General

Re: Ron Paul No. 2 in Delegate Count?

John Ess — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 20:49:06 GMT

Gingrich does need to hang it up.

Paul can afford to weather the storm even after some losses, since he is radical and just trying to spread the message of peace and libertarianism.

But Gingrich wants the broad support of being a generic neocon. And if you can't win against Santorum or Romney, who basically fit that bill perfectly, there is no need for a third clone.

More than anything I think Gingrich is losing because he is ugly, pudgy, and he has helmet hair. He's so nineties. While Santorum and Romney actually look like presidents, even if they are terrible people. I can't imagine anyone sees any difference between them, other than Santorum wrapping his brand of fascism in the Bible.

Re: Ron Paul No. 2 in Delegate Count?

John James — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 20:30:50 GMT

Now that may be the case...He was saying "second" at least 3 states ago.

Re: Ron Paul No. 2 in Delegate Count?

John Ess — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 18:28:59 GMT

Looks like he is in third, in pledged delegates, Mr. James. gingrich has more total, but paul has more pledged.

Re: Ron Paul No. 2 in Delegate Count?

John James — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:14:13 GMT

Technically yes. They are simply making a guess. All those delegates haven't been assigned yet. So in terms of actual pledged delegates, Paul is 2nd.

Ron Paul No. 2 in Delegate Count?

limitgov — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:05:23 GMT

Ron Paul keeps saying he's number two in delegate count. Yet on CNN's website, he's not.

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/scorecard/statebystate/r

What gives? Is CNN wrong?