Evidence Of Iowa Voting Fraud

Before I compile the evidence I've seen that points towards a rigged Iowa caucus, I'd like to point out that I try to not be a sore loser. When I saw that Ron Paul got third place, I wasn't immediately screaming "It was rigged!", and refusing to accept that other candidates can win things. But upon seeing a few things, it started to pique my interest, and really raises the question of whether or not the Iowa caucus was rigged in any way.

Let's start out with Santorum. No more than two weeks ago, Santorum was basically a nobody. He was polling poorly, and he had little hope of winning Iowa. However, the media began covering him quite a bit, and dubbed his rising numbers the "surge of Santorum". Whether or not that is suspicious to you is a matter of opinion.

But watch this Fox News video with Karl Rove, where he describes an interesting method of determining who won.

Wallace: I don't understand, you're saying they basically have come to an agreement as to what the vote's going to be in Clinton?

Rove: The person who's got the offical piece of paper is missing. But the Romney and Santorum people who were monitoring it agree on what the number is, so they basically agreed we will confirm both of us the outcome of this particular precinct, and the state party will accept that.

So the Romney and Santorum "people" agreed on that. Romney's "people", the campaign which is being funded by every financial institution that you can think of, and Santorum's "people", Santorum being voted among the top 3 most corrupt members of Congress. Interesting that the Ron Paul "people" weren't brought into the discussion. Then Wallace tries to boost the credibility of this anonymous source of Rove near the end.

So they lost the actual figures, from an area with a big university in Ames, which would have been populated by a high percentage of Ron Paul supporters obviously, and then came to an "agreement" which led to Santorum moving up.

Rove: They made the correction in Story County which moved it from an 18 point margin for Santorum to a 4 vote margin for Santorum.....in Clinton County, the one outstanding precinct in the state, and that it will show an 18 vote victory for Mitt Romney which will give him a statewide victory of 14 votes over Rick Santorum

Screen-caps from an Infowars video which I will post at the end of this thread: So it appears that Rove's numbers, given to him from his unnamed source, are false, according to the Des Moines Register. It seems to me that this agreement that was reached was more about falsely attributing votes to each other rather than honestly determining what the total was.

Now here's an Infowars video, with former ABC and CNN correspondent Greg Hunter, creator and producer of USAWatchdog.com. They discuss the possibilites of a rigged Iowa caucus, and this Karl Rove clip, among other things:

So is this proof that Ron Paul was going to win, but they cheated him out of a win? No, not exactly. However it is proof that the conventional system of determing who won the county was thrown out the window, and instead two clearly corrupt candidates "people" got together, and agreed who had how many votes.

How significant would rigging those two counties be? Well, Story County contained 4209 voters, and Clinton County had 1384 voters, making that a total of 5593 votes. Ron Paul lost by 3796 votes, so he would have had to have scored an average of 67.9% in those two counties.

That's highly unlikely, because the highest percentage of votes out of all of the counties was 60.9% for Santorum in Lyon County, with a total of 540 voters. The highest percentage that Ron Paul got was 48.6% in Jefferson County, out of a total of 840 voters. So the odds that those two counties alone involved in the "gentlemen's agreement" could have accounted for Ron Paul being in first, but then being tweaked to put him in third is slim to none, even though there are many college students in that university location.

Could there have been other areas where some form of voting fraud took place? It's possible, but based on these two counties alone however, these could not have knocked Paul down from a potential first place to third place. This alone is not proof that Ron Paul was going to get first place, but the process was rigged in order to ensure that Santorum and Romney took the lead. However this Santorum/Romney agreement is very suspicious.

But there is also this YouTube video that shows exit poll numbers, and has Paul leading. However I had a few issues with this video, mainly the lack of a named organization/person who did the polling. So while in my opinion it's not very credible, and it doesn't say how many people they polled, when they did it at, where, I guess I still ought to post it because there was a thread earlier about this:
So we had Ron Paul leading many of the pre-caucus polls in Iowa, but then one of the 3 most corrupt members of Congress, Santorum, came out of nowhere and took a very close second place to banker puppet Mitt Romney. Karl Rove openly admits that Santorum and Romney's "people" came to an agreement about who had how many votes, and this was told to him from an unnamed source.

Was the caucus rigged in order to prevent Paul from getting first? We can't say for sure, but there is at least some evidence to back up that some votes were manipulated.

reply to post by TupacShakur


True or not , it dosen't matter at this point . Ron Paul will send his 6 Delagates from Iowa to the RNC . Vote Fraud will happen , it's up to the Public to Demand it Stop . What else can we Do ? ........

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by TupacShakur

 

True or not , it dosen't matter at this point . Ron Paul will send his 6 Delagates from Iowa to the RNC . Vote Fraud will happen , it's up to the Public to Demand it Stop . What else can we Do ? ........

Demand it stop.

