CAN RP BREAK THROUGH 4% OF THE VOTE IN ELECTRONIC VOT....
ing machine precincts in their respective states----- those 15 or so states still remaining? In caucus states, he (Dr. Paul) has received 10-25% of the vote, however, in primary states with electronic voting machines, he is only getting (especially on and since Super Tuesday) 4% or so of the vote. I find this particular number not only very questionable but highly unlikely, considering how many states he has received 4%. Keep an eye on the remaining states and how many times RP receives 4% of the vote verses how often McLame will exceed 50% of the vote. In California, Dr. Paul received 4% of the vote in all 53 districts! Thank God election fraud does not presently take place in our country, otherwise, I might be inclined to believe it's happening now.
My opinion
Fortune Favors the Bold
The vote count was probably skimmed a bit, but not enough to make a significant difference. There are more obvious reasons for the low numbers.
1. Alot of us were assuming the polls weren't accurate because they were only polling hardcore republican land line users, i. e., those who had voted in the previous primary to win Bush the nomination. This may have been how the polls were conducted, but this then reflected media coverage. It also lead us to be apathetic.
2. The funding for the campaign came very late in the game. Paul's team had to put everything together in about two months without the help of party infrastructure or corporate support.
3. The grassroots didn't understand how to get out the vote till after the initial primaries. The other candidates were very focused on this and had been organizing it for a long time. Paul's candidacy was more of a protest candidacy till the moneybombs in november.
4. The newsletter thing did hurt, big time. The timing was perfect. After people were disappointed by Paul's 4th place finish in Iowa, after unrealistically expecting him to come in the top 3, the letter was released, This was unfortunate, since considering the database in Iowa was sabotaged, he did VERY well. He dropped in the polls significantly, 5 points in one weekend, following the newsletter scandal. When people in NH were "googling" ron paul, all they saw was talk about him being a racist and casual supporters jumping ship.
5. Paul really needed to shock everyone in those first two primaries to be taken seriously.
6. We didn't get nearly enough precinct leaders, and alot of the ones we did get didn't fufill all the requirements. Most states had less then ten percent of precincts covered.
7. Some individuals at lower levels of the campaign (Katti Price) were opportunistic and messed things up badly.People also had unrealistic expectations of the campaign. As someone said, they essentially had to build the road before they walked on it, and 2 months is nothing. The other candidates were preparing for two years. Also, people don't understand how expensive advertising is. It also isn't all that effective if you don't get media coverage.
8. The media did suppress Paul's message, for reasons that should be obvious to anyone who is aware of the issues.
9. The supporters were caught in a Catch 22, where to get the message out they had to be passionate and aggressive. Since most "conservatives" by definition, are afraid of change and think that youth are politically stupid, it may have acted against him, but these people weren't going to vote for Paul anyway.
10. People think the surge is working.
11. Even I am suprised at how effective the media fear mongering has been. But then again, I don't really watch televison
12. The age demographic is overwhelmingly up there. There is a peer-group mentality that takes over.
13. People in general are pretty fucking stupid.
14. This campaign was an extreme longshot to begin with. We needed alot of things to go our way, and they didn't
I am not being negative, just assesing why the numbers are so low.
Fortune Favors the Bold
Ohio election fraud 2004
just do a search 2 Ohio women sentenced 18 months for voter fraud in 2004...get pages of news about it(not all MSM, though)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4266
"Ohio Election Workers Sentenced to 18 Months for Rigging 2004 Presidential Recount"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wisconsin...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=1&date=10/23/2006&id=13188
Woman sentenced in voter fraud. An admitted crack addict who was ... for cash before the November 2004 presidential election was sentenced to three years' ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can look it up..
The Ohio story was on our news here in Ohio.
Some of it is due to "who's Ron Paul", like around here..but when I say"he's Republican", most in my neighborhood say"I'm a Democrat" and go off ona tangent about GWB.
The Republicans I speak to want a "warmonger"...
I know of maybe, personally, Maybe, 3 people voting for Ron Paul.
If they do nt see him on MSM, then"Something is wrong with him".
Gets old hearing that.
At least at the Hara Arena Gun Show this weekened, there will be a full 10-12 Hours, both days, of Ron Paul booth and info center....less than 2 weeks before voting...so who knows...it might help spread the word .
It's all about how much you
It's all about how much you have to do to support your candidate. If you just have to show up and cast a vote, then the less passionate are willing to show up. If you have to take up extra time to attend a caucus and there's a process you have to take part in, then only the passionate will show up.
