I've seen my fellow RP supporters start to sink to the level of our opponents in some of the baseless assertions of voter fraud in Nevada. Being there first hand, I felt compelled to offer my thoughts and urge we focus our efforts in a more positive and constructive manner.
http://robertfellner.blogspot.com/2012/02/we-were-not-cheate...
  |
|
★
The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul or his Presidential Committee. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original poster, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site IMMEDIATELY. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2011 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul. | General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here
Thought you guys might be interested in this
Considering how serious the fear of voter fraud is here, I would imagine you guys would want to donate and support RevPac's efforts in this regard:
Dear Robert,
Enough!
Disappearing ballots, ghost voters, mysterious miscounts, convenient resignations ...
All of it adds up to, at the very least, widespread incompetence on the part of Republican caucus officials. How is it possible that there aren’t better safeguards in place for this critical primary election?
Revolution PAC will change that. After the turmoil in Nevada, we secured an experienced polling firm and committed to having boots on the ground for a number of contests preceding Super Tuesday March 6. We will actively watch, record and verify the vote.
An ambitious plan for an exit polling army is in place. Now, it must be fortified.
Your immediate contribution will directly boost precinct penetration, providing the technological and operational resources required to ensure the integrity of impending contests in multiple states.
https://www.revolutionpac.com/donate/
www.grimsgrumblings.com
BTW, I completely agree with
BTW, I completely agree with the above letter. (If this gets down-voted too, I'm just giving up!)
www.grimsgrumblings.com
There is vote changing on this thread!!
I voted this thread UP and it registered a DOWN vote. I have read the blog that Robert linked to and now have a better understanding of what happened after asking a clarifying question.
The essence of it is that there WAS a low turnout for whatever reason and many of those tagged as RP supporters just didn't turn up. There may have been some voter fraud but from what I have read there on the blog it was not material and the main reason was low turnout.
Not all RP voters are as convinced as we are and that will probably increase as his support increases. I guess it is just so important to make sure anyone we turn on to RP fully understands the condition the US and the world is in.
"Where the Welfare State is on the march the Police State is not far behind."
Melchior Palyi Hungarian Economist
I must have voted it down
I must have voted it down when you voted it up.
there is not "vote changing on this thread"
you just weren't the only person on Earth who voted on this thread since you loaded the page.
"You underestimate the character of man." | "So be off now, and set about it."
Lol quick on the draw there bud..
.
I hate to say...
Another example of the feature causing division and animosity. Sigh. I guess it does serve a purpose in saving resources? lol.
"They used to come get you and lock you up because you were insane, Now they come get you and lock you up because you are sane"
Look at my post about turnout doubt
http://www.dailypaul.com/211617/more-rp-supporters-not-showi...
The votes are straight. I'm an admin.
It will appear that way if numerous people vote differently at the same time, it also refreshes and shows votes before yours when you vote.
No election fraud.
It was the "Magic Ballot" theory in action.
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." ~ Margaret Mead
GOP Cheating in Neveda
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/10793-some-cal...
Dr. Paul statement on vote fraud:
http://www.dailypaul.com/211564/ron-paul-fraud-victim-in-2012
Ron Paul's Convention Speech
Stick to.
gambling there Rob.
http://theintelhub.com/2012/02/05/nevada-clark-county-vote-f...
This guy deleted my post on his blog
doubting his story. Enough said. Ron Pauls' internal pollsters had him with highter numbers. If he is with the campaign, I want to know why the campaign didn't let us know they didn't believe it was election fraud night of the vote.
Holy delusional! Google
Holy delusional! Google marked it as spam and I had to go retrieve it....My blog is filled with comments "doubting my story" so to pretend that because "I deleted it" when it merely never was posted because of Google filtering, is about as logical as "we lost Nevada because of voter fraud" despite the Ron Paul Nevada Campaign being the ones who oversaw the vote count, oversaw the precincts, oversaw the voting locations, and are reporting "nope, our supporters just didn't show up."
