Republicans in panic mode over vote at CPAC Convention?

[kentuck]

Ron Paul received more votes than Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin combined? What does that mean?

It means they are in Tea Party mode and are not too keen on voting for establishment Republicans. It means many Republicans have deserted their Party. They have reason to be concerned.

It means that many Republicans are no longer buying the lies of the mainstream Republican Party, about deficits, debt, the Fed, and all those issues that Ron Paul speaks about. Ron Paul is not mainstream Republican.

No doubt, many of the leaders of their Party are scratching their heads, wondering what it all means?
It means their message is not receptive to a large proportion of their Party. They should not be too comfortable with their victories in VA and MA. It may not mean what they think it means?

[KingFlorez]

1. There's a divide

At this point, I think they have to worry about some of their base splitting off and supporting third party types if the tea party candidates don't get picked in primaries.

[customerserviceguy]

2. Big deal

If Ron Paul had used the phrase "tea party" he would have been credited with founding the movement. But his supporters were ready when someone else came along with the right wording.

No surprise to me, I've met a few Ron Paul fans, they are out there in the stratosphere, with one or two issues governing everything they think, do, or say.

This little straw poll means nothing as it relates to this coming November.

[BeFree]

7. Polls mean nothing this November

The votes will not be counted as cast.
The vote counting machinery will decide who and who does not get the most votes.

The recent Mass count turned out like this:
Brown got 60,000 more votes than McCain.
Coakley got 800,000 less than Obama.

It was a machined vote.

[smoogatz]

8. Okay--so Obama was chosen by voting machine hackers?

Or does that only happen when people we don't like win elections?

[Sebastian Doyle]

12. No, Candidate Obama brought out a huge turnout to override the fraud

...and then pissed all of those people off by appointing a cabinet full of corporatists and Clinton retreads, thus guaranteeing that turnout will NOT be there for 2010 and 2012.

Which means the machines will steal the elections and the whore media will tell you it's all good.

[anonymous171]

14. Yeah, keep spinning.

Just remember that they don't need to rig the vote to get their candidates into office. That's the beauty of the private media.

[Sebastian Doyle]

15. Well, thanks to the Opie Roberts KKKourt

..all the whore media has to do now is run their unlimited commercials.

[seattle_blue]

17. That's pretty strange

For some reason I was thinking the exact same thing today. It was one of those thoughts that just kind of pop up in a person's head from time to time.

[harkadog]

28. And only you know that

The MA vote was due to a lack of enthusiasm by Obama voters. It had nothing to do with machines. Voting in MA is controlled by Democratic party officials. Did they rig their machines against their own candidate?

[BeFree]

36. You don't know?

The machines are programmed by a private company.
The Dems don't know how to program computers do they?

You do know that there was no auditing of the machines, right?
So, you trust the machines and believe the M$M?

Do you even know what ES&S is? Who owns ES&S?

[harkadog]

62. You are saying there are no Dems who know how to program computers??

If there was a concern why don't the Democratic party election officials raise it? Because they don't know any of this? Just you? Why don't you go to MA and help them out? :rofl:

[BeFree]

63. So

You think the Dem party programs the machines? Who does program the machines?
Do you know?

If you knew the history of how we got the machines foisted on us you wouldn't have to ask why the party doesn't seem concerned. Basically it is because to officially call the question would be the same as calling a question on their own elections and indeed the whole system. Can't have that.

Imagine if all elections from the last few years were officially questioned?
It would be the end of the system as we know it.

It must be hidden from us because it would take away their power. We are damned if we do and damned if we don't and our fine politicians have taken the easy way out and the way that lets them stay powerful.

[MadMaddie]

64. Sorry to say that machines used have coded programs that

can flip the votes.

Yes, code is written by humans thus it can be written to be intentionally flawed.

The big question should be why does our political system allow voting machines to be developed by a private company? Anything that has to do with voting should be a non-partisan company or a government organization that pushes the machines out accross the country.

[harkadog]

65. How come our party officials who control these election boards don't check this out?

How come only people on internet boards know about this?