This is why the delegate voting is so important. Last weekend, my precinct selected delegates to go on to the county mass meeting. There were 8 slots available as well as 8 alternate slots available. Only 3 people showed up for my precinct. We just had to put our name on a piece of paper. We could have had 5 more delegates and 8 alternates if people just showed up. The good news is my wife and I were two of the three and I think the other guy is very conservative and is more aligned with Ron Paul than the other two. There was several other precincts at my county district's mass meeting that didn't have anyone show up.
Sure there's more voters for McCain and Huckabee, but Ron Paul has the passionate followers. The GOP party is very malleable. Look at what the neo-cons were able to accomplish. We've got enough people to reshape the party... we just need to show up.
I sincerely think that all RP supporters
should just show up on the delegate selection day!
I dont have voting rights and yet I was there on election day at the booth just to do canvassing and sign-waving.
If you call yourself American and have voting rights, then it is downright treason not to be selected as delegate and throw away chances like this.
Hate povery, not the poor - Gandhi
Hate povery, not the poor - Gandhi
Conspiracy theorists, please get lives
It's sad to see the ones who are left here are basically conspiracy theorists, 9-11 truthers and those who can not see the writing on the wall that the nomination process is over.
Look people, Ron Paul never got above 5-10% of the republican vote average in any state. I'm sorry but the states did not collude with one another to disenfranchise Ron. Diebold is not out to get Ron.
What Ron needed to do was instead of running for the house of reps was instead run for Senate or Governor. When is the last time someone from the house of reps received the nomination from either party?
That should tell you something.
It's too late for Ron because he is too old now. No one is going to elect him at 75-76 years old. The best chance is to get a fiscally conservative republican who is simply anti-nation building. Mike Hagel, senator of Nebraska or Gov Mark Sanford of SC. Why they never jumped in the race when it was clear there there was no frontrunner, I haven't a clue. Talk about a missed opportunity. The best we can hope for is that McCain picks one of these guys as his VP. Remember, McCain is old too. And of course I'm not wishing him harm, but if he were to pass away in office, it'd be nice to have a VP who at least reflects some of Ron Paul's beliefs.
Stop with the vote count nonsense people. If you want to be constructive, start looking at candidates in Governor or Senate positions who are Ron Paul like for VP or the next presidential run.
You mean to say that
Mike Huckabee beat Ron Paul in 52 of 53 precincts of California...No way! And look at the pattern the way the vote counts were for California. Except for 1 county McCain is 1, Romney at 2, Huckabee at 3 and RP at 4.
Please give us a break! In the precint I live in RP got 1248 votes and McCain got 30000+ and I have yet to meet any McCain supporter. There has been 120-125 very dedicated RP meet-up members in my precinct. McCain had no such meet-up groups in the precinct I live in.
Hate povery, not the poor - Gandhi
Hate povery, not the poor - Gandhi
I am in California and I'm with you....
I voted in the San Francisco area and I am SURE the counts were rigged! I know that I personally voted paper ballot because I do not trust those machines. There were stories all over the local news how in many precincts so many people showed up to vote that they RAN OUT OF BALLOTS! They ended up using photocopies. Who knows if they even counted those?
I have yet to see a single sign or commercial around here for either McCain or Huckabee. I have seen quite a few freeway signs (many handmade) and automobiles (mine included) decorated with Ron Paul stickers though.
Think about this.... California is full of Anti-war, pot smoking people... (medical marijuana is legal in CA) Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate running who is Anti-war and Pro-Legalization! There have recently been some Federal raids of some of these medical dispensaries that have gotten alot of people up in arms. They don't want the Federal Government messing with their medicine! Granted, most of the state is registered Democrat but you'd still think that Dr. Paul would pull out at least a FEW precincts here...
If it looks like a duck....
"There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know." -John Heywood 1546
Dr. Ron Paul is my HERO!
...Or run 3rd party.
Because I know a hell of a lot of Democrats who would vote for him except a) that "R" scares them away, or b) The obama/clinton vote is more important.
What fucked the RP run?
basically the fact that it's really hard to reregister voters (despite being a lifelong republican, I was undeclared when I moved to CA and had to register as a republican, turned my form in two weeks before the deadline and still had to fill out a provisional ballot -- even though my republican card was mailed to me)
And the fact that the republican establishment doesn't want him, because he won't perpetuate the Iraq war.
