0 votes

What I Don't Understand is Why the Percentages Never Change???

I wonder what odds an insurance actuary would come up... maybe billions to 1.

Because this doesn't happen just once, it happens every time.

Comment viewing options

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

This is why

argument by analogy.
If you poor a gallon of water in a empty cup you fill it up
If you poor a gallon of water in a full pool you want effect the water level at all.

The more votes counted the the greater the buffering capacity.
Every vote counted increases the buffering capacity, That is why the % fluctuates early in the count.

If the the tally is mitt 20000 and Paul 10000 Mitt 75% Paul 25%
then next precinct comes in and Paul get 120 and Mitt gets 50 because the numbers are so large it effects the overall percent very little.

You conspiracy nuts are....nuts

Let me get this straight.

The states of Iowa, NH, and Michigan are in collusion with each other to keep Ron Paul down.

Do you realize how idiotic that sounds? Does that mean Giuliani should also be complaining? He's doing worse than Paul!

No people. Get wise. It's the heads of the campaign who decides how little money is spent on TV air time. How little money are spent on ads. Who choose the ad agencies to shoot commercials. Who decides how little time Ron spends in these states campaigning.

Fire Kent Snyder and Lew Moore.

Ron Paul 'The Truth' It

Ron Paul 'The Truth'

It doesn't help that they fail to put Ron Paul in those pre-election polls. There has been plenty proof of that.

Ron Paul 2012

A random sample (precincts all over) averages same as whole

It's called STATISTICS.

If you take a random sample of 1000 voters in Michigan you'll get a result that's incredibly close to what the final vote is. That's how pre-election polls work--they call a few hundred people at random and then use the percentages to predict what the whole population will do.

With scattered precincts all over the state reporting at the same time, the first 10% of votes recorded is probably a pretty good random sample.

If you really are drawing names completely randomly, as few as 1,000 people in the US can give you a good estimate of the final percentage of a national race, plus or minus 2%. In other words, after the first 1,000 people you poll, you can create a prediction, and there is a 95% chance that the final result will be within 2% of what you predicted.

Please LEARN ABOUT STATISTICS before spouting conspiracy theories. I blame the failed public educational system.

BS Statistics can't explain no variations unless the sample

set is completely homogenous. Look at the MI presidential candidate map. Not homogenous!

You talk about the "pre-election polls" working the same way?
The same "statistics" argument was previously used to "prove" that Hillary was going to win Iowa, Obama was to win NH, and that Giulani was the front runner for all the republicans. Faux news quoted statistics to censor Ron Paul from a debate (because he would surely be "last").

Guess all of those were statistical diebold computations.

Troll alert, or maybe you are just a statistics pollster?

Michigan is not homogenous, but precints come in randomly

Of course Michigan isn't homogenous. The Yoopers are just f'n nuts. (No offense to any Yoopers here).

But the precincts come in randomly. It's not like the precincts in the south come in first, then the ones in the north come in last. If you watched the map, they were distributed pretty randomly across the state and between urban and rural areas.

Thus, it is random in the RELEVANT way. Precincts report in a roughly random order, which means that the data comes from a random mix of urban and rural polls. That makes it sufficiently random.

If you want to call "statistics" "trolling" then be my guest, but it's the truth no matter what name you give it.

An example

Imagine that you put 1,000 marbles in a box. Maybe 700 of them are blue, and 300 of them are red. So there's a 70%-30% distribution of marbles.

Now randomly reach into different parts of the box and pull out 100 marbles. I'll bet that you'll end up being pretty sure that there are more blue marbles than red marbles in the box, even if you don't get exactly 70 blue and 30 red. That's all the media needs to "call" an election. I'd also be willing to bet that you got somewhere between 60 and 80 blue marbles. If you pulled 200 that range would be relatively narrower, maybe between 125 and 145. Etc.

It doesn't matter if you mixed the red and blue marbles up when you put them in, so long as you grab from different random parts of the box with each grab. That's like precincts from different parts of the state reporting randomly.

Receipts = No More Fraud

Everything would be solved if voters received one. Then everything could be verified and this fraud would be no more.

Did you know there is a lawsuit going on about the election fraud?

http://www.ncel.w4sp.com/

"Please support the National Clean Elections Lawsuit (NCEL) 150 people - 3 per state - sueing for paper ballots, stored in public, and counted in public. We need to END electronic voting.
Furthermore, if this is not done before we lose Ron Paul, it is probably too late.
Even Obama is the Chicago chapter of the CFR (council on foreign relations), a group dedicated to one world government, and not terribly concerned about guaranteeing our constitutional rights in the process."

--
Remember: Debt is a form of slavery.

Yeah But Until We Have Reciepts.....

RSK We need to utilize Commercial Affidavits of Truth. Ardent Dr. Paul supporters at every precinct in each state on primary day. Cordially get signatures from all Paul voters as they exit the polling stations, much like exit polling. I've written extensively on these on various sites for at least a couple of months. From a legal/lawful standpoint, they are judicially foolproof. I've been using them for years and have always prevailed. They're rock solid. trust me! Each state can coordinate through meet-up groups and precinct captains for that state's signature total.

Giving a reciept opens door to harassment and intimidation

Imagine a Guiliani thug saying "vote for Ron Paul and I'll kill you."

