CAUCUS STATES RP GETS 10-25% OF VOTE, PRIMARY STATES HE GETS.....
Submitted by SableArms on Wed, 02/13/2008 - 17:05
4% (seems to be the magical number) of the vote. Election fraud is rampant when electronic voting machines are used. This is absolutely despicable and unacceptable. If we cannot prevent voter fraud, can we remedy the problem through the use of Affidavits of Truth at the polling facilities? There are still less than 20 states left. It must be effeciently instituted as soon as possible to be effective. If nothing else, we could ties the elections up in court.
»
Just give me a reciept!
We could use electronic voting if there was a reciept given, then the person could verify their vote and hand put it in a ballot box. Then the box can verify the vote if need be a recount.
I like a system where voters
I like a system where voters use a paper ballot to cast their vote (in the primaries) and the bottom of the ballot has a bar code. The voter would scan their vote onto the computer and insert their ballot into the ballot box. Each voter would have their votes counted twice and both of them will be counted. In case of dubious results, the only results that will be valid would be the paper ballots.
It's not election fraud.
Its the fact that he gets no media air time. Primaries take no time to go and vote and be done with, caucuses are for people who are more dedicated (and presumably more knowledgeable) about the candidates. Its also the whole everyone wants to pick a winner syndrome. Face it most Americans are pretty much sheep that do what theyre told.
that's exactly it
the original process was designed to aid party activists in selecting a nominee, NOT the voting public. The caucus was a mechanism to further that aim. The evolution of public primaries, and especially open primaries, is much more recent. Parties are private organizations and can design nominee selection any way they want. In fact, I assume a political party could assign a group of 100 elected officials nationwide to choose its candidate without any of the process you currently see. Probably not good for the party to exclude wider participation, but perfectly legal.
Hence, when it comes to the Paul campaign, supporters are more enthusiastic and dedicated than for many of the big name candidates and we receive higher vote totals in those states using caucuses. Among the general public, there is much less familiarity with Dr. Paul and, given the lower level of political understanding, less support.
Whatever so-called vote fraud or bad counts are concerned, just not a factor of any magnitude relating to our poor results in primary states, it just isn't. If we were competitive at the top, say polling 30% and McCain getting 32% in open primaries, I'd be much more concerned about the count. When you pull 4%, sorry, the system is not stealing 30% of the ballots.
Even the most famous proven vote fraud in modern history, the election of JFK over Richard Nixon came down to a few thousands fake votes from Chicago provided by Mayor Richard Daley.
Watch Hacking Democracy
If you do not believe that election fraud exists after watching this video, I have nothing more to say. Or read Vote Scam "The Stealing of America" by the late Collier brothers.
seen it
it can be fraud or just crapola machines. Anyway, obviously you're gonna believe it's always massive fraud no matter what. Just take a walk in your neighborhood and ask people who they voted for. Ron Paul does not come out on top, just doesn't. You want to keep blaming the machines or evil conspirators, go ahead. The public is just not smart enough to get the message, they are brainwashed by years of socialist thinking.
I'm gonna say it again
Caucus states he gets 10-25% of vote, primary states he gets 4%. HUGE DIFFERENCE! No election fraud? You have got to be kidding me.
I believe fraud exists...
I believe fraud exists... but this is a valid point. Caucuses tend to favor candidates who have the most dedicated supporters.
well, it's both.
elections do get "tuned" as we have seen ...