37 votes

UPDATED: Suspicion of Election Rigging in the 2012 Presidential Primary (with extra graphs)

UPDATED to include info on rigging against delegates, parameters of the lawsuit, and what a "normal" election should look like:

Throughout the entire 2012 presidential campaign there have arisen incidents of irregularities in the vote count. This has occurred so commonly that suspicion of malicious rigging has been proposed. This would indicate the possibility that there is intentional manipulation/alteration of the vote count for political gain.

Hard evidence for such rigging is often difficult to procure. This is a result of the nature of the voting process in America, which is largely computerized or electronic. Sensibly, since the electronic processes are devoid of receipts—devoid of any clear paper trail—proving intentional vote rigging is cumbersome to say the least.

In fact, in this presidential primary there is sound reason to suspect malicious intent. It all began in Iowa, when the normally transparent voting process was compromised by the local GOP itself by dispensing with the requirement for voting ID. It was the Iowa Republican Party’s which exclusively made this decision, which accordingly sets its own rules for the caucuses. This includes counting its own votes, while announcing the results to the media exclusively.

As if to raise suspicions further the Iowa GOP then announced it would count all votes in an undisclosed secret location, without any independent monitoring.

Sure these acts are suspect, especially when added to the comments of Fox News’ and Iowa GOP insider Dee Dee Benke, who said at the height of the caucuses, quoting Iowa's top GOP organizers, “there will never be a Ron Paul win we will see to that.”

Yet, it wasn't just Ron Paul votes, which were rigged. In fact, rigging was also committed against Rick Santorum and even possibly Michelle Bachmann, along with Rick Perry. In all cases the rigged results favored Romney. Remember, Romney falsely won both Iowa and Maine. However, in general Ron Paul was the greatest victim of this corruption.

Read more (note in particular the glaringly abnormal chart for what appears to be the greatest rig of all, Illinois):


Comment viewing options

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

The charts (S.C.) showing a decimation of Gingrich votes over

to Romney in one case and Paul to Romney are now embedded within the OP-ED.

Karenabcde said wisely that Gingrich delegates must be exposed to this and surely would feel comfortable with the only candidate who is honorable towards them.

Posted this on reddit, let's

Posted this on reddit, let's help get it some publicity, upvote it if you have a reddit account: http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/vxe8l/suspicion_of...


Well reasoned and persuasive article. I particularly like the statistical analysis.

This points out the futility of trying to work within the Republican party. They will cheat with impunity to deprive us (or anyone) of success unless it fits into their neocon corporatist agenda. We should withdraw our sanction and build our own organization working with like minded groups such as the Libertarians to supplant them.


But RP says Mitt has won fair and square.

And he's honest. So I guess we're all wrong. Right?

He didn't say that.

If you are talking about the Wolf Blitzer interview, he said nothing of the kind.

Blitzer asked if Ron Paul is willing to "admit that Romney won fair and square". Ron Paul simply answered that he "has no reason to suspect him of cheating", thus A: not "admitting that Romney won", and B: not saying with any certainty that Romney or those trying to nominate did not cheat.

It's a very clever way of pretending to say what they want to hear (to appease them), but actually not saying anything of the kind.

"The battle for Novemeber has only begun"...

.. is what Ron Paul said on Cavuto. So - something might be fair and square, but is is not Romney's winning.

Ron Paul ... forever.

I never heard of that

But even if he claims voter fraud, what evidence does he have to disprove it? It's hard to produce any... and would only damage oneself politically

And he said in a Tea Party rally that "we might actually be the winner of Iowa!" and it seems, yes we did.

Just a something I want to say, if Dr. Paul is the nominee, he is known as Dr. No right? When Obama says YES WE CAN! I picturing him saying: "Well if what you are doing is illegal detaining and assassinating Citizens, declaring war without congress approval, individual mandate healthcare and robbing the public etc... Then I say, NO YOU CAN'T!!"

*Crowd goes wild*

"Truth is Treason in an Empire that lies" - Ron Paul

Educate the masses, and win in the end.

He may say he has won, but show me where he said it was

"fair and square"?


I am Karenabcde, incarnated as

SchnauzerGuardian, after someone alleging to be Mary1 accused me of being for the other team. Take a look at my Puppy, Winston, who is on my profile, who is a staunch Ron Paul supporter. I am the one who has chaperoned him to all the Ron Paul rallies we've attended.

I hope 2 things:

first---that you can get 2 PHD level statisticians to state the mathematical chances of select charted voting results...it would be super to give to the judge.

second, I hope you can directly communicate with Santorum and Bachman et. al. If you could, it is conceivable they may tell their delegates to vote for Paul....

I think the link you give above is excellent, and I hope you can get to the top of the other campaigns....not going "through" any assistants they may have to screen out calls, and so that each may receive both the write-up the charts/graphs, and the professional witness statements by the statisticians about the unlikely chances of the given results.

Finally....do you have anything on Gingrich being cheated? Must be in there somewhere....if we could even get his delegates.....


Still Karenabcde, too, from our book!!

Yes, we are working precisely on what you have suggested. There is evidence of purging of Gingrich votes, as well.

Will add this data to the OP-ED.

UPDATE: the chart showing flipping of votes from Gingrich has now been added, with commentary.



"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

This is Excellent

I wrote something similar, but it covered many more states, and Yahoo! Contributor vehemently refuses to publish it. It adheres to all of their guidelines and I made every edit they requested. Everything is properly quoted and cited. I know because I have a graduate degree and I've been properly trained in APA style. I have submitted it to Washington Times and Examiner.com and neither have granted me permission to publish it yet. I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but why will Yahoo! Contributor publish some loser's review of a local Chinese restaurant, but then deny a well-written expose about election fraud in our supposedly free country?