268 votes

Guess What? SC Primary Results in Question!

I received an e-mail from our meet-up which I'm editing but for to include this statement:

I have some significant information that I need to share with all of you regarding vote fraud in the SCGOP Primary. I have met with SCGOP Chairman already and am meeting again next Wednesday in Columbia. You will want to hear what I have discovered.

I've have uploaded the SCGOP Primary Vote Analysis to Google Docs: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B_wWkfsJPShUMWQxMTc2NzgtM2M...

and would like commentary any of you analytical gurus might like to add here or additional insights. This is very important to us in South Carolina! Thanks!

****Analyst Adds Update****

Hey guys. I just want you all to know that I have graphed in detail all of the counties in NH, SC and Fla that have the precinct information available on the Election Commissions' website. I have amassed a couple of hundred graphs probably. The most difficult part of this is getting this information into a form that is brief but easy to understand. Please appreciate this.

There are surely exceptions to the following observations, but here are some generalities:

1. In any county where Ron Paul has more votes than Mitt Romney using the low vote total precincts, you get a ridiculous- looking curve like the one in Anderson County. (Anderson, Greenville, Spartanburg, and Oconee Counties). Mitt ends up at a vote total that could have been Paul's projected total and Paul crashes to the ground.

2. In the counties where Romney has more votes than Paul in the low vote total precincts, There is no ridiculous anomaly like the one in Anderson County.

3. In any race where Newt is ahead of Romney and Romney is anywhere close to Gingrich in vote total, Newt gets flipped by Romney (Richland, Charleston, and Beaufort Counties in SC) much like the maneuver in Anderson County where Mitt flips Paul. It appears to me that Newt actually won these counties as well as Polk and Duval Counties in Florida.

4. As I have laid out in my brief, fluctuations should occur in honest elections; however, these "flips" look to me like one candidate is suddenly losing his slope (established vote percentage) and another (Romney) is gaining at precisely the same percentage. My personal constitution screams to me "this phenomenon is not a normal occurrence!"

5. In almost all Counties, Mitt Romney gains hundreds- even more than a thousand- in the very largest precinct(s). Many instances this tail end gain appears to serve the purpose of draining Ron Paul just enough to be last place. (example: Charleston County SC). I'm not saying there isn't an honest explanation, but I want to hear one... that makes sense. Maybe in every single county Romney supporters turned out in "droves" at the very largest precinct(s)?

6. Most graphs follow a disturbing trend: Mitt Romney's vote percentage "line" looks more like a parabola curving upward and the other 3 candidates' lines like a parabola curving in the negative. This might could be explained in some honest way, but it looks like algorithms in voting machines to me. I invite intelligent discussion.

7. Yes- demographics can play a part, of course. I am NOT a Demographics expert. I do like math though.

8. I will release a procedure that will show all of you math analysts how to do this on your own. You will see the same anomalies as I see.

****Analyst Adds Greenville County Results****

The 2012 SC GOP Primary- Greenville

Comment viewing options

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

Just a FYI

This is a long video (1.5 hours) but if you skip to the end of it (like the last 20 minutes or so) it goes into detail of how the cards get programmed and also a stark demonstration of exactly how it works.

Hacking Democracy

I was thinking of the same exact clip from "Hacking Democracy" after seeing the google document. It's been a few years since I saw the documentary, but the final scene demonstrated a memory card rigged with an algorithm to add votes to a preferred candidate without changing the total count. I hope more evidence surfaces to verify if such a thing occurred in SC.

Axis where the lines cross

I read this pretty closely and it's very convincing. While it would need comparative data from other elections, it is still strong. If you create an axis where the Paul and Romney lines cross and flip one of them I bet it comes very close to being an inverted match. If I created the algorithm I would have it skim votes from someone else at certain intervals as not to have this ring true. If anyone has the resources, print the Paul and Romney seperate graphs, use a clear sheet of plastic and trace one line, flip it, see what you get. It looks close enough for me.

It's not Romney

Also, I don't think it's Romney we have to beat anymore...The system is the enemy. The evidence and circumstances keep piling up. They'll be sorry if Paul gets into office.

