lot of people don't like the system.

  34. #1912
    DIAMOND STATUS
    Nitro Express's Avatar
    Member No
    7682
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:17 PM
    Location
    Jackson Hole, Wyoming
    Posts
    32,783
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1,438
    Thanked 4,015 Times in 3,250 Posts


    Blog Entries
    15
    Rep Power
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by knuckleboner View Post
    how does taking delegates people thought were pledged to a different candidate make the ron paul campaign MORE appealing to the average voter?...
    That's why I like the idea of having a presidential tournament. Do it like karate or tennis. All the candidates start in the first round and as the rounds continue more and more get eliminated and those with the most votes go onto the next round. Then you have the whole US using a secure electronic system with a paper trail do the voting. It could be done and it probably would work better than this stupid party system we have now.

  35. #1913
    Rice Cooker
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    knuckleboner's Avatar
    Member No
    120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-07-2024 @ 03:10 PM
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    2,927
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 241 Times in 190 Posts


    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    Are these the same average voters you were just saying didn't get a voice and got stuck with Romney before they even had a chance?

    Or the ones that are turning out in droves to try to get the one they are passionate about elected?
    if by droves, you mean thousands in a contest that will take 60 million votes, then yes, droves.

    though, overall, i think my position's been pretty consistent. the average voter, who will decide this election, like they always do, are not that well served by the current primary process.

    i don't begrudge the paul supporters for being enthusiastic. in fact, more power to them for being so. but it doesn't change the fact that i think the process is still problematic. as will be demonstrated by the overall lack of participation.

  36. #1914
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    By droves, I mean enough people to overwhelm the establishment in many states and take control of the nominating process and several state parties in the process. Just the same as any other dedicated group of voters could.

    You feel that the current process keeps many people from participating; That message is lost on us. We have been turning out and will continue to turn out long after everyone has called the match. If other people cared as much, they could do so too, and could change the outcome of these contests just as much as we have.

    They simply choose not to.

  37. Thanked Dr. Love for this KICKASS post:

    ELVIS (05-01-2012)


  38. #1915
    Banned
    REPENT AND SINS NO MO!

    Member No
    14
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Last Online
    11-04-2021 @ 07:27 PM
    Location
    China
    Posts
    44,120
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    2,838
    Thanked 3,233 Times in 2,449 Posts


    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    If other people cared as much, they could do so too, and could change the outcome of these contests just as much as we have.

    They simply choose not to.
    Bingo...

    This is exactly what is wrong with "We The People."

    Most people either just don't care enough or they are too distracted with Idol, Facebook, sports and propaganda bullshit "news."


    Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!

  39. #1916
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Forget The Nomination: Ron Paul’s “Revolution” Is Taking Over The Republican Party

    What little commentary we’ve seen from the media on Ron Paul’s silent coup presently underway in the Republican Party has focused mostly on its implications for the 2012 Republican Primary and whether Paul can hold back Romney’s delegate count just long enough to ensure a brokered convention, which is the only feasible scenario in which Paul could emerge as the party’s nominee.

    But perhaps more important and far-reaching in its implications for the future of national politics in the US, is not Ron Paul’s delegate count, but the fact that his supporters are successfully taking over the Republican Party district by district, county by county, state by state. That the fiercely independent Republican congressman from Texas might still have a tiny chance at winning his party’s nomination, while interesting, is less important than what he will most certainly have succeeded at doing: Ron Paul has built a political machine.

    Judging by recent events in state and local GOP conventions across the country, it may not be at all presumptuous for Ron Paul’s supporters to call their burgeoning movement a revolution.

    In Iowa, it is no exaggeration to say that Ron Paul’s people have taken over the GOP. After a stunning coup on April 21st, the new Iowa GOP state central committee now has six members who have publicly expressed support for Ron Paul’s candidacy– and that includes the new state chair of the Iowa Republican Party, A. J. Spiker, the former vice chairman for Ron Paul’s Iowa campaign! Think about that. This is major news. It signals a sea change in the Republican Party. We are now living in a world where the head of the Republican Party of Iowa is a Ron Paul supporter.