[MadMaddie]

66. They know

Several states have outlawed the use of the machines.
One of the the machines in question are diebold machines.

Diebold Machines
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5553

California 2009 investigation into the machines
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/03/ca-report-finds/

Lack of security in Diebold Machines
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/hotel-minibar-keys-open-diebold-voting-machines

Florida Diebold Machine Fiasco
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0310/S00211.htm

[customerserviceguy]

31. Voting "fraud"

Our answer to the right-wing's birthers.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Arkana]

40. So you're saying that it's not possible at ALL

that a liberal could lose a close election.

Nope. The MUSHEENS stole it.

There was no fraud in Massachusetts. Coakley was a shitty candidate and I'd say she deserved to lose, the way she conducted herself.

[BeFree]

44. No

It can happen. But the numbers were so screwed up that the election in Mass can be questioned. There was no audit. It was the machine's word and that was it.

You say there was no fraud in Mass, but you have no way to prove that. So your statement is false and you should just stop being false.

The truth is the machines can easily be hacked to produce numbers that are not what the vote count actually is. And if you don't know that then you haven't been paying attention. Pay attention. Learn and don't be fooled again.

[Arkana]

45. If you lived in Massachusetts you wouldn't be surprised that Coakley lost.

She ran possibly the shittiest campaign since Thomas Dewey.

And no, I can't--but I don't think you can produce evidence of such massive fraud that Coakley was cheated out of a win, either. We can't blame "THA MUSHEENS" for every election we lose.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Arkana]

48. How is it up on that high horse?

Seriously, those numbers aren't shocking at all.

There was NO enthusiasm for Coakley and a LOT for Brown. If the best he could do is 60K more than McCain, that doesn't bode well for Republicans statewide--because all it means is that Democrats need a better candidate next time and he's toast.

Maybe there were some isolated incidents of voter trouble. I don't know. But to go "IT WAS STOLEN FROM US" when that's pretty clearly not the case is just absurd tinfoilhattery on your part. Democrats run the state--both houses of the legislature, the governorship, and the election board people are all Dem-appointed. Please explain why they would steal the election from their own candidate.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Arkana]

51. "Go away"?

:rofl:

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BeFree]

53. Lets review

You call the scanners "Musheens", you label me "tinfoilhattery" and you claim I am on a "High horse". Good name calling. If you expected me to get irritated, you are right. I have studied the "Musheens" for years and years and even you say that you can't prove me wrong, yet you call me names expecting to win a debate? You must be proud.

[BeFree]

60. A DU thread on the Mass count

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=203&topic_id=514920&mesg_id=514920

[sendero]

38. The tea party bunch ..

... are a flock of libertarians so it is no surprise they would vote for Paul.

The repugs are busy trying to co-opt the tea baggers and I'm betting they will eventually succeed.

[customerserviceguy]

67. I agree on both points

I usually see them described as racist here, and most all libertarians I've met are not explicitly racist, their political philosophy seems to be more live-and-let-live, and that attitude doesn't have a lot of room for overt racism in it.

Yes, the Rethugs will grab the tea partiers, but they will have to do so by disowning Dubya, since his administration engineered the bailouts that gave rise to the movement.

[RevCheesehead]

3. Yeah, but expect the media to ignore it.

Other than liberal radio and MSNBC, it will never have happened... or, it somehow will be the Dems' fault.

[gratuitous]

4. Watching ABC News tonight

They passed it off with nary a shrug, contending simply that CPAC hadn't really "chosen" anyone. Apparently Ron Paul doesn't count, even when he outpolls the next two candidates combined on an open slate. Of course, for some reason, this meant bad news for Democrats, who are unorganized and in disarray, according to ABC.

[BlueIdaho]

5. If the republican'ts think they can control the tea baggers

like they did the christian coalition - they are dead wrong. Tea baggers are a violent, hate filled, racist lunatic fringe.