Enough republicans hate McCain, and enough democrats are frustrated that RP can make run for it on a 3rd party. It's easier to steal votes as a 3rd party runner *especially in this sort of a political mood* than to steal votes from the other party.
your naivity
or ignorance about there being vote fraud is frightening, especially for a ron paul supporter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHhliNyJYmw
oped news also has a good story about an election official forced to resign because he demanded paper ballots for the upcoming primary in texas.
www.blackboxvoting.org has unearthed many accounts of vote fraud and helped get two ladies convicted.
YOUR acceptance that "everything is fine" is exactly what is sinking our country. Go ahead, continue to trust your government (sic, special interests).
As a NH resident
I found it remarkable that after the primary some people insisted that the reason Dr. Paul only received 8% of the vote was because there was a conspiracy to rig the election. This amazing pronouncement, and the insistence on a statewide recount, simply reinforced the notion that supporters of Dr. Paul are "kooks".
Dr. Paul received 8% despite having the best grassroots campaign by far. There were multiple problems with the campaign here and, unfortunately, these same mistakes were continued elsewhere.
Problem #1 was a lack of a coherent strategy to actually win the election. Problem #2 was ineffectual advertising. Problem #3 was a lack of RP in NH. He simply didn't spend much time here. Problem #4 was an almost total lack of old media relations. No smart campaigning. Problem #5 was almost zero endorsements.
h-daddy
"conspiracy theory"...
I don't wear a tin-foil hat but there is definitely a concerted effort to make sure RP doesn't do well. I wouldn't say the election was rigged (possible the majority of people really want war and bankruptcy or they're too stupid to know that's what they're voting for) but I also wouldn't rule out the idea that vote was being skewed slightly in the early states just enough to keep RP in the single digits and prevent him from gaining momentum and more mainstream support (a little ignoring here, a little marginalization there, a smear piece on election day and some lost/uncounted votes all ensure the revolution is demoralized and effectively stifled)...
It is possible you are correct
but I don't think it likely. What seems far more likely to me is that in order for a relatively unknown congressman, with a non-traditional outlook on both politics and economics, to muster support (actual votes) requires a flawless campaign strategy and maybe some luck. Dr. Paul had neither.
Keep in mind that way back in Sept. Paul and McCain were in the same place poll-wise in NH. McCain, to that @#%^&'s credit, came up with a strategy and pulled it off. The RP official campaign, as far as I can see, had no deliberate strategy for NH.
h-daddy
It shows the power of MSM
McCain was kept alive by the media, and RP was smeared and ignored.
Now, a better campaign may have dealt better with the MSM, but it would have been an uphill battle.
McCain "courted & wooed" the media.
That's smart and, importantly, free. Knowing he had great PR from 2000 his strategy was to goto the state where he the most positive campaign and build on it. He pretty much lived here for 3 or 4 months working every journalist and media outlet in the state. His advertising was done at minimal cost and underscored his "straight talking" image. The endorsement of the Union Leader and the Boston GLobe is very important. Ask Pat Buchanan. What McCain pulled off in NH was brilliant.
The Ron Paul campaign, just to give an example, had MSM opportunities but failed to capitalize. Both the Concord Monitor and Union Leader editorial boards met with Dr. Paul. The description of those meetings was glowing. VERY positive. Was there any follow up? Any attempt to win an endorsement? Any use of their statements in the campaign? None. A simple TV ad based on the editor's own words would have been very effective.
h-daddy
The media was directed to cover McCain full time
They provided full time reporters to follow him day and night. He didn't "woo" them. All he had to do was wake up and they were there. All day every day pumping Americans on CNN and Fox with visions of McCain.
Immediately after Iowa the games began. It was John McCain, John McCain, with an occasional "Ron Paul is a kook or Ron Paul is a Racist" story.
The media made McCain as directed.
No evidence for your idea.
The reality is that the old media runs on a shoestring and is lazy. They don't really have any reporters and certainly nothing one could call a journalist. They pretty much pump out whatever falls in their laps. If McCain pimps them then that's easy and they call it a story. Keep in mind that regurgitating the same story over and over is a lot less work than doing a new one. Ask anyone in the old media where they get their material and, if they are honest, this is what they will tell you.
PR people get paid to get, and keep, their clients in the news.
h-daddy
I happen to agree
with that.
And that the potential for voter fraud is even higher with those things in place.
