So if Dr. Paul wins--I expect Dan to start spinning--lol--in his seat, in front of his computer--lol

Mitt won 37%
Paul 36%
Santorum 18%
Gingrich 6%

Wow really close.

Darn no Dan spinning..;o)

Mitt now shows 39%

He had a really good day.

Appears some coalescing is going on around Mitt from conservatives.

So then Paul will gain almost as many delegates as Romney?

"That we take America back and that we keep America as it's always been..."

~Mitt

No, danni, Paul will have more delegates. Caucuses typically aren't pledged delegates. Those delegate counts you see are 110% meaningless.

Adamm is correct. Paul supporters tend to be very active and know the system so they do a good job of getting delegate positions. If a state has pledged delegates that doesn't help but in states with unpledged delegates Paul supporters could get the majority of the spots and basically give the whole state to Paul despite only taking 36% of the caucus.

As Maine goes, so goes the nation.

Heh heh.

Really, really pathetic that an entire state has 5000 actually turn out to vote. Democracy at its finest. Is Jersey Shore on or something?

Adammm, do you know what caucuses are? Not many people turn out. And Maine has only about a million people, so how many voters is that? Mainers don't watch Jersey Shore. Dirty Jobs maybe. : )

Oh well. Let America reap what it sows.
#11 | Posted by adammm

Oh Please, you Paulits need to synchronize your beanie Propellers.

200 vote margin, and 20% of the caucuses have yet to report or even vote due to "inclement weather" postponements.

SPIN SPIN SPIN. Media has no right calling it yet in this instance.

Yeah let's just go with Romney, PA. We can have some more trillion dollar bailouts and corrupt zombie companies screwing us over. Couple more wars too.

Been working really, really well for us the past ten years.

I would love for Paul to win Maine and use it as a springboard to cruise all the way to the White House but lets face it Americans give lip service to liberty nowadays and are content to be led by the nose by Big Government Democrats and Republicans

"Caucuses in Washington County scheduled Saturday were postponed until Feb. 18 because of a major snowstorm that blanketed the region. Earlier, the state party's Executive Director Michael Quatrano said county officials were told the results would not count toward the total."

Translation: Paul could win, but we won't let him.

Translation: Paul could win, but we won't let him.

#16 | Posted by adammm

Libertarianism could not work as a full-bodied system of governance. Too inflexible. If Jefferson had been a Libertarian, there would have been no Louisiana Purchase.

Actually, Paul blew it. This was his best chance yet and he didn't put in the effort. Is this a presidential campaign or an old geezer's farewell tour?

Now, the Libertarian response to my above post might well be something like: Well, if you really love freedom, you should be content with a third or more fewer United States.

And no national parks in the remainder.

#18 | Posted by nullifidian

I advise you not to poke Ron Pall people with a stick but now that you have, I'm off to the kitchen to get a cold one and some pop corn to watch the fun.

Of course, as history has demonstrated, when ever a Libertarian principle leads to some non-preferred outcome, Libertarians identify competing Libertarianisms, all of them bad, except for the one they like.

It's interesting that the only people I've actually seriously seen praise Ebeneezer Scrooge identified themselves as being Libertarians. Their premise is, simply, that Scrooge was justified in being a bastard, on principle.

The chains Libertarians forge in life must be waxing long, indeed.

I'll vote RP before I vote for any other candidate.

When I find people disagreeing with RP, its on issues he can't, as President, change.

It's the things RP talks about that people agree with that, as President, he can.

The reach of the military needs to be brought in and the engagement in conflict must come to an end. I haven't seen one in recent or distant years that was actually a National Security interest.

George Washington farewell speech was very clear about engaging in other countries' wars and we have been fighting theirs for too long.

The taxation and banking industries do not want RP. Warmongers don't either.

The only thing I'm not sure of is what RP will do if Congress would actually declare war because they want another war.

So Jefferson ignores the Constitution with the LA Purchase. That justifies ignoring it on drugs, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, deficit spending, torture, rendition, etc. etc. today?

And stick to the story anyway. There's 80% of the vote in, and the Maine GOP is basically saying "screw the other 20%, they can still vote but we're not going to count it."

That should vex anyone.

Seriously, when you're all standing in line for food stamps and your free phone and begging for your entitlements from foreign banks and politicians who don't give a fuck about you, think back to this election.

I would love for Paul to win Maine and use it as a springboard to cruise all the way to the White House

And I would love for the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders to come to my house and do me, while showering me in hundred dollar bills. I'll be rich and exhausted long before ronpaul1776 ever wins the Presidency.