    And it’s not just Iowa, though Iowa is especially significant because of its prominent role in the national primary process. Ron Paul’s supporters are taking over the Republican Party everywhere. This weekend during the April 28th district conventions, Ron Paul supporters also took over the GOP in Louisiana, with not a bare majority, but a whopping 74% of the delegates to Louisiana’s state convention in June. You can bet they’ll show up and you can bet they’ll elect their own to positions of leadership in the state GOP.

    It’s the same story in Alaska, where the Ron Paul movement took over the Republican Party’s state convention on Saturday, and elected two Ron Paul supporters to the positions of state chair and co-chair, Russ Millete and Debbie Holland-Brown, respectively. Even in Mitt Romney’s own home state of Massachusetts, Ron Paul’s movement swept the state’s district conventions Saturday, and stacked the slate of delegates bound to vote for Romney on the first ballot in Tampa with activists who will vote for Ron Paul on the second ballot if there’s a brokered convention.

    Looking back further to mid-April, Paul’s supporters also dominated conventions in Minnesota and made a strong showing in Colorado. Looking ahead, Paul’s supporters are poised to continue repeating their successful takeover strategy at the Nevada State GOP’s convention this weekend, and careful observers should look out for more possible surprises in the upcoming Texas and California processes, especially with the likelihood of Newt Gingrich’s withdrawal from the race, leaving Ron Paul as the only alternative to an electorate that is hardly enamored with Mitt Romney.

    Again, the bigger story here is not Ron Paul’s chances at winning his party’s nomination, but his supporters’ marked success at winning control over the party apparatus itself.

    Another important angle here is that what we’re seeing happen in states all over the country completely disproves the pervasive narrative that Ron Paul’s supporters are computer-bound, “armchair activists” that can win online polls but just never show up to vote in person. In fact, we can infer from their apparent tenacity that Ron Paul supporters are actually more energetic than typical Republicans, more likely to show up and vote, and more likely to get more deeply involved in the political process by becoming delegates and attending party conventions at every geographic level.

    It now looks more like Paul has suffered in state-wide primaries and straw poll votes not because his supporters lack the energy and follow-through to vote, but because they are merely still outnumbered by voters more inclined to choose one of Paul’s opponents. But while Paul’s camp is outnumbered by people more likely to vote for a Romney or a Santorum on election day, the number of such voters with the energy to get as deeply involved as possible in the party process now appears lower than the number of Ron Paul supporters willing to do the same in states everywhere.

    Whether media commentators consider this change a good or bad thing for the Republican Party and for the future of American politics, they have an obligation to report it to their audiences and acknowledge just how significant this change is. We are witnessing no less than a political revolution in the country and a major shift in the GOP’s internal composition. For two election cycles now, Paul’s supporters were an outside minority that had to make their case to the party establishment. It looks like in 2014 and 2016, Republican candidates will have to make their case to Ron Paul supporters in many places.

    Start looking for more of Ron Paul’s platform of limited government, individual liberty, and constitutional rule-of-law in the rhetoric and on the agendas of candidates, policy-makers, and party leaders at every level of American government in the years to come.

    The Grand Old Party is becoming a Grand New Party.
    http://ivn.us/2012/05/01/forget-the-...ublican-party/

    Nice party... we'll take it.
    Last edited by Dr. Love; 05-01-2012 at 10:12 PM.

  40. #1917
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    haha Peter Schiff... you're awesome


  41. #1918
    Rice Cooker
    Crazy Ass Mofo
    knuckleboner's Avatar
    Member No
    120
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-07-2024 @ 03:10 PM
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    2,927
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 241 Times in 190 Posts


    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Love View Post
    By droves, I mean enough people to overwhelm the establishment in many states and take control of the nominating process and several state parties in the process. Just the same as any other dedicated group of voters could.