With no receipt, no problem -- you can go into the voting booth and vote for Ron Paul, then come out and tell the thug "I voted for Guiliani." You laugh all the way home.

With a receipt the thug can say "show me the receipt to prove it." *Bang* you're dead.

Simple solution

It could be coded!

--
Remember: Debt is a form of slavery.

And when somebody figures out the key?

We're back to square 1 if any campaign figures out the key to decoding the receipt. I'm sure you wouldn't put it past Guliani to find the key, right?

Don't forget that people are morons.

Lots of people really have no business voting. 40% of Democrats voted for NO ONE! Perhaps a vote for a true anti war Democrat would have helped their cause?

NH Recount is a huge story. Why ZERO media coverage? Hmmm

They don't want the general public to learn about the hand counted vs. the scanned ballets. The outcome and/or knowledge could be red flag to ralley behind and bring transparency to upcoming states. They ain't talkin' cause they are too busy programming memory cards. To wait in line in the snow to cast a vote for bigbird (unconfirmed) is pure bullshit!

they don't change cause

they don't change cause diebold

I have watched elections in my country my whole life and numbers always change over time and distance. I never seen predicted winner before 90+ %

your primaries are predicted around 10 % and the numbers stay basically the same.

it´s so weird it´s ridiculous.

on top of that the voting is done in secret on hackable machines with no verification.

LOL

Free recount from here on out...

I bet the MI Militia could pull off a recount for free.

My Daughter Lives In Michigan

There is nooooo way that the percentages would be exactly the same. Plus, I am 58 and have seen a lot of television coverage of elections. Never have seen all these unbelievably early calls with zilch news commentators saying..."It's early.." "You know back in ___ so and so moved from third to first when the last ten counties came in, etc." Actually, it made watching the things borderline interesting. Why watch if you already know what is going to happen. It's not only is strange....why would networks *even* want to do that???

(Been a long day for me.....I'm even going out there and imagining that it is a subtle psychological plan moving to calling it sooner and sooner as we move toward....nobody goes to the polls anymore. Why go. They already know what is going to happen. Why vote. Voila. No more pesky elections to rig. Just follow Trilateral directives. More efficient. hmmm. I'll go to bed. Just disgusted with the sabotaged system!)

But given everything that has happened, we should be pleased with the results as long as he remains fourth. Kindof' good in that we can move under the radar...let the Beltway Libertarian's smear campaign die...they probably shot their entire wad with that one...and then pull off a BIG surprise primary. Which one will it be?

fonta

Receipts = No Fraud

Everything would be solved if voters received one. Then everything could be verified and this fraud would be no more.

Did you know there is a lawsuit going on about the election fraud?

http://www.ncel.w4sp.com/

"Please support the National Clean Elections Lawsuit (NCEL) 150 people - 3 per state - sueing for paper ballots, stored in public, and counted in public. We need to END electronic voting.
Furthermore, if this is not done before we lose Ron Paul, it is probably too late.
Even Obama is the Chicago chapter of the CFR (council on foreign relations), a group dedicated to one world government, and not terribly concerned about guaranteeing our constitutional rights in the process."

--
Remember: Debt is a form of slavery.

It is a little odd

Michigan can't be THAT homogenized.

I've been taking screen shots every few minutes.

Looks like the only real wrestling was Huck, and Romney.
Their numbers changed 1 or two points, once a decent amount of precincts started coming in.

"I don't endorse anything they say"
~Ron Paul On the 911 Truth movement.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGyhlNY0y1k

actually...

it's basic math. People always like to think that things might change rapidly, but they rarely do. Once the number is large enough, it takes a heck of a lot to move the percentages. Keep in mind that some of these counties aren't turning out more than a few thousand votes spread among four or so candidates.

It isn't really that much of a mystery. Just wishful thinking on all of our parts that there might be a huge block of votes out there that will shift things. But that's rarely ever the case. In fact, that would shock me more. In this day and age, precisely what would explain such a wide change? Is there really a county out there filled with an abnormally high percentage of critical thinkers compared to the rest of the counties?

shhh

You're ruining a perfectly good conspiracy theory with intelligent rational analysis. (otherwise known by some as "trolling").

No

She's trolling like you. Shills and plants are not welcome here. Go home! This is fraud.

--
Remember: Debt is a form of slavery.

It's obvious isn't it?

Computers. Human activity is always more fluid.

"People should not be afraid of their governments; governments should be afraid of their people." - V for Vendetta

Yes ...Why do the percentages stay exactly the same.

This is very weird isnt it? Also, note the exit polls show that people that were anti war voted for McCain!!! This doesn't make sense to me.

It's called fraud

You're an American. You are not supposed to think so hard, remember?

--
Remember: Debt is a form of slavery.

Rational thoughts, Please

All these conspiracy theories and voter fraud claims are driving me nuts. Yes, there is bias, but all this whining every time something doesn't go the way people want it to reminds me of the worst of the other candidates campaigns. If you have proof, present it, until then, shut the hell up, you only suceed in discrediting valid criticisms of the process.

Free and Brave
or Cradle to Grave
You can't have both

Free and Brave
or Cradle to Grave
You can't have both