At best circumstantial

I wouldnt consider believing an argument along this line of analysis until you had years of data from 'control' elections. Then you could say something about the probability of the occurrence of this type of trend. Even then I would of course want a 95% CI deviation. In other words years of work to do.


I say its absolutely irrefutable proof. Try calculating standard deviations for romney's and RP's curve.

Can anyone do this quickly? I'll bet they're ridiculous.

Now I'm Mad!

This is rediculous! The GOP has lost me forever. Unless the candidate up there has the last name Paul. I'll never vote for these snakes ever again!

Wow! Thank you!

I've stared at my share of interesting data plotted this or that way, being a scientist in cutting-edge area of research, and, usually, if there is a trend which you believe should be there, the first data sets show it only if, as my buddy says, one has "mother's eye" for the data...

This is more obvious and convincing than anything I've ever seen, and great "experiment" design/analysis, by the way!

Also, makes the cheaters look REALLY stupid (as you said, any smart programmer would have found a way to add some noise to make it less obvious)!

As an only suggestion for an improvement, your 277 threshold to produce final graph sounded a bit arbitrary to me. Maybe I missed the point (reading on a smartphone), it is obviously not where curves intersect (fraud is well underway by then), and I can see how at the 51xx votes along X they start to deviate from projections, but critics will say that you picked that number arbitrarily! To silence them, I would rather use a round 250 number (and say that it is a hypothesis, but look how well supported by data!), or put your threshold where "actual" curve deviates from linfit by more that 3sigma, or some such.

In Liberty,

Paul B.

Did someone send this to

Did someone send this to Drudge or Rachel Maddow?


you don't think they read DP?

New Hampshire and Ecuador.

Ben Swann has it!

I bet he'll investigate it!

Greenville Co., Wade Hampton Precinct

Several Ron Paul supporters, myself included stood out in the rain from morning until dusk holding RP2012 signs and handing out Super Brochures to anyone who would take them. Because of state rules, we were not allowed to be closer than 200 feet from the polling place doors, that alone kept us from engaging voters as they came and went. Our effort was little more than a soggy sign wave most of the day. Our post was just a couple blocks from Bob Jones University, so to say that we were in less than favorable territory is not a stretch. However, we did get quite a few thumbs up and a couple people who came to thank us for being there. Even one young lady made up her mind to vote for Dr. Paul just because we were that dedicated. Of course we thanked her, but really, whats a little rain compared to what we've all endured over the years.
We were not alone, there were other groups doing the same thing, here and there about Greenville Co. SC, but in the end we were not enough it seems.
Here are the totals for Wade Hampton:
Newt------222 39.7%
Santorum--132 23.6%
Paul------122 21.8%
Mitt------ 79 14.1%
Cain----- 4 .007%
Total ----559 votes cast

Greenville Co
Paul 12,142 votes 15.7%

Link for results below:


Would like to see Iowa

that was so strange after about 40% in Ron had a narrow lead then mitt and santer just took off and Ron dropped.

Will Romney DROP OUT

The following are Romney's change in votes from 2008 to 2012 as a percentage.

Iowa -0.64% *
New Hampshire +7.25%
South Carolina +12.7% *
Florida +15%
Nevada -1.1%
Minnesota -24.36%
Colorado -25%
Maine -12.66% *

* Denotes proven election fraud in Romney's favor, not adjusted for in these numbers.

More Details at: http://www.dailypaul.com/207797/ron-paul-vs-mitt-romney-head...

Good start..

This is a great start! But as someone who works in investment banking, I see statistical analyses everyday that are misconstrued inorder to push a false thesis. I hope this data is true but I have a couple of questions/comments that if answered would strengthen the case:

1. First and foremost you need more geographical diversity, this is easily done through more research so you're already on your way- good job! You need more SC counties!

2. The assumption here is low turnout precincts vs high turnout precincts- not urban vs rural. Therefore you need to differentiate data along that premise.. what does this data look like when compared between low turnout precincts in urban areas and high turnout precincts in urban areas. Likewise for rural. I'm not a stat master but this might be able to be done with a multiple regression test that accounts for population density.