:D
911 was an inside job
i think 911 was an inside job, but even i dont believe this crap about rigged elections. he got between 3% and 10% in voting states, no matter whether they were optical scan, touchscreen or hand counts.
ok
"911 was an inside job" but the elections are pure and unadulterated...
.....ok.....
What is
with some people on DP automatically labeling someone with a out-of-the-mainstream point of view as a "conspiracy theorist"?
That is a denigrating term used to demean people who just might see things a little differently....
It doesn't bode well for the whole free speech idea, does it?
See my discussion
See my discussion of the pejorative label "conspiracy theorist" here.
"We don't have to start a brand new revolution...All we have to do is restore the original Constitution." -Ron Paul
----
"...a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." -John F. Kennedy
something wrong with questioning the integrity of elections?
Thanks for reinforcing the limits of debate with your pejorative label of "conspiracy theorist." I for one agree with American Patriot Patrick Henry on "freedom of the debate" however.
"We don't have to start a brand new revolution...All we have to do is restore the original Constitution." -Ron Paul
----
"...a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." -John F. Kennedy
Vote Count Accurate in Maricopa, Arizona
Vote Count Accurate in Maricopa, Arizona
On February 20th, 2008 Treg says:
I was one of 12 republicans and 12 democrats selected to give a citizens audit to the vote count in Maricopa County Arizona.
Out of some 360 some sealed bins holding all the ballots, we where free to select any bins we wanted for auditing. We selected 8 bins to count at random for democrat vote, and 8 for the republican vote. The hand vote count showed that the machine vote to be dead on.
With two republicans and one democrat sitting at a table, ...or...two democrats and one republican sitting at a counting table, we broke the bin seal and opened the bins and began counting the ballots one by one, by hand.
4 times the hand count and the machine count did not match up (usually by one vote off). When that happened a recount had to happen, counting each ballot in sets of ten. Always it was the manual count, not the machine count, that proved incorrect.
At my table, we first counted democratic ballots. Obama was consistently ahead by a small margin. Our first bin we counted 498 for Hillary, 502 for Obama. Other tables counting democrat ballots from other bins came up with similar spread in favor of Obama. There was over 260,000 early ballots. We sampled 1000 ballots out of the Early Ballot bins. In those, Hillary had a huge margin of victory. Hillary beat Obama in the state of Arizona and the spread reflected what we hand counted. When we tabulated the margin of victory from all of our sampling and the margin of victory Hillary got from the overall master machine count, it was right on the money, very accurate.
Then we moved to count 8 bins of ballots for a republican count, again we chose them ourselves.
What do the ballots look like? The ballots are about 11 x 17, on hard paper. The ballots have the names listed to the left side, then the right side is an arrow pointing to the name on the left side. There was 20 or so names for president. Take the name Ron Paul. Ron Paul would be on the left, then long arrow pointing straight to his name on the right. To vote for Ron Paul (or any one), you, the voter, would "complete" the arrow in the middle. The arrow's middle section was empty. With a black marker, you would fill in the middle of the arrow, completing the arrow, thus voting. The machine rejects double voting and places those ballots into a special sealed bin, that we humans then look at and audit latter. We learned the machine would NOT count as double voting if even a person just did a dot in the middle of any arrow and a solid line in the arrow he/she intended. This happened a lot. People, perhaps unaware, would place a dot in the middle of each arrow as they went down the list, then fill in the middle of the arrow pointing to the person we could see they wanted. The machine could not count these, but we did. I saw about 12 like this for John McCain. A light small dot in the middle of each arrow until a full dark line for John McWaricain. With the other two table counters in full agreement, (a table had to decide it 100% one or the other), a vote for McCain was added. Thus, even those bins that had ballots whereby the machine did not count the votes, the votes did get counted.
My own hands counted over a 1000 republican ballots. I can tell you that it was very sobering to see that Ron Paul received 5.5% of the vote. Fred Thompson, who dropped from the race, had no signs about town, no ads, no commercials, not in any debate before Super Tuesday, pulled 9.2%.
The bottom line guys, in Maricopa County the vote count is NOT fraudulent. Its very well handled and the machines are right on the money. There was many ways the vote is audited and many systems in place for watching the ballots. New Hampshire could learn a lot from Maricopa County, Arizona.
Ron Paul received 5.5% of the vote, not just in Maricopa County, but state wide. The fact that Ron is receiving that nationally tells me that probably very accurate.
