8 votes

Don't dump on Iowa and Nevada! OR Caucuses! *Update*

I know there has been a lot of controversy surrounding the caucus vote counts in Iowa Nevada. I know that Ron Paul supporters are disappointed with Ron Paul's finish in both states.

And I admit that there is potential for vote fraud in any caucus process. I even posted about what happened in my caucus.

http://www.dailypaul.com/200463/vote-fraud-power-and-privile...

But there is a world of difference between the kind of retail vote fraud involving a few votes here and there that is inherent in any caucus process (run by and for amateurs) and the potential for wholesale vote fraud possible in a primary process.

Can a few votes swing an election? Sure. But a caucus is NOT an election.

For all practical purposes, the Iowa Caucus Straw Poll was a virtual 3-way tie for first, and should have been reported as such.

The MSM treated the results of the Iowa caucus like an election with a razor thin margin of victory. But that was the media's fault, not the caucus system.

They wanted to keep the focus on Romney and Santorum at the expense of the other "winner", Ron Paul. And thanks to all of the controversy over the missing precinct and miscounts they succeeded admirably.

But don't throw the baby out with the bath water!

1) The political establishment does not like the caucus system. Rigging a caucus result is messy. There are too many people involved at too many levels with too many trails of evidence to make wholesale vote fraud risk free.

The same reasons that make figuring out the REAL vote count tedious and time consuming, makes a clean coverup almost impossible to pull off.

The insiders would love to be able to flip a switch and make thousands of votes change without leaving any kind of a paper trail.

2) Caucuses favor informed and enthusiastic voters over the casual, last minute decider, "I liked his haircut" kind of voter. In other words, caucuses favor true patriots.

3) More specifically, the insiders would like to take away the early voting status for Iowa and Nevada. Why? Because these two states have shown that they have a strong (and growing) core of activist, liberty-minded voters. The insiders see the handwriting on the wall. By 2016 the Republican Central Committees could be dominated by Ron Paul Republicans and then THEIR control of the process would be O-V-E-R.

*********

Ron Paul supporters, don't join the MSM chorus calling for an end to the early voting status for these caucus states.

The insiders would LOVE to promote early primaries in more populous states like Florida and South Carolina. Are you beginning to see why? Ultimately, if they could get away with it, they would like to reduce the nomination process to a one day national primary. The only candidates who would stand a prayer under such a system would be those selected by the political insiders and promoted by the MSM.

Eliminating the caucuses will only hasten that day.

Don't play into the hands of our worst enemies.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

????????

Your comment:"They wanted to keep the focus on Romney and Santorum at the expense of the other "winner", Ron Paul. And thanks to all of the controversy over the missing precinct and miscounts they succeeded admirably."

Exactly HOW did they "succeed", thanks to all the controversy?

Perhaps it's your definition of "they"?
Please explain this.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

Sorry about that.

Let me try again. The news following the Iowa caucuses SHOULD have been this, "Romney, Santorum and Ron Paul are now the frontrunners."

Instead it was "Romney beats Santorum in a squeaker."

Then when the votes were certified a couple of weeks later it became, "Santorum beats Romney in a shocking reversal."
and
"Iowa GOP chairman resigns in disgrace."

Notice who got left out?
The only winners were Romney and Santorum.
The only losers were Ron Paul and the Iowa caucuses.

This is all due to the MSM spin.

If Ron Paul and Santorum's votes had been reversed the news would have been, "Romney wins the Iowa caucuses."
"Santorum surprises pundits with his last minute surge."

Then two weeks later the news of the recount would have been ".........".

Did that help?

******************************
The Virtual Conspiracy

SteveMT's picture

The cost of rigging elections.

January 31, 2012, 3:22 pm
Iowa G.O.P. Chairman Resigns in Wake of Caucus Controversy
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/31/iowa-g-o-p-cha...

http://www.dailypaul.com/211369/nv-state-gop-chair-resigns-a...

NRP Statement on Resignation of Chairman Amodei
CARSON CITY, NV – Sherry Dilley, Acting Chair for the Nevada Republican Party, issued the statement below following the resignation of Mark Amodei from his post as Chair of the Nevada Republican Party.
http://www.nevadagop.org/nrp-statement-on-resignation-of-cha...

Has there been any evidence that the former Iowa chairman....

Has there been any evidence that the former Iowa chairman actually "rigged" the vote count in Iowa?

BTW, the caucus straw poll is not an "election". (Please see the updated OP.)

It appears to me that his resignation was an effort by the Iowa central committee to use him as a scapegoat for an embarrassing incident.
"Rigging" involves intentional manipulation as opposed to incompetence and I haven't heard credible evidence that he was guilty of either.

******************************
The Virtual Conspiracy

Vote Fraud Caught on Video

...

Vote Fraud Caught on Video

This is a reminder of what we are up againts and how the game is played. You don't like whats happening. Do something about it. This movement is about liberty and we still have it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txoLlfrBENk&feature=mfu_in_or...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVUf9Ef8Ufg&feature=mfu_in_or...

I agree

I found it interesting the Faux "reporter" from Vegas was betting the caucus would be gone by 2016.

"Its easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
Mark Twain

Iowa turned out 5% of the

Iowa turned out 5% of the vote. Nevada turned out 30,000 voters from the entire state. Nobody cares. Apathy will rule the day until China forecloses. Then people will demand action.

The flip side of that coin is....

....that it was a low hanging fruit for us. We DEFINITELY had more supporters than who showed up. So, I would look in the mirror before blaming others.

Hear! Hear!

Hear! Hear!

I do think

there is corruption going on in the caucus states. I posted this yesterday and maybe if we all wrote an email to the auditor to find the missing 8 precincts in Iowa something would be done. In my thread I put the email to the Iowa auditor.
http://www.dailypaul.com/211455/email-iowa-and-ask-where-the...

We have few options for dealing with getting screwed.

Boycotting Iowa products and Nevada tourism is just about the only way we can send a message that there is a price to pay for cheating us. Come up with a better suggestion and I'm open to it.

If I were you I'd definitely boycott Iowa products:

Beef, pork, chicken, turkey, soybeans, soybean oil, ethanol fuel (including super-unleaded), leather products, cosmetics, antifreeze, corn and corn products, anything printed with soy-ink, milk, ice cream, cold cereal, Pella windows, various hydraulic hose and components, washing machines, Eaton transmission (they produce many transmissions for semis...so don't use anything transported by a truck), ballpoint pens, John Deere, Winnebago or Quaker Oats. This list is not inclusive.

I just don't see how boycotting the citizens, factory workers, and farmers of Iowa will hurt the Iowa GOP. It hurts me, my family, and my neighbors. We are Ron Paul supporters.

I don't know what you should do to hurt Iowa's GOP, but I don't think that taking it out on us is the solution.

You could buy this shirt:

You could buy this shirt: http://www.dankwax.com/dank-tees.html lol