3. How does this data compare to primary results from other states? Does voting behavior deviate from SC pattern? This might be able to be checked by correlating specific exit polling data to voting results and then checking consistency amongst other primaries (for example, correlate most important issue or voter demographic results from exit polls to published results.. unless each election is being rigged in a similar fashion -paul to romney- then there should be discrepancies here)

4. How do these results correlate to last year's results?

5. How can you prove this is not just a result of campaign organization, with disproportionate turnout by Paul folks at low turnout precincts? This does not necessarily mean Gingrich and Santorum would fall too, just that Romney has an enthusiasm gap in places his paid for staffers are not.

6. What is the exact number of voters per precinct in which data begins to skew? (This would be needed for algo) pull your new regression equations (at least two total maybe more) then test it against other counties. Unless they used a different algo in every county the larger precincts would have a greater correlation then that same counties smaller precincts because the formula can not account for demographical preference (just blindly pushes votes one way after a certain voter threshold)

This is no where near a complete list, and I honestly do not think this correlation will hold up as you expand your geographic sample size (it would be better disguised than this because the risk of being caught vs. the rewards are too great! The people who have this type of power would rather use it to reelect status quo Obama in the general election..imho). However that doesn't mean I don't have hope! I'll take this by my buddies office tomorrow morning (who has some sort of PhD in stats) and ask him for his take.. should have good commentary!

SC Results Link

Here's the best numbers I've found..... someone else can do the math.


ecorob's picture


That's just too darned coincidental, isn't it?

Looks like blatant voter manipulation by the powers that be. Now, just who collects, counts and verifies these votes?

I think they should be put up right now, front and center and held responsible for these treasonous, yes, treasonous acts!

Ron Paul

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

All But Newt

Santorum, Romney and Paul all pulled out


Joaquin Balaguer

Do you want to learn more how elections can be cheated? Read about Dr. Joaquin Balaguer. Hi mastered that art.

Bigger smoking gun...

The biggest smoking gun of manipulation of the votes between Romney and Paul is the symmetry between their lines. When Dr. Paul's votes jumped down, Romney's jumped up at the same time. Draw a straight line half way between their real vote totals and you'll see it. This shows the linkage between the two and not between Gingrich or Santorum. It would be interesting to see the actual numbers in a spreadsheet and run the symmetry test between all candidates and see if it exists anywhere else.

I'm impressed BUT

I'd be more impressed if a NAME had been submitted with this report. Even a Web handle would be better than nothing.

New Hampshire and Ecuador.


I think he's getting it all together to release. He has more than just SC. See update above.

Freedom is not: doing everything you want to.
Freedom is: not having to do what you don't want to do.
~ Joyce Meyer

Straight line to the victory

Apart from the apparent flip ~275 votes, MattWilliams06 below is precisely correct natural phenomena of any nature do not wrap so closely around the line of best fit, ever! Looking at your numbers I would call the entire set of results predetermined with an inflection point around ~275 votes.

I think I'll load up the data from Maine to illustrate. That may take a while.



Unflipping Believable

The graph labeled Unflipping is the most believable.

I keep telling all my friends

I keep telling all my friends that the smart people support Ron Paul...see it's TRUE!

Woe be to ye who under estimate us...

If my need to be RIGHT is greater than my desire for TRUTH, then I will not recognize it when it arrives ~ Libertybelle

Electronic Election Fraud

Does anyone have access to any independent exit polls? That would really help.

I do not think it is

Romney campaign, NWO, Illuminati, Rothschildes or Zionists who did that. We can assume that local GOP apparatchiks could do that in order to keep and promote their career and for big bribes. But in today's police state (America), I doubt FBI and CIA do not keep a close watch on the machines as they keep a close watch on all media and non-profit outlets. It is possible that people on the top think RP is a danger to National Security - threat to Military Industrial Complex (our military superiority), threat to the FED (our financial superiority), threat to American way of life (job security for millions of trade union Americans and special interests, unwillingness of majority to work hard as "Chinese" or "Mexicans" in free competition to acquire wealth through savings.)
The order may have been issued.

wow this is pretty

wow this is pretty compelling!