Writing-in Ron Paul to Win in Iowa, NH, Maine: The Numbers Are ThereSubmitted by Sue4theBillofrights on Sun, 09/16/2012 - 01:18
As the new launch WriteInRon2012.com reports:
In Iowa, 2008, Paul had 11,800-plus votes—or about 10% of the vote—while in 2012 he had over 26,000 votes, a 121% increase. In contrast, interest in Romney in this state collapsed over the same period, with a -0% increase, from 30,021 to 30,015 votes. In New Hampshire Paul’s rise was even more dramatic, going from only about 8% in 2008 to nearly 23% in 2012, a 210% rise, while Romney’s rise was a mere 29%. Maine was so corrupted by rigging that the numbers aren’t completed, but the rise for Paul was meteoric.
Jared Glenn in LewRockwell.com observes "How the GOP Establishment Stole the Nomination From Ron Paul":
Days before the caucuses, Paul held a commanding lead in the polls and all the momentum, with every other candidate having peaked from favorable media coverage and then collapsed under the ensuing scrutiny....For the first time ever, the Iowa GOP changed the final vote count to a secret location . After the caucus, results from 8 precincts (including those with colleges, in a state where Paul won 48% of the youth vote) went missing. Interestingly, these were all precincts Romney lost in 2008. In addition, GOP officials discovered inaccuracies in 131 precincts. Though polling in a comfortable first place, Paul finished third in this non-binding straw poll, behind Romney and Santorum.
And down east in Maine, Glenn tells us:
Ben Swann reported on shenanigans... Even though only 84% of votes had been counted; State GOP Chairman, Charlie Webster, declared Romney the winner over Paul by less than 200 votes. Hancock and Washington Counties hadn't voted yet because Webster cancelled the caucuses due to an impending snowstorm, promising they could vote later and their votes would be counted. The snowstorm never occurred and he later reneged on his promise, telling voters in those counties their votes would not be counted after all. Washington County was Paul's strongest in the state in 2008.
All this is in addition to the ample mathematical evidence of vote-flipping against Paul in Iowa and NH detailed in the study "Evidence of Algorithmic Vote Flipping in GOP Primary Elections" linked at the Von Mises Institute website.
The votes in these states will be officially counted. Then it will be up to the states' electors who vote their conscience. They can hand it to Paul in protest of the shenanigans, what history would be made! WriteinRon2012.com makes an ingenious proposal: use the absentee ballot to prove your vote, which is paper and can be photocopied. The beauty of Iowa, NH, and Maine is that, population-wise, they are small. With some kind of ground organization it is entirely conceivable that, given proof against the dirty tricks which are likely to be deployed, and given Paul's true numbers, strong, perhaps even winning, write-in votes can be cast.
Such showings would throw a spotlight on these states' election machinery for the next 3 years, perhaps forcing enough reform for Ron or Rand at last get a fair shake in 2016.