Solid Numbers in NH and IA?

The excerpt I have pasted here is from www.votefraud.org on how probable criminal activity stole the winning caucus results from Pat Buchanan in 1996.

This article can be viewed in its entirety at http://www.votefraud.org/house_without_doors_and_update2008.htm

"But where had that GOP county chairman, as well as all the rest of the local Iowa Republican caucus leaders, been directed to call in his results? To the GOP State Committee? To the Iowa Secretary of State? No, to VNS in New York City. This means that the GOP state party had willingly abdicated its responsibility by turning over the vote tabulation to a media-controlled service-VNS. Indeed, in a letter to an outraged constituent dated June 6, 1996, Senator Charles Grassley admits: "Since 1988, the Iowa Caucuses have operated under the system whereby the precinct gives its results to the county, which, in turn passes the information on to the 'official' reporting outlet, the Voter News Service (VNS). The State Republican Party has no role in this reporting process and no independent verification of the votes. VNS is the first entity to get the results and then it reports them." (The Senator is wrong on one point. In the vast majority of cases where precincts in a county are not meeting at one or two centralized locations, each precinct caucus leader calls directly to VNS in New York City.)

So how did VNS handle its stewardship in Dubuque County during the 1996 GOP Iowa Caucuses? Badly, and perhaps criminally. By the next morning, only ten hours later, VNS had sent false (or falsified) results back to the Associated Press to be published all over Iowa. Buchanan had "lost" 13 percent of his vote in Dubuque County as it passed through the VNS and AP offices on its way back to the *Des Moines Register.* The AP reported that Buchanan had garnered only 757 votes-down from the 870 he had actually received. If VNS shorted Buchanan even four percent on average across Iowa, then Patrick J. Buchanan, not Senator Robert Dole, won the Iowa Caucuses."

Also, NO poll is going to come near telling us how many people are going to be voting for or against someone when they are polling only a fraction of the citizenry at best and we do not ever know where and who. As I have said before, polls do not elect anyone. They are created by people with an agenda to INFLUENCE people toward the views of the pollster or whomever is paying for the said poll,

Of course, this is just one poll. But it's the latest as far as I know, and I think it makes a promising case for Paul finishing 2nd.

Mike Huckabee 39%
Mitt Romney 17%
Fred Thompson 10%
Rudy Giuliani 9%
Ron Paul 8%
John McCain 6%
Tom Tancredo 2%
Unsure 8%
Other 1%

Paul's 8% doesn't include any democrats or independents that might have switched over. That number may not be very high in Iowa though. But I bet the number that is important is the number of people who've never voted... including college kids. That easily puts Paul over 10% in my opinion. All in all, he may be much higher.

If you listened to "Trump" talk about how turnout may be low compared to past Caucuses because of Kansas playing in the Orange bowl and the cold weather... that makes a strong case for a poorer showing from other candidates.

And if you haven't seen this video, it does a good job explaining how Paul can win primaries even if legitimately polling at just 10%.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtmA2u2pVCA

http://www.jimmyliberty.com loves Ron Paul

Even if RP is currently polling at, say 5%, from a rough count of people on dailypaul, 80% of the people have never voted in a republican primary before, hence they are not counted in the polls. Therefore, we should actually have ~4x the support that we're polling at... by my crude estimate. And Ron Paul supporters will DEFINITELY vote and will definitely NOT change their minds.

More accurately:

For Iowa-- by my estimate (ronpaulgraphs.com number of donors per million captured x population in million x factor of uncaptured donors), about 1200 people from iowa have donated to the RP campaign in Q4 so far. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess assume that everyone who donated will definitely vote for RP. To get 25k votes in iowa that means that roughly for every person who donated to the campaign, there need to be about 20 who didn't and who end up voting for RP.... realistic? I have no idea.

For NH, 100k votes would give him 25% (assuming a 50% eligible voter turnout), enough to win most likely. ~1200 have donated from NH (my rpgraphs estimate), so 83 votes per 1 donor needed.

Nevada, on the other hand is looking very good. Turnout in Nevada will probably be very low, less than 5% of eligibles (that's 30,000 votes).
So far, ~1900 people have donated to RP from Nevada. If we assume a 5% turnout, that's over 6% of everyone who will VOTE! So even if 1 in 4 RP supporters have donated, that means that RP should get 24% of the vote.

The one problem of my estimates is that I'm not 100% sure if the number of donors on the RP site are unique donors.

John McCain: 115,545 votes - 49.0%
George W. Bush: 71,121 votes - 30.2%
Steve Forbes: 29,615 votes - 12.6%
Alan Keyes: 15,170 votes - 6.4%
GOP Write-Ins: 2.068 votes - 0.9%
Gary Bauer: 1,671 votes - 0.7%
Orrin Hatch: 147 votes - 0.1%
Others: 453 votes - 0.2%

Top 3??? How about top 1? Lets think positive and keep pounding the streets. We are starting to make progress in Iowa, Now lets just win this thing!!!!

http://elections.gmu.edu/Voter_Turnout_2004_Primaries.htm

86,000 Votes in 2000 in Republican IA Caucus....

17,000 votes will probably yield 3rd in Iowa....

245,000 votes in NH R Primary...only 145 in D NH Primary....

We need 75K vote to win I think....