I doubt if any vote or election since the Golden Age of Athens was ever without corruption in some degree or other.

reply to post by Zanti Misfit


Yeah and even if this caucus was 100% legitimate, this still wouldn't be bad for Paul. He doubled his percentage from last year, so I think that can be considered a positive.

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
I doubt if any vote or election since the Golden Age of Athens was ever without corruption in some degree or other.

This is True , even Clay Potshards can be Recolored .....

I made some mathematical errors in the OP, because I didn't account for Romney and Santorum losing supporters if Ron Pauls numbers would have been higher. Also, I changed the percentage of the two counties as a whole instead of seperately. If somebody wants to tweak those numbers and see what percentage Ron Paul would have needed in both of those counties in order to get first place, please do that. That way, we can determine if rigging those two counties alone could have prevented Paul from getting a potential first place victory.

reply to post by TupacShakur


Here's some more Good News for Dr. Paul , he is gaining Support in NH while Romney is losing some ...............



www1.whdh.com...

I realized that if Ron Paul had done better in those counties, the total number of votes for Romney and Santorum would have been less, meaning that he wouldn't have needed 67.9% of those votes.

So let's say Ron Paul had 40% of the votes in both of those counties. 40% of 4209 voters from Story County is 1684. Let's say those extra 596 votes were taken evenly from Romney and Santorum, so 298 from each.

For the next county, Clinton County, let's say he also got 40%. 40% of 1384 is 554 votes. Again, spread evenly among Romney and Santorum, take away 277 votes.

That gives Ron Paul an extra 1150 votes, and takes away 575 from both Romney and Santorum. That would put the total at 27369 for Paul, 29440 for Romney, and 29432 for Santorum. Still over 2,000 away from first place.

The same thing done, except giving Paul 55% in each county, would give him 761 votes in Clinton County, which is 466 more than his 295. In Story County, 55% of 4209 would give him 2315 votes, 1227 more than his 1088. So Paul would have gained a total of 1743, and both Romney and Santorum would have lost 872 votes.

This would change the total for Paul to 27962, Romney to 29143, and Santorum to 29135. Still not first place.

Let's say he got 55% in Clinton, and 70% in Story. 70% of 4209 is 2946, which is 1858 more than his 1088. That added to 55% in Clinton would be a total of 2324 more than his official vote count. Half of each county taken away from Romney and Santorum would be 233 + 929, which is 1162.

With these numbers, Pauls total would have been 28543, Romneys would have been 28853, and Santorums would have been 28845. So even under these extreme conditions, with 55% of the voters selecting Paul in Clinton County, and 70% in Story County, he still would have been down by a few hundred. If he had done slightly better than that, maybe like 75% in Story and 55% in Clinton, he may have surpassed the two.

So while it is stastically possible for him to have gotten first place overall from these two counties alone, it's unlikely, because it would have required support on a level that's only matched by a few other counties in the state.

But maybe things like this happened in a few other counties. It's not impossible, although that's purely speculative. But keep in mind that these are the two counties that were reported on mainstream media to have been "agreed upon" by Romney and Santorums "people". So it's possible that Ron Paul would have gotten first place from a rigged caucus, but the evidence so far shows that from two counties alone, it's unlikely that they would have given him the victory.

reply to post by TupacShakur


I look at Ron Paul's Presidential Campaign as an Endurance Race . A Few keep falling by the way side because the Breath of their Message is found Lacking . If his Message eventually Rings True amoung the Hearts and Minds of Most Americans , then he will go the Distance and become our next President . If not , then at Least he Made for a time, Some of us Listen to the Voice of Reason and caused us to Question why our Country is in it's Present State of Decline ..........

Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by Zanti Misfit

 

Yeah and even if this caucus was 100% legitimate, this still wouldn't be bad for Paul. He doubled his percentage from last year, so I think that can be considered a positive.

So Ron Paul is doing exactly what he is supposed to do: keep the people who might start getting REALLY pissed off thinking there is still a light at the end of the tunnel.

So, there's voting fraud. But, it's only a LITTLE fraud, so not that big of a deal, right? I mean, they only got CAUGHT in two counties. Obviously, all the rest of the count is totally legit. And he doubled his percentage from last year, which wasn't rigged AT ALL.

Hmmm. Yeah, he's got you right where they want you. Not flipping out or anything, the system is corrupt, but it's only a LITTLE corrupt, and Super Ron is here to save the day. Just sit tight, don't worry, it's gonna be ok.

I'm sorry, but I can't get excited about this at all. The video in the OP makes it clear that they are talking about two precincts , not two counties. Iowa has 1,774 precincts. Problems in two precincts? That's not even a flyspeck. I doubt that each of those precincts had even 100 votes a piece.

There was a minor correction of maybe a couple of dozen votes. As I say, I'm not worried.

reply to post by TupacShakur


These are not real votes. They are not done in a legitimate fashion. These are groups of people in rooms, writing names on slips of paper or raising their hands. Are you really looking for fraud in a system that has no legitimacy to begin with?

