Talk Elections

The very definition of MASSIVE Freedom Fighters.

Trying to subvert the will of the voters is not fighting for freedom...

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/mitt-romney-lost-north-dakota-caucuses-will-get-most-of-north-dakotas-delegates-anyway/

You wouldn't feel like that if it was the only way around.

Of course not. Just as I like it when Democrats win elections over Republicans and don't like it when Republicans win elections over Democrats. Point is?

1 and 4.

YES IT IS!

The Paultards would be bitching MASSIVELY if this were happening in reverse. But when they do it it's okay. I only hope that this leads to all the delegates in any primary or caucus election being strictly bound by the vote results.

More appropriately, it's damn fun to be part of a campaign committed to hijacking conventions at the precinct and county level and using it to push delegates forward and try to take over state conventions. Too bad there was a track meet on the day of the MI county conventions.

Yeah bitches!
It's only okay if we do it!

Massive horrible people, they know they have no chance, they are trying to impose their unwanted will on the party.

To them I say, shut up, get out, come back in November to vote for Romney.

That is all you are good for now.

Horrible people and a proof that nomination process needs improving. Not because of Mitt Romney, but because of some democratic principles.

My next Downfall video will be Hitler flipping out when he finds out about them.

If they pull it off, massive FF.

Voted FFs, but I want to say neutral.

Would you be happy if Paulites infiltrated the Electoral College and elected their guy after Obama won the popular vote states with over 270 electors?

It is undemocratic, but even if Paul won the primaries legitimately, the RNC would pull what we are pulling and try to nominate Romney.

I'm pretty neutral on the whole issue. Frankly, I think the caucus system is outdated, as it allows party elites (or in this case, small groups of devoted supporters) to assign delegates regardless of the will of the voters. I think the paul people are taking undue advantage of the system, but so are Romney's supporters.

The very definition of "Enemies of Democracy", of course.

Quite a few differences, the EC being a joke system to begin with, the fact that most states have anti-"faithless elector" laws making this impossible, and that Mitt Romney isn't exactly someone who respects democracy either. Take a look at the delegate allocation in North Dakota and explain why I should feel one iota of sympathy for Romney.


No, that's the man who took a supermajority of delegates in North Dakota after winning around 23% of the vote and coming in third place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM9pXlxkomQ

You mean the same way most of the Paul delegates are supposed to be "bound" for Romney?"He did it first" is a great argument.

The hijackings are undemocratic, but the state parties in question have only themselves to blame for setting up such undemocratic delegate selection systems in the first place.

Marginal freedom fighters (at least in spirit). Of course we all know that nothing too interesting will actually come from their efforts.

FF. Not "Massive" however; that would imply I agreed with their politics.

Given that a pretty decent chunk find Romney just as bad as Obama, I'd doubt that.