But hey what would I know, I was just there! You guys are probably right. We were a huge favorite to win a closed Republican caucus despite being at 9-15% in the polls and its because of voter fraud we lost. Sorry for posting my crazy theories!
www.grimsgrumblings.com
from the Labor and Employment Laws of Nevada
WE READ:
"4. Time Off For Voting, Nev. Rev. Stat. 293.463, et seq.
All employees eligible to vote in an election are entitled to take paid time off from work
sufficient to vote if it is impracticable to vote before or after normal work hours. If the distance
between an employee=s employment and the polling place is 2 miles or less, the employee is entitled
to one hour. If the distance is more than two miles, but not more than 10 miles, the employee is
entitled to two hours. If the distance is more than 10 miles, then the employee is entitled to three
hours.
Employees who take time off to vote cannot be discharged, disciplined, or penalized, nor
receive any deduction in wages for doing so. Violations of this provision are a misdemeanor,
punishable by not more than six months in jail, and a fine of not more than $1,000.
You also may not prohibit employees from participating in political activities, or from
becoming a candidate for any state public office. Violators of this provision face fines of up to
$5,000."
____
I've been seeing allot of excuses made for not voting "because I had to work". Almost every state has a law similar to the one above. Know your states laws. Should voting, conflict with your work schedule, notify your employer before the conflict, you will be taking the time to vote. If he balks, show him the law and go from there. That's how adults do things. You're adults now, it's time to stop expecting people to hold your hand. It's time some of you learn how to plan ahead. This is good life advice.
If you didn't vote because you were afraid to get fired, you cost 1 vote. You're now informed.
Try it in a Restaruant or Club
You get your hours cut. Welcome to the real world.
Overcome or be a victim.
If you're not savvy enough you can be walked on. That law, is a real law, that allows for real recourse, in the real world that I occupy. I've been around for quite some time, and have worked in retail, trades, and have run my own business. Should you not wish to utilize the law to confront a boss who is denying your right to vote, that's your choice. But do NOT attempt to justify your fear by flippantly suggesting, some of us who are savvy, do not reside in the real world. Overcome, or be a victim.
Most are not aware of the millions of laws
And nobody can even read them all. I think that's the problem. There shouldn't have to be a law to allow someone to vote.
It should be a given.
Ron Paul's Convention Speech
What?
The laws that govern selling hotdogs on the street corner, or legal tender laws are irrelevant to the right to vote correct? Ok, now let's presume the issue at hand is "Labor and Employment Laws in Nevada". Google that and instantly filter out "millions of laws" that are irrelevant to our issue at hand. If my boss is denying my civil rights, I'm going to be aware of the laws that protect those rights. He will pay one way or another.
The protections for our right to vote are in the 15th ammendment to the U.S. Constitution, The Nevada State Constitution, and numerous Labor laws, one of which I listed in my first post.
The problem you suppose, is not the problem. The problem is we do not know our rights and we do not fight for them every day. If we're not going to familiarize ourselves with what rights we have, how to protect them, and how to use the system we pay for that is purportedly there to protect them, why are we here?
Excuses, and whining do not protect your rights. Wrestling them every day from those who would deny you those rights are what protect them. Overcome or be a victim.
You're right.
People need to stand up more and demand their rights. If that were the case, there wouldn't need to be so many laws to try to protect them or skirt them.
Ron Paul's Convention Speech
Musings from My Recollection
I recall that "shenanegans" were called 4 years ago in Nevada.
I recall the NV GOP admitting to the fraud.
I recall seeing a thread where someone from the NV GOP was on tape admitting to it and saying "Sorry".
If the 2012 Nevada Caucus was "on the up and up" - wouldn't there be some significant change shown as compared to 2008?
Or are we supposed to believe that Ron Paul had ZERO significant growth in Nevada?
And that the amount of fraud committed was the difference seen over the last 4 years?
Are we supposed to believe that?
Really?
Are we supposed to believe ...