I noticed that this whole Iowa thing did not turn into some sort of actual legal election of some kind until all the teenagers rooting for Ron Paul got old enough to find Iowa on a map.

These are not real votes. They are not counted legitimately to begin with. The best part too, the results do not even matter.

How many people were going to vote for Ron Paul but have decided not to because he came in 3rd place in a poll?

reply to post by charles1952


No dude, it's counties. It's made pretty clear in that quote that says "Story County" and Clinton County".

reply to post by CaptChaos

So Ron Paul is doing exactly what he is supposed to do: keep the people who might start getting REALLY pissed off thinking there is still a light at the end of the tunnel.

So what, do you think he's a plant who's actually corrupt, but just sent in there to give people who see the corruption hope for the future of this country?

So, there's voting fraud. But, it's only a LITTLE fraud, so not that big of a deal, right?

I'd say even a little fraud should be enough to get that fat pig Karl Rove thrown into prison.

I mean, they only got CAUGHT in two counties. Obviously, all the rest of the count is totally legit.

Well they only got caught in two, but that doesn't mean the rest was legitimate. The others could have all been perfectly legitimate, or some of them could have been rigged. I can't say for sure either way, because the only evidence I've seen is about these two counties.

And he doubled his percentage from last year, which wasn't rigged AT ALL.

I haven't seen any evidence that suggests lasts years was rigged.

Hmmm. Yeah, he's got you right where they want you. Not flipping out or anything, the system is corrupt, but it's only a LITTLE corrupt, and Super Ron is here to save the day. Just sit tight, don't worry, it's gonna be ok.

So do you think the Santorum will Hit The Fan after this next election or what? Don't get me wrong, things are getting bad, and they've been accelerating quite a bit lately, but if he gets elected, we could have a chance to reverse lots of things that are wrong.

But if they have the power to rig a little bit of the system, what's stopping them from rigging the rest? Hell there's evidence of presidential elections being rigged, so if that was the case, rigging caucuses should be a cake-walk for whoever we're dealing with.

IDK man, who knows what power they have. But that doesn't mean that we should just give up and accept it. If Ron Paul doesn't get elected, we'll see what happens. But lots of peope are awake to what's happening. They see the endless wars, the Federal Reserve system screwing this country through inflation and manipulating our currency, the unconstitutional legislation being used against the American people in the name of protecting them, the corrupt politicians serving powerful entities and special interests, and all of that fun stuff. Things might get ugly in the near future.

reply to post by TupacShakur

Dear TupacShakur,

I am reluctant to disagree with you, you've got a good reputation, so I listened again to the first minute of the interview:

"and that the Keokuk county precinct ....this is in Clinton, yeah this is in Clinton County the one outstanding precinct in the state" "And that It will show an 18 vote victory in that precinct for Mitt Romney" 0:20-0:36

"We will confirm both of us the outcome in this particular precinct." 1:00-1:05

(Your absolutely right that the interview refers to story and Clinton counties, but only because that's where the precincts are located.)

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


Ah I see. But he still does say they made the correction in "Story County", which was the one with around 4,000 voters. But yeah, he just said one precinct within Clinton County, which had around 1,000 voters. Thanks for pointing that out

But it seems that the agreement referred to that precinct within Clinton County, and the Story County thing was simply a correction. So yeah, I think you're right, it's nothing more than a few dozen people. So it seems that because a couple dozen votes wouldn't have changed much, Iowa was fairly legitimate, as far as the evidence in this thread goes.

Unless they rigged those couple dozen votes, but what's the point if that's the case? I guess this still doesn't 100% rule out voter fraud in other areas, but as far as evidence goes, there's very, very little to suggest that Ron Paul was going to get first, but they rigged it so Romney and Santorum got ahead of him.

Thanks again for making that known for us. How about unflagging the thread guys? All the evidence amounts to an agreement within a single precinct, and an unsourced YouTube video, which isn't really much at all.

Unflag the thread please

We don't want the front page to have a thread with very, very little to no evidence backing up voting fraud.

Is there a mod that could maybe close the thread?

All I know is that if Rove is involved in any way whatsoever, it's crooked and fraudulent.

reply to post by Ex_CT2


I can't argue with you there

Well, This was a very well written post. And I knew some of these conspiracy vote against ron paul things were to come up. Yours was very well written and the only one that I have seen so far. More might be out there on the ATS airwaves, but now that the mystery has been solved by another user I must say this. The votes that were lost were so minuscule (like 20) that even if Ron Paul received all those votes it wouldn't have propelled him to the top. You still have to consider the votes that would have gone to Romney and Santorum anyway. And it appears that the Romney and Santorum collaboration that infowars is talking about was taken out of context. Romney and Santorum calculated that Romney would have won by 9 votes instead of 8. Romney didn't really care about Iowa anyway as he spent little energy on the ground their. He let Santorum have all the glory that he rightly deserves from his evangelical fans.