[Historic NY]

6. WOO HOO here comes the 1850...pre Republican Party..

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[deacon]

10. It's a leaderless party. n/t

[LLStarks]

11. Teabaggers are not libertarian. nt

[anonymous171]

13. Right, they just support libertarian policies. nt

[DRoseDARs]

19. Not sure if you're being sarcastic, but conflating teabaggers with Libertarianism is nonsense.

Libertarianism dates from the late 1700's and over the past 220+ years has developed several often-at-odds facets, and free-market Libertarianism is an American beast from the 1960s-70s. These teabaggers are, as Rachael Maddow spent MANY segments showing on her program since spring of last year, a corporate-created false flag "grassroots" movement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism is a simple place to start, but assuming your local library hasn't been closed (as several here in Reno, Nevada may be to save money) then that would be a better place to look.

[anonymous171]

20. Oh you were talking about traditional libertarianism

In America, it's usually called "anarchism," not libertarianism.

[DRoseDARs]

21. As I already said Libertarianism has facets. Labelling the entire philosophy anarchism is dishonest.

I'm not a Libertarian, but good grief.

[Bullet1987]

23. I wish people would stop confusing (whether intentionally or by accident) libertarians

With the racist, corporate-created "Tea Party" that gets touted by Beck on Fox News. They are not the same.

[DRoseDARs]

24. If you can't correctly identify the opposition, you can't correctly combat its philosophy.

eom

[sendero]

39. No it isn't.

.... they couldn't be more libertarian if they printed MORON on the backs of their heads.

[DRoseDARs]

69. Yes, it is. Willful ignorance on your part or another's won't change that.

[kentuck]

70. I like the sigline photo.

:-)

[DRoseDARs]

71. Actually not part of my sigline; posted to mock those conflating teabaggers and Libertarians.

Glad you like it, though. :thumbsup:

[kentuck]

72. Thanks for the correction.

:-) I didn't know what to call it. But I liked it!

[RZM]

16. This means nothing

Ron Paul will not win the 2012 Republican nomination -- he won't even be remotely close.

[K8-EEE]

18. It means something

They have nobody plausible for the top spot. IMO no one on that list can win.

[RZM]

27. My prediction is

They will nominate the Mitt-ster and he'll lose handily to Obama, though perhaps not by a landslide.

[K8-EEE]

32. I think they are already pushing Mitt but it won't go over with the TeaMonsters

They have themselves painted into a corner which is great.

[upi402]

22. Libertarians are whackier that actual conservatives

Not the fundies and haters, but Goldwater Republicans. Like when Pat Buchanon and Gerry Brown were BOTH against NAFTA. They were so opposite that they looped around and met on that. Ron Paul has some great ideas, then he turns into drunken Grampy behind the wheel.

[Bullet1987]

25. I kinda disagree. Libertarians get ignored by their party just like Liberals do

They're no fans of corporations either. I don't agree with them wanting to cut every program in the book, but they have some good ideas. Most importantly, a populist can be BOTH a liberal and a libertarian.

[DailyGrind51]

26. Even the neanderthals in the "teabag" movement know that Republicans don't walk their talk!

[Kyril Enko]

29. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

:evilgrin:

[harkadog]

30. The CPAC straw poll does not mean anything

Romney won the vote for the last three years and it didn't do him any good for the R nomination in 2008.

[alfredo]

46. If Romney and his ilk are all they have to offer, then they

are in bad shape.

Remember, it is the ultra conservative/Libertarian wing that goes to that convention. It has no standing in the real world.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

33. Something is going to explode.

How and when it does will be interesting to see. If the teabaggers explode, they could take down significant parts of the Republican party. They could also completely derail the entire country. A gigantic vacuum is developing in which Americans do not trust government or care.

[kentuck]

34. I see a possible Third Party ...

with the Teabaggers as its base. This would shoot down the dreams of the Republican Party bigtime.

[annabanana]

35. "It means that many Republicans are no longer buying the lies of the mainstream Republican Party"

We can call those people "Independents".

It's what they're calling themselves now.

[KonaKane]

41. Good! How is a split conservative vote a bad thing?

I have been saying this from the get go. The Teabaggers should be encouraged at every turn in the run up to elections.

