I know that Ron Paul is not a pure libertarian. However, do you really think that fascism or socialism is a better alternative. MSM has a real problem with with Ron Paul because he messes up their game plan. Do you realize how concentrated the ownership of MSM is? Think about Gannett and Newscorp. The GOP has their own interest (think about SPP). I thought that civil liberties were important to libertarians. Ron Paul may not be the perfect libertarian candidate, but at least Ayn Raynd would not roll over in her grave for Ron Paul as she would for Alan Greenspan.

Ps. sorry for the misspelling I never could spell without a spellchecker.

No worries on something so silly. This is a blog; I don’t pretend that it’s journalism perfected. ;o)

Peace!

The easy part is the provisional ballots. The date to register as a Republican was nov 29th. but the LOGOP only used a list that included people who had registered as of the 1st. So all the supports who Registered between the 1st and 29th had to cast provisional ballots. It is presumed that most of these were Ron Paul supporters. Furthermore, some of the Delagetes for Ron Paul were also forced to cast Provisional votes. None of the Provisional votes have been released that I know of. This is one of the official reasons for the delay. The second reason is a little more complicated

It goes something like this. When you vote in their caucus it is not for your candidate of choice but for a delagate. These delagates then go on to vote for delagetes later at the state level. Depending on whether the later primary has a consensus their vote will either determine 20 or 42 delagates who will go to the national convention. Most likely no candidate will get enough votes in the later primary to garner the 51% needed for a consensus. Therefore, the caucus delagates will determine 42 delagates not 20.

Now I’ll back up a little. When you go to the caucus to vote you are voting for a delagate as a said. However, you are supposed to know which delagate to vote for becasue the candidates’ name and picture is on a peice of paper or ticket. This ticket included the names of the candidates delagets and a little info on each candidate. The combination of the candidate and his delagetes is called a slate.

In this caucus for the first time and most likely last time delages where actually allowed to be on more than one slate. This came about with the Ronald and Nancy Reagan slate that was titled pro-life pro-familly. The Reagan slate included delagetes for Guiliani, Huckabee and McCain. However, most of the people who voted for the delagetes on the Reagan slate did not know that the same delagates were also on the slate for Guilioni, Huckabee, and McCain. They thought they were voting for delagates who where uncommited or basically none of the above.

So this is the situation we have now. The most votes were cast for the Reagan/uncommited/none of the above. However, sinse McCain had the same exact delagetes (same persons) on two differen slates some of these delagates got enough votes to go to the state and cast thier vote. But who are they supposed to vote for McCain or Reagan? No one knows however, becasue they were on McCains slate they have unofficialy declare McCain the winner because more of his delagates have recieved enough votes to go on to the state and cast a vote for an actual candidate. But, his delagates arn’t really his if more people voted for the Reagon slate than the McCain slate. All delagates are uncommited and can vote for who they please, but most vote for the candidate that put them on the slate. This is the first time that Louisiana has allowed delagates to be placed on two different slates. I suspect it will be the last considering the confusion.

So, in a nutshell this is where we are. Most likely Ron Paul got the most votes that where actually cast for a candidate. Reagan got the most votes cast for a slate. And McCain got the most delagetes of any candidate because his delagates recieved votes from people voting for his and Reagan’s slate.

If anyone cares or is still confused just ask and i’ll try and confuse you (I mean clarify) this a little more.

Peace, Brad Smith

Ron Paul absolutely has a conservative record and is no isolationist. I do not care who else supports Ron Paul; my support of his candidacy is firmly rooted in a bit more than his status as a celebrity’s hero. The uniform support for his political agenda can be found in the basic ideas of freedom and individual autonomy. Anything outside of that is quibbling. And the issues of some (and certainly Ron Paul) regarding the outcome of the Civil War have nothing to do with slavery or ethnicity at all- you know that as well as I and that you choose to come here and spew untruths about a candidate and philosophy you think hasn’t a snowball’s chance in Hell is telling.

Common sense dictates that the electorate be informed as to the various positions candidates have with respect to the various issues. I believe many of the electorate is aware of the various positions Ron Paul has with respect to any number of issues.

It’s my personal belief that some of Ron Paul’s policy positions are so far out there that only Bill Lee would be proud. Many others in this country – and I do believe people are much much more informed this time around – share my beliefs and concerns about Ron Paul’s political positions.

This country has endured years of political turmoil because idiots control our government. We do not need someone who will add to that turmoil.