Question: how specifically did the NV vote fraud likely occur?

If it was the NV GOP senior officials just changing some of the precinct totals at headquarters, then there would be a check and balance of the precinct captains seeing that the figures that they reported to headquarters were changed.
So what I'm thinking is that some of the precint captains must have been in cahoots with the NV senior GOP officials.

Comment viewing options

Just a theory

Example: If one of the captains was corrupt,Susie,let's say, she could keep the total from the volunteers by assigning them to only count their part of the alphabet of voters. For example: John is tasked with registering A-G voters. At the end of the night, he reports the A-G subtotal to the captain Susie. Unless he is looking over her shoulder, he doesn't know what she wrote in the final tally. And even if she pretended to read off the totals, she could rattle off some fake numbers for the four candidates, shaving off RP's and giving them to Newt.

RP R3VOLution

If there were 1000 precincts,

If there were 1000 precincts, all it would take is 1 skewed vote per precinct to make the difference between 2nd and 3rd. Without precinct totals per each, there is no way to know. A simple miscount of 1 each - OOPS!

RON PAUL 2012 * Restore America * Bring The Troops Home
http://www.texasuncensored.blogspot.com

That's an interesting point

I wonder how many precincts were in Clark County, ie. the largest county?

If we had a Ron Paul person at every caucus

to get the vote count and report the outcome to a central
location,we would not have this problem.I have not seen any reports coming out of Nevada except for the late night caucus.

or a camera live streaming

at each location, with witnesses

RP R3VOLution

My Error!
I spread this thinking I was leading various private efforts to an official site. Sorry for my ignorance! Apparently Nevada HQ is not asking for vote tallies.

How it happened is that the

How it happened is that the GOP realized that Paul had kicked-ass in Clark County (perhaps even elsewhere) when they got the reports in by phone or whatever from each precinct. So, they said "We can't let this happen". They stopped reporting votes, shutdown all media activity, and said they were going to do a recount because of x,y,z. in order to do the recount all votes were transported to a location and in the process votes were destroyed.

Why didn't they just report the numbers from the initial count done by all the precincts? The precincts count the votes and phone/send them in. Cause they didn't like those vote counts... Remember, the dude said "I don't trust the precinct captains..." Translated: "I don't like what the results are so we are going to do reshuffle the deck."

So, Ron and all his lawyers stand around watching votes being counted but so what... Those don't include the missing ballots so you can count those all day if you want (and they did) - the numbers aren't going to be anything but the altered reality of the House. Standing there recording them and monitoring them is pointless because you failed to catch them in the action of destroying votes and didn't position someone at every precinct to relay the local tallies.

The only way to do this is to have someone in every precinct who checks the number of ballots against the number of signed-in voters, who makes sure the final count does not exceed that, and to monitor and record the counting, and immediately relay the totals. There is no other way - if you don't do that you might as well be pissing in your face.

i like that post

Great point about the recount imo..the recount will miss votes that were destroyed deliberately ..

And btw who's the dude who said he didn't trust the precinct captains? Who are you referring to?

The dude is woody stroupe

woody worked for bob beers.
In April 2008, Beers abruptly recessed the Nevada Republican Convention when the Ron Paul faction appeared on the verge of sweeping the election for delegates to the national convention. Although the reason given was that the convention ran out of time, the convention was never reconvened and ultimately the party leadership named the delegates. Ron Paul supporters say that they were cheated and that Bob Beers facilitated the cheating process.

I thought we had Ron Paul people

at every caucus to keep track of the votes.What happened?

Good question.

Caucuses are notoriously difficult to rig on the wholesale level for the very reason you mention.

A lot of people are throwing the the "F" word around ("Fraud") without even trying to present a theory about how it was accomplished.
I am especially bothered by the allegations concerning Iowa where the only irregularities I have seen were regarding a relative handful of votes. This may have effected the order of finish for Santorum but would not have effected Ron Paul.

Nevada seems to be a different animal however. Here you had results that were quite at odds with recent polls, turnout at events, historic appeal, and a national trend of RP doing consistently much better than 2008 in raw votes.

I don't think they could keep a lid on a conspiracy involving enough precinct chairs to alter thousands of votes. It would fall through.

On the other hand, if we didn't have a significant number of RP supporters acting as precinct chairs, they could alter the vote totals at the state level and it would be very hard for us to prove it.

All of this goes to show how important it is for us to become leaders, not just voters, in the GOP.

Did they do that in Nevada?

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

good point

I had not seen a theory either of how it was suspected done.

I have not seen where the party has published ...

precinct totals.

I have only seen county totals.

If that is the case, and they never do publish precinct totals, which I don't think they will if there was fraud, then it happened at county head quarters or in route to the county headquarters.

I don't think they could rely on precinct captains to keep a secret.

They stuff the ballots in route. That way the count monitors from the campaign don't see anything.

If they thought enough ahead, they would have also combined 5-10 precincts together into one box in route. That pretty much assures that precinct counts can't be reconciled with the counts they get at HQ.

Ballots likely weren't

Ballots likely weren't stuffed, they were likely destroyed or flipped. The turn-out was too low for there to be any room for ballots being added.

maybe you are just not understanding.

Let's say the big precincts had a few hundred ballots each.

They took ten of those boxes and combined them and then counted the votes.

There are a ton of precincts with zero ballots and then there are a few with a whole bunch of ballots.

Put ten together and you get a few thousand ballots and then you stuff a fistfull of ballots into the box that say either Newt or Mitt and then they arrive at HQ and then the recount begins.

No way to reconcile with the precinct totals. You don't even know which precincts they combined together so you couldn't even reconcile total vote counts.

That is the only way it could be done. Period. Especially if the campaigns had their minders there watching the vote count.

But the vote totals are

But the vote totals are already so low... Your saying that they decided to just throw-in a few hundred ballots? Maybe. IF the Paul-Gingrich thing was really that close that they said "hey lets stuff some ballots to give Gingrich the lead..."

I don't think that is what happened. I think the turnout was at least a few thousand more than what the numbers are showing - in Paul's advantage and they destroyed ballots.

In your scenario the total turnout is lower than what is reported, in mine it is higher. I think its unlikely that the turnout was as low as they say and that Paul saw no growth from 08 to 12.

They could have yanked some Paul ballots as well ...

in route to HQ.

All I am saying is that the fix happened in route to HQ, if it happened at all.

There is no way the precinct captains were in on it.

I think I concur with that

I tend to think it's unlikely that the precinct captains we're in on something. Creates perhaps too much risk than the senior state gop officials would want.

Interesting post

Maybe the precinct totals are not published and thus no check and balance from the precint captains.

I think these are the reported totals for each precinct

If you want to check on a specific precinct:
2. Type the precinct number in the "All of these words" box (usually 4 digits I think)
3. Type NVVOTECOUNT in the "From these accounts" box
4. Hit "Search"

Note: You may get multiple results if there's more than one precinct using the same 4 digits (usually there's another code at the beginning, like a letter, to differentiate)

can we get some nevadans to comment on this?

Ie. Those with more familiararity navigating this stuff

I think those are the totals that were reported at the ...

precinct level.

But I have not seen official totals broken down and published by precint.

Maybe I am wrong.

You will have to be able to reconcile the official vote totals with the local precinct totals.

Also, since Clark county was the one with all the issues and that is about 60% of the vote, any fraud could be specific only to Clark and still get the results that they want.

The other counties may be 100% accurate.