"Never interrupt your enemy when they are in the process of making a mistake." - Napoleon

[proud patriot]

42. Very Interesting

to me it means there is some truth in the rummors of the death of the Republican Party.

[Cleita]

43. Ron Paul doesn't spin the Republican Party line. Maybe that's his appeal although

sometimes he's pretty far out there for me. It's a good sign though that maybe the lemmings are starting to think for themselves.

[Taverner]

49. Ron Paul is batshit crazy enough to suggest eliminating the Fed and Income Tax

Teabaggers, by nature, are batshit crazy

[jrodefeld]

55. Defend this statement

You state that it is crazy to suggest eliminating the Federal Reserve and the Income Tax.

First, the Federal Reserve:

This is an institution which was created in an unconstitutional manner in secret in 1913 by a group of powerful insiders like Rockafeller, JP Morgan, Warberg, and many powerful bankers who colluded to create a system which would protect their profits and socialize their losses. It was NEVER meant to serve to population at large, but rather the bankers and corporate leaders. It continually devalues the peoples money, operates in total secrecy, and has brought us the Great Depression, the high inflation of the 1970s, continuous booms and busts, and our current economic crisis. Furthermore, it is our monetary system which is the primary reason for the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. It is a ponzi scheme which benefits well connected insiders and people of privilege at the expense of the middle class. So many progressives posture as if they care about Corporatism and the rich taking control of our country, while failing to realize that it is the Federal Reserve system which has allowed this to take place.

If you want to characterize Ron Paul as batshit crazy, be intellectually honest and add the following people to that list of the "batshit crazy":

Thomas Jefferson:

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.
Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The
issuing power (of money) should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to
whom it properly belongs."

James Madison:

"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and it's issuance."

Andrew Jackson:

"If Congress has the right to issue paper money , it was given to them to be used by... and not to be delegated to individuals or corporations"

And a few additional quotes from people primarily involved in the creation of this system and who benefit from it:

The Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863:

"The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from it's profits or so dependant on it's favors, that there will be no opposition from that class."

Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild:

"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws"



So, if you want to bash Ron Paul for favoring eliminating this private banking cartel then you must also bash the Founders, our constitution, and many of the greatest minds throughout history that have written about banking and the control of currency to favor a privileged class. History is against you and fiat money. It is on the side of honest money, commodity backed money.

As for the Income Tax:

Are you suggesting that Income tax, which suggests that the government owns you and ALL of your income and permits you to keep a portion of it, is consistent with a system of government which respects individual liberty? Not to mention that the IRS operates in a manner more akin to the Mafia with its bullying and intimidation tactics than an honest agency of government serving the people.

If you want to know a little more about the history of the Income tax, watch Aaron Russo's documentary, Freedom to Fascism. It details the illegality of the Income tax in great detail.

So, if you care to defend your baseless assertions, I would be happy to provide even further material which shows that Ron Paul and myself are on the correct side of history on these issues and you are not.

Seriously, what type of intellectual capacity does it take to come up with such "brilliant" and "well thought out" statements to some of the most important issues of our day as this:

"Ron Paul is batshit crazy enough to suggest eliminating the Fed and Income Tax. Teabaggers, by nature, are batshit crazy"

Try using your brain next time. Maybe you could try doing some research about the history of the Federal Reserve and the Income Tax as see who's on the right side of history and who's not. I await your response.

[Taverner]

68. Ahhhh OK - you must be a Libertarian

Might have thought...

[spanone]

54. implosion will soon follow

[Danascot]

56. I don't know what their problem is

They could have just announced that each candidate got 65% and none of their followers would question it.

[Crabby Appleton]

57. CPAC is not Representative of R primary voters. nt

[SoCalDem]

58. Didn't Huckleberry win past year?

These freaks always have their panties in a wad about something..

[AlinPA]

59. Ron Paul is not mainstream Republican in the sense that he does not act as the fundamentalist,

war-loving, flag waving bible thumper creationist in his campaigning. That straw vote was very strange in that it did not pick Palin or Santorum who represent the republican base.

[krabigirl]

61. Yep, and they are freaked out over that.