Five Ft. Three

“A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.” ― Milton Friedman

The primaries, Romney and Paul

on January 23, 2012

Soapie posted at his blog something that I was not aware of, that both Santorum and Gingrich will not be on many primary ballots because they did not do the necessary things to get on the ballot there, so it is impossible for either of them to win the nomination without those 500+ delegate votes. So, my question is, why are they still raising money and going on with their campaigns? Isn’t it unethical to take donations for campaigns that have a zero chance?

Edit: From the AP on January 13th:

Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and Jon Huntsman have all failed to qualify for the ballot in at least one upcoming GOP primary. In other states, they have failed to file full slates of delegates with state or party officials, raising questions about whether these candidates have the resources to wage effective national campaigns.

So, it does appear that Soapie is counting his chickens before they hatch, so to speak, or in this case not counting delegates that may in fact be counted later on for Santorum or Gingrich.

Advertisements

16 responses to “The primaries, Romney and Paul

  1. Jim McKee says:

    Actually, this is a myth being spread around by one camp in particular.

  2. Beth says:

    I had found one source last night that seemed to say the same thing as Soapie, but then edited my posting this morning to include a source from the AP that doesn't appear to make it seem like it was as cut and dried as Soapie makes it sound.

  3. soapster says:

    "Isn't it unethical to take donations for campaigns that have a zero chance?"Gingrich wrote the book on unethical behavior.In order for either Gingrich or Santorum to secure the nomination, they will need to win delegates from the caucus states. Anyone that understands the difference between a primary and a caucus knows that you cannot be successful in a caucus state without organizational structure (of which Gingrich and Santorum have none).If you are well organized at the grassroots level in the numerous precincts, it becomes quite easy to run slates and push through the supporting delegates on to the BPOU, County, Congressional District, and State Conventions. If a campaign has no organizational structure at the precinct level they are not going to be able to acquire delegates at the early levels.I live in a caucus state. I understand full well how this works.

  4. soapster says:

    National delegates do not come out of the caucuses. The national delegates from the caucus states won't be decided until summer.Of course FOX, CNN, MSNBC, et al. aren't likely to tell you that as they post their delegate numbers (which are nothing more than estimates) on their websites and on their broadcasts.That Gingrich and Santorum have already compromised themselves with respect to acquiring delegates by failing to file in primary states speaks to their lack of organizational structure (a structure they absolutely must have to do well in caucus states).Further, just because a candidate wins the presidential preference straw poll in a caucus state doesn't mean they win delegates.What happens, and did happen ALOT in MN in 2008 is that people come to the caucus and vote in the preference straw poll and then leave. That has absolutely NO bearing on delegates. Nomination of and subsequent voting of delegates for the forthcoming conventions within states occurs later in the caucus agenda.This is how grassroots activism works and it is a beautiful and wonderful thing.

  5. soapster said… "Isn't it unethical to take donations for campaigns that have a zero chance?"How about Paul, he also has Zero chance.

  6. soapster says:

    Up against this establishment and their pundits and presstitutes in the media you're probably right. But then it doesn't matter to us.Your candidate isn't likely to win against Obama without Ron Paul's supporters.We aren't confined to an election. That's the beauty of a movement.

  7. soapster says:

    "Up against this establishment and their pundits and presstitutes in the media you're probably right. But then it doesn't matter to us."To say nothing of Wall Street and the Banksters.

  8. soapster said…Your candidate isn't likely to win against Obama without Ron Paul's supporters You mean all three of Ron Paul's supporters?

  9. soapster says:

    "So, it does appear that Soapie is counting his chickens before they hatch, so to speak, or in this case not counting delegates that may in fact be counted later on for Santorum or Gingrich."This comment makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It displays your lack of understanding on how the allocation of delegates occurs. Gingrich and Santorum do not have the numbers for the needed delegates to secure the nomination. They won't magically get them unless by some stroke of genius all the remaining states changed their rules to their favor.They'd have to have landslide wins in the remaining states. And, as I pointed out that isn't going to happen in the caucus states because they simply do not have the organization to train the voters to snatch up the delegate spots. We've been holding mock caucuses since early summer. We have been working county fairs, farmer's markets, sports games, pub crawls, etc. to find RP supporters and get them plugged into the network. This isn't something that just gets put together overnight. This is real grassroots activism. It's not as simple as just leaving the house on election day to go fill in a ballot. You folks that live in Primary states have a totally different approach to your the way you select delegates. And really Mal, if you spent more time actually seeking out supporters for Newt instead of making juvenile comments about the number of supporters RP has, your candidate might actually have enough supporters of his own so that he didn't have to cancel events. http://www.mercurynews.com/presidentelect/ci_19782823Grow up.

  10. Jim McKee says:

    Unless you have a crystal ball, your opinions are strictly that, opinions.I say, let's just let it play out, and see what happens, because really, all the stuff you say is kind of vague and ephemeral, and the only state that Santorum and Gingrich won't be on the ballot for is Virginia (also, DC for Santorum). I think it's rude and arrogant for anyone to say someone should step down. Gingrich & Santorum can easily win without VA/DC.And honestly, if the choice is between Romney and Paul, I'm Mitt all the way, baby!!!

  11. soapster says:

    A vote for Mitt is a vote for the banksters.

  12. Jim McKee says:

    A vote for Paul is a vote for the crazy old man down the street, yelling at kids to stay off of his lawn.

  13. soapster says:

    I'll take the crazy old man who understands monetary policy any day.

  14. shoprat says:

    Even though you don't have the support to win the nomination, delegates equals some say in what happens at the convention and may force Romney to move to the right. Ron Paul is a mixture of profound wisdom and inexplicable stupidity.

  15. Beth says:

    I agree with Shoprat, also for Santorum staying in the race even if nomination is unlikely (not impossible though), he may be positioning himself for VP.

Thanks for joining in on the discussion!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s