We in the grassroots can take credit for lifting Ron Paul from 1% nationally to 5% nationally. What needs to be answered is how much money and TV airtime did the Ron Paul campaign buy before Super Tuesday. Even though there was a media blackout, there also was a HQ campaign TV blackout. Strategic national TV ads where never placed for Ron Paul. We need to learn what could have done better to break through Ron Paul to a national audience. Ron had the best grassroots campaign and the best money raising supporters, how is it that the Campaign failed to give Ron Paul national TV airtime and exposure prior to Super Tuesday.
Treg
why are there so many
deluded people here ?
First, RP does better in Caucus states because his supporters are active interested and organized. Primary state voting is much easier, just take five minutes and show up at the polls during a 12 hour period.
In primary states, RP has received as high as 8 % (NH and WA) and had 6% in MD, 8% in DC, 6 % in MI, NY, TN and some as low as 3%. There is no vast conspiracy, the Diebold machines are clunky, and have 0.5 % errors but they have not been rigged against Ron Paul.
The ~5 % he gets represents his base of active supporters. You need to face facts that most republicans do not support RP for president.
Once people smarten up, we might get some progress, but so many on this site are like blind Lions, losts of Roar, but not able to figure out what to bite.
You Are Probably Correct
We need a mathematician.
These problems with how our voting system works have been well-studied mathematically: there are many reasons why it is almost impossible to get a population to take seriously more than two candidates. It has to do with the way people in groups act.
This is what makes some of the alternative voting systems seem attractive, where you get to pick a first, second and third choice, for example.
We are fighting a population that watches the news and votes by habit. Most haven't really looked at their choices, and those that do, are willing to compromise on the lesser evil. The problem isn't just the machines.
IMissLiberty
IMissLiberty
manufactured consent
Which came first? The chicken or the egg? How in the world are the non-choices of Barackabee McClinton hatched and foisted upon the American people?
We're battling the manufactured consent of the brainwashed masses. Like the Matrix, the very people that we are trying to save are part of the system that we are fighting against.
The Corporate Military-Industrial Government-Media Complex has largely limited the debate (similar to the conditioning on a mass-scale that I discussed here) on the Presidential election. As a result, it's been obvious to most intellectually honest people that Ron Paul's campaign has suffered greatly from an obvious "mainstream" media bias against him and his campaign.
From the very beginning the "mainstream" media attempted to marginalize the Ron Paul campaign and Ron Paul's supporters through the indoctrination of pejorative language, lying, and the soft bigotry of silence used against Ron Paul and his supporters.
I agree with you that, unfortunately for our Constitutional Republic, "most republicans do not support RP for president." But the reason for that is not as innocuous to our political processes as you seem to buy into.
"We don't have to start a brand new revolution...All we have to do is restore the original Constitution." -Ron Paul
----
"...a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people." -John F. Kennedy
How consent is manufactured
Most people use a simple heuristic to make complex decisions for which they do not have enough information. There are actually about 25 questions you can use to determine how someone will decide about an issue.
It is heavy reading, but there is a ton of information here
http://research.yale.edu/culturalcognition/
Deluded?
First of all, you're an idiot. Secondly, you're an idiot. I didn't state he (RP) got 4% in every state, I was referring to the frequency at which he received this percentage of the vote. Lastly, you're an idiot! The obvious is not obvious enough for certain individuals.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
And again I say... HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!!
You think there's no voter fraud where the (ILLEGAL) machines are concerned...where have you been, man?
You should check out blackboxvoting.org sometime....seriously...
Good question, though...why ARE there so many deluded people here?
;)
Where's your proof ? ?
And I mean real proof, not just stories from liars.
Also, try to learn the difference between errors and mistakes, and fraud.
Also, try to learn the difference between "the possibility of fraud", and fraud. Yeah I know all about blackbox voting, and guess what, they do more to hurt the cause of fair elections, because of their stupidity.
What happens is as soon as they find a potential problem, they go apeshit, accusing people of fraud, and lying. Of course what happens is that fair minded people get pissed off at their behavior and ignore them.
As far as riggin elections it is the voter registration rolls, not the machines that are most susceptable to problems - see http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004...
When you ignore these problems and ramble on about how Diebold is linked to blah blah blah, you make it EASIER to rig elections. When you say stupid shit like the machines are programed for 4%, you are being an Idiot, and no body listens, they decide not to worry about the real problems, and they decide not to vote for the candidate you support.
In short, proof, or STFU