That you can see all of this, but Ron Paul can't? Or that he knows all of this, and had four years to prepare, and didn't? Are we supposed to believe that the Nevada chairman of the campaign is complicit? And (if the report is true) that the Paul supporter who is NVGOP chair and who certified the results is complicit?
If your conclusions about fraud are accurate, then other things follow from that. At some point you have to explain the way Ron Paul responds to all of this. And if it comes down to trusting you, or Ron Paul, I'm gonna stick with Ron Paul. He's not naive, he's not corruptible, and he knows a lot about winning elections and how the system works.
What's he supposed to say?
If he claims fraud, he'll get painted as a whiner, a complainer, a sore loser, etc.
Without any proof, then yes
But the allegation is of massive fraud across at least two elections and multiple states. Are the enemies of liberty so skilled in their skullduggery that there's not one piece of solid evidence usable in court? Loyalty so unshakable that ther has not been one whistleblower? Moreover they were able to pull it off this year after Team Paul had four years to prepare.
Fraud on that scale is not the simplest explnation.
Additionally
How do you fight election fraud when you don't have access to the ballots?
I think all of us suspect something underhanded went on when EIGHT PRECINCTS were "lost" in Iowa (7 of which voted against Mitt in '08). But how can you challenge ballots that are "lost"? Even if you could prove they were stolen, destroyed, or otherwise cheated, how can you prove what the votes should have been?
The lost counties of Iowa
Here's what's so frustrating about these discussions. If you start tracking down the claims, there's a lot of misinformation. For example, the campaign event in SC that everyone knows Newt had to cancel for low attendance -- it's not true. (The truth is that Newt didn't go but the event wasn't canceled, and Ron Paul was one of the speakers. Ron Paul spoke to a nearly-empty stadium. CSPAN has the video. Attendance was low because they charged a high entrance fee.)
So, how about those eight precincts missing in Iowa. What's missing is the "Form E" that was part of the process of making the count official. You can read a detailed account here:
http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2012/01/26/29049/
Note that the vote totals were reported on election night, before the paperwork was delivered to Des Moines, so if there's a conspiracy to commit fraud you'd have to have the local poll workers in on it. And not just them, because if you read the accounts there were witnesses to the counting as well. And those counts were submitted electronically. In some cases the ballots themselves are still available -- what they submitted on paper wasn't the ballots, but a summary.
The votes were counted that night, but not certified because (for various reasons you can read about in that article) a "Form E" wasn't properly provided. Also note that these are tiny precincts. Big enough to matter in whether Santorum edged out Mitt or not, but only because they were so close.
The idea that this was part of anti-Paul election fraud is just kind of silly when you look at the procedures used, look at the fact that the votes in these precincts were counted by hand in front of witnesses and reported immediately electronically, and look at the numbers involved. And even more so when you look at how many people would have had to be complicit in falsifying those numbers that were publicly reported immediately.
Evidence is not
necessarily proof that would hold up in a court of law. However, even if he did have proof, he would have to put up with the accusations of being a whiner and sore loser until it went through the courts and a verdict was rendered. The election would be long over by then. That's what makes vote fraud so effective. Even if you successfully fight it, it's too late.
IOW, it would HURT him during the campaign, even if it would help him after the campaign. So he is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
How do you know what Ron Paul says behind closed doors?
Just because Ron Paul hasn't come out publicly about there being fraud doesn't mean it didn't happen. There is way too much circumstantial evidence for there not to be something there.
Ever heard the saying where there's smoke there's fire?
So your suggestion is
that Ron Paul could prove fraud if he wanted, but he chooses instead to only talk about it behind closed doors rather than filing a lawsuit? Even though silence means complicity in the fraud that is hurting the cause of liberty?
Or is it that massive fraud has been pulled off this year in multiple places, and in 2008 too, and all without even one slip up or just one whistleblower to provide the kind of evidence that could be the basis of a lawsuit?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThoTlRFraBY
http://www.dailypaul.com/211981/ron-paul-interview-with-bob-...
/Mike
Front Fell Off
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcU4t6zRAKg