16--Um. No. My mom lives in Washington County, and it's fuckin' nasty right now, weather-wise. Not sure why they had to move the caucus back a week, but to assert that they did so to fuck Paul over is displaying pure ignorance of what weather does in places like Washington County, Maine.

Paul has no chance to be Prez but he will be able too make his speech at the Repub national convention and that will be about it.
putting effort in his campaign now is a work of futility.
Rmoney will win the repubs and Obama will win the Prez again

Prag, not that they moved it back, but that they said they won't count the votes. I understand the weather factor. I don't understand why they have to finalize the results now and dismiss late ballots.

"I understand the weather factor. I don't understand why they have to finalize the results now and dismiss late ballots."

Okay. Sorry. I misread. The state decision-makers are fucked on this one. They should understand the realities of the state in which they live. NOT cool. But then, these idiots (Republican party idiots : ) ) elected Paul LePage.

Maine is liberal (hence Olympia Snowe) so of course they would go for the most liberal of the candidates.

Flag:

Prag, not that they moved it back, but that they said they won't count the votes. I understand the weather factor. I don't understand why they have to finalize the results now and dismiss late ballots.

#29 | Posted by adammm at 2012-02-11 08:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

Which is sad because they apparently said nothing to one county when they made the decision. Oddly enough that county polled heavily for the one who shall not be named :(.

So Jefferson ignores the Constitution with the LA Purchase. That justifies ignoring it on drugs, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, deficit spending, torture, rendition, etc. etc. today?

#24 | Posted by adammm at 2012

Well, I of course said no such thing. I simply said that if Ron Paul had been president during Jefferson's term, this country might have to have lived without a majority of it's states, and our border with Mexico would be the Mississippi.

Libertarians are tiresome when they describe Libertarianism as the panacea it's clearly not.

32--This would go to support part of my response to MSGT. However, it should be known that Washington County (specifically named upthread) is one of the least-populated counties in the state. Piscataquis might have fewer people.

Romney will make an excellent international banking cartel puppet. The Zionist that run the cartel will be able to use Romney to sway the public on the right in the same way that they have used Obama to sway the public on the left. This cartel prospers with either side in power because they own both sides. What ever the election outcome they will continue to attack foreign nations as they enslave "the people" of this country under a mountain of debt. It is hard for many to see the light of truth when so much is covered in their shroud of darkness.

So Dirk, you'll be writing in Ron Paul? (I pretty much agree with you btw, though I'd put in less cabalistic terms.)

Media has no right calling it yet in this instance. -- #13 | Posted by adammm

To the extent that they know their districts, it's statistically safe. Could be called at 1% if the 1% can be treated as a random sample and the margin is big enough.

What bothers me is the headlines -- "Romney wins..." The fact that we're several months into the season and Romney edged Paul by only 3% seems like the real story to me, given early predictions that Paul would be among the early dropouts.

So Dirk, you'll be writing in Ron Paul?

#37 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST AT 2012-02-12 09:35 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Yep!

39--I can respect personal follow-through. Unfortunately, I'm not sure about the "waste your vote" possibility. I just don't think that there will be enough write-ins. And I tend to think that most people who vote RP are not people who would otherwise have voted for Obama. Maybe I'm wrong. American politics is fucked up. We need to break the duopoly!

I decided a couple of elections ago that I am done being part of the charade. When the "choice" that is presented to the American People ends up with the same outcome (more war, more debt, more government, less freedom) regardless of who we "choose", was there ever really a choice? I don't think so.

I refuse to lend credence to the lie that has become our election cycle by throwing my "support" behind any puppet of the tyrants. We are only beaten when we give consent. Until then let the resistance to tyranny contine to fester like a thorn in their side, with the understanding that full blown infection may at anytime occur.

40--You have my respect for that, sir. I don't think it will change anything because I don't think enough people will do it--and as Kanrei says, without doing it with Congressional voting, it will make no difference--but I have serious respect for the stance. Go, Dirk! (And no, I"m not the cynical leftie who says that because I see it as a way to increase Obama's chances of winning. Though I think it will.)

I don't think it will change anything because I don't think enough people will do it

#42 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST AT 2012-02-12 10:24 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

All rivers begin with a drop of water. I will wait for the flood of humanity to grow as I continue to wet the appetite of liberty.

...I'm not sure about the "waste your vote" possibility... We need to break the duopoly! -- #40 | Posted by pragmatist

We'll never break it if people keep worrying about wasting their votes, though.

A wasted vote is one for people who don't give a shit about you or liberty or the country. That is, every candidate in politics today.