    You feel that the current process keeps many people from participating; That message is lost on us. We have been turning out and will continue to turn out long after everyone has called the match. If other people cared as much, they could do so too, and could change the outcome of these contests just as much as we have.

    They simply choose not to.
    dude, regardless, the fact is it doesn't matter what ron paul's followers do, the majority of Americans - for WHATEVER reason - will not feel that connected with the party nominating process. that's my problem. the nominating process is NOT designed to give the average voter the best choice. and if that message is lost on ron paul followers, then they will never be part of the solution. because taking over a local republican party through a relatively small number of people (relative to the total registered voters there) will NOT encourage the average person to get involved. so the problem remains.

    look, i'm not knocking ron paul followers' enthusiasm. that's a good thing. but until there's fundamental change in the process, itself, i don't believe any amount of individual enthusiasm will improve the overall situation. after all, ask yourself, what are the ron paul followers going to do when he loses the nomination (which he will) and when he isn't a major participant in the convention (which he most likely won't be)? will they say, "it was a hard fought contest, but i respect the process and will be anywhere near as involved in the general election?" my guess is no. which would mean the process is still flawed.

  42. #1919
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    I think they'll shift their focus to the Campaign for Liberty and other liberty-minded candidates. Trust me, we're not going anywhere.

  43. #1920
    Dr. Lulz
    ROTH ARMY SUPREME
    Dr. Love's Avatar
    Member No
    124
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    03-02-2020 @ 09:51 PM
    Location
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,825
    Status
    Offline
    Thanks
    488
    Thanked 1,443 Times in 997 Posts


    Rep Power
    43
    Ron Paul outpolls Obama by 8 points in Montana, Romney barely ahead.

    Romney leads Obama narrowly in Montana

    President Obama is in worse shape in Montana than he was four years ago against John McCain. As part of his near landslide nationally, he lost this usually Republican state by only two points. Now, he trails Mitt Romney by five. But that is half the deficit Obama faced just five months ago, and by most standards makes Montana a marginal swing state.

    Romney leads Obama 48-43, down from a 50-40 advantage when PPP last polled the state in November. Worse for Romney is that his soon-to-be-vanquished intraparty foe Ron Paul actually leads Obama by eight points (49-41). Obama is able to keep it relatively close here because he basically ties Romney with the plurality independents, while Paul leads by 22 points.

    At this point, Romney is far more popular than Paul with Republicans, and has two-thirds of the vote in the caucus, while Paul only maintains the quarter of the vote he got in the three-way 2008 caucus. But with independents, Romney has a lot of work to do, and this is true and more problematic for him in swing states where Obama is doing just as well as he did in 2008 because of Romney’s toxicity with independents and Democrats. That is on top of lingering doubts with some partisan Republicans who were not behind him in the primary battle.

    Paul’s libertarian brother Gary Johnson could also present a problem for Romney, particularly in the western states. Johnson’s presence on a third-party ballot line would bring Romney’s lead down to two points over Obama, with Johnson pulling 8%. That is because he lowers Romney’s share of the GOP vote from 92% to 83% while hardly touching Obama’s grasp of his party.

    The president probably missed his best shot to win Montana in 2008, but luckily for him, he doesn't even remotely need its three electoral votes to win re-election.
    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/m...n-montana.html

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 6 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 6 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 5 Most Kickass CVH Songs
    By OfficerJimmy in forum VH/DLR Songs And Albums
    Replies: 122
    Last Post: 10-15-2012, 06:36 AM
  2. Kickass Photography
    By Hardrock69 in forum Max's Non VH/DLR Related Stuff
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-06-2010, 09:58 PM
  3. Paul Rodgers + Paul Stanley = WEIRD!!
    By rustoffa in forum House of Music
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-14-2007, 09:56 PM
  4. vh day kickass
    By sammysucks65 in forum House of Music
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-21-2005, 08:44 PM
  5. Kickass Websites!
    By ALMOSTsaved in forum Max's Non VH/DLR Related Stuff
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-19-2004, 11:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •