Giving delegates to Mccain will ensure a Hillary Clinton Victory...Here's why

Romney Loses Unpledged Support - McCain Needs 477 Popular Delegates to Win Round Two

by Zephram Stark

Tracking Primary votes, you might think John McCain had the race won when he pulled his California upset (with the help of some shenanigans), but the real action goes on behind the scenes with the unpledged RNC Superdelegates, the real deciders. If you watch who the Superdelegates support, you can tell what's going to happen in the Convention. The Superdelegates are the power players. They are the former presidents of the United States and the party leaders. If you are in a convention and a former president asks you to support Hillary (which will happen at the DNC), it's pretty hard for an Average Joe like me or you to say 'no.'

This morning, Mitt Romney lost his Superdelegates. He only had nine, but once your Superdelegate count goes down, it creates a snowballing effect from which you cannot recover. A couple hours ago, Mitt Romney dropped out of the race. None of his Superdelegates switched over to support McCain. None of his Superdelegates switched over to support Huckabee. The reason is obvious to anyone who has done a match-up poll for November: Romney, McCain and Huckabee cannot beat Hillary Clinton. Clinton's pro-war voting record cannot be offset by Romney, McCain or Huckabee's pro-war voting records, so it comes down to popularity contest for them, and Hillary is more popular.



Stark Polling Results

Ron Paul's anti-war voting record is the only platform that can beat Hillary Clinton in November. Americans hate the war. We went into World War II all gung ho, and we geared up the world's biggest war machine, but when we won, the war machine never went away. Now we are tired of it. We overwhelmingly want peace. We want to power down the war machine. Hillary has been trying her best to convince us that she hates the war machine too, but even if we ignore the tens of millions of dollars she receives from the defense industry or pretend that it doesn't matter, it's hard to ignore her voting record or imagine that she didn't know what she was doing when she made those votes. My buddy Doug's reaction to Hillary's vote to grant President Bush the option of invading Iran sums it up best. He jumped to his feet and yelled at her face on the television, "How many more troops have to die to satisfy your blood lust, you bitch?!"

To be fair to Hillary, I have to note that Ron was the ONLY major candidate for president to speak out against officially labeling the Iranian Army a terrorist organization, but Doug's point about Hillary is that she's telling us one thing and doing exactly the opposite. At least the Republicans admit (in so many words) that they are willing to send troops into harm's way for the purpose of keeping the lucrative war machine going. The important thing to remember in all of this is that it will be easy to demonstrate that Hillary is the pro-war candidate while Ron is the anti-war candidate, which brings us to our strategy moving forward.

You've had one day to sit around and feel sorry for yourself, now it's time to get back to work. We did better in Round One than we originally expected. Now it's on to Round Two. Romney dropped out which we hoped would not happen but were expecting. Now we have to keep McCain from getting 477 more delegates if we are to win in Round Two. To do that, we have to employ a different strategy. As I'm sure you can tell, the conspiracy strategy was completely ineffective. We instantly got the five percent of Americans who believe that a military coup is immanent, and we worked hard to prove that theory to the other 95%, but we didn't get anywhere close to the 50% needed to win the popular vote in Round One. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that since Ron Paul's message has nothing to do with improvable conspiracies, that associating things like "9/11 Truth" with his campaign probably had a major negative effect in Round One. So let's be done with that, shall we?

We lost Round One, so using the same strategy for rounds Two (delegate coup), Three (independent ticket), Four (control of the House of Representatives) or Five (dissent to anything unconstitutional, along with mutual defense) would be silly. In order to adopt a more useful strategy, let's take a close look at the difference between successful diplomats and unsuccessful diplomats. It is the same difference you see between successful lawyers and unsuccessful lawyers. The difference is "burden of proof."

You never want to place the burden of proof on yourself unless you have a slam dunk argument. Never assert things that you cannot absolutely prove by the measures and base assumptions of everyone in the party you are addressing. Never assert things that the party will dismiss without believing or questioning you for proof.

We only need to win one of the rounds to get rid of the IRS that is funding this despotism. The first thing Paul supporters absolutely must let go of if they want to have any hope of winning rounds Two or Three is "9/11 Truth." It doesn't matter if it's the truth. We can't prove it. We are placing the burden of proof on ourselves for something that is improvable. If we can't let go of that, we've already lost rounds Two and Three. If you want a great conspiracy, ask yourself why former members of Blackwater USA are joining 9/11 Truth movement groups around the United States. Can I prove that? No. See my point? On the subject of "9/11 Truth," Ron Paul has said, "If they care about this campaign, they will drop it."

Second, don't ever imply that you will take offensive action against anyone. I know you wouldn't really do it, but don't even imply it. If anything, imply that you would never take offensive action against another person. You don't need to. No matter how bad things get, the only thing you need to do is defend yourself, your family and the consensual group of neighbors and friends you band with. When you make the argument that you can change someone else's mind by threatening them, all they have to do is say, "Nope, my mind didn't change," and you lose. You can kill people with a gun, but you can't make them obey your will. You always lose if you think a gun is a magic wand. Plus, you'll scare people, and then they'll want to stop being scared by taking you out. For every person who wants to oppress you in Washington D.C., there are a thousand people who want nothing more than for you to not oppress them. Battle the one, not the thousand.