43/44--So... Fuck Occupy and Tea. We need a Vote Your Conscience movement. Seriously, though, there are not enough Americans who think this way to make a difference in national voting. Do you guys REALLY think you could get more than half of the voting populace to abandon party-line or "pragmatic" voting and to all vote for the same guy? That's the only way it would make a difference to the actual outcome (as opposed to a difference to your conscience). No matter who is named to the Republican ticket, the upcoming vote is going to be tight. Can one third-party candidate or write-in draw enough to gain a majority? And then what happens in the electoral college? Or are you pushing for symbolism, immediate realities be damned? (I'm not saying it's wrong if you do; I'm asking because I want to understand the thought process.)

45--Not bad, Adammm. But I submit to you that if you don't engage in politics--voting, letter-writing, rallying, other activism--you have abrogated your (logical) right to complain or criticize. Not that voting by itself is enough either...

Not that voting by itself is enough either...

#47 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST AT 2012-02-12 12:09 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Here you kind of made my point for me.

Voting and election results, although they are important, are not the only measures of success. Information spreads exponentially. Once the people" gradually start to forget about "sides" and start to draw the same conclusions ie. The United States Citizens are Zionist Slaves used to further the Zionist agenda via war. then eventually the tide will turn and the Internationl banking cartel will be exposed. Only after the true enemy is revealed will the American People be free of their masters. Until then it's just slave on slave warfare ie dems vs reps. Rich vs poor. Terrorist vs Americans. All part of a shell game to keep our eyes off the real enemy that we should be facing and engaging.

I love the line in The Gangs Of New York delivered by the aristocrat..."you can always count on one half of the poor to kill the other half"

I understood your point, Dirk. How about my comments on how you and other who believe as you do (which could include me) can motivate the citizenry to break the duopoly?

And btw, some terrorists ARE Americans.

I understood your point, Dirk. How about my comments on how you and other who believe as you do (which could include me) can motivate the citizenry to break the duopoly?
And btw, some terrorists ARE Americans.

#49 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST AT 2012-02-12 03:19 PM | REPLY |

We need to understand just exactly where our true strength resides, defend it to the death and cast aside any representative that would subjugate it behind any other cause. We need to prosecute every politician, judge or citizen that threatens it and have the swiftist forms of justice in order to send a message that in this country, at this moment in time, the rights of the individual reign supreme.

As far as Americans being terriorist, one only needs to look at the state dept to understand the truth in that statement. The idea that we should give this or any other government entity more money and power is insanity.

" the rights of the individual reign supreme."

That would indicate to me that nothing else matters, and I don't agree with that. I'm more of a "greater good for the greatest number" kind of guy, tempered of course by the concept of individual liberty. But all of that is wide open to interpretation, isn't it?

My right to throw a punch ends at your nose, eh, or just before it? And even then, if I swing and deliberately don't hit, I'm intimidating you, and that's awfully problematic. So no, individual rights do not reign supreme. Government, it has been said, is the shit we do together to make our society work. So yeah, we need some of that. And I think that community is often as important as the individual...

"As far as Americans being terriorist, one only needs to look at the state dept to understand the truth in that statement. The idea that we should give this or any other government entity more money and power is insanity."

Well, I was talking about Nichols, McVeigh, Padilla, al-Awlaki... (I abhor the NDAA legislation as well; I think that's at least partly where you were going.)

"greater good for the greatest number" kind of guy, tempered of course by the concept of individual liberty.

#51 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST AT 2012-02-12 06:56 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

In my opinion we cannot have two masters. It divides focus of the individual and a nation therefore creating division rather then unity which is of course where we find ourselves today.

If we focus on the individual the individuHenry then decide what they feel is in the interest of " the greater good" and contribute volunteerly as opposed to one group using government force to implement their idea of "the greater good". In my opinion using force for "the greater good" is a bit of a contradiction as I do not believe in the use of force over a free people. There is also the double edge sword aspect where you might think steeling my money is good to provide abortions for "the greater good" and it passed leglislation and i might believe that placing your children in harms way (drafted)to go kill brown people on the other side of the world because they have a different religion then I might have. All legal, all "for the greater good", all forced upon a people, and all wrong in my opinion.

The main point being; if you need to use the force of government to implement your idea of what "the greater good" should be, there is nothing "good" about it.

Rick Santorum is a perfect example of someone that wishes to use government force to implement his idea of what "the greater good" should be. I don't know about you but people like this make me want to purchase more ammo? It makes no difference what letter is behind their name. We should all be sceptical of such control freaks.

The reason being is they are ruled by fear and a lack of faith in their fellow man which is a large indicator of the lack of faith they have of themselves.