It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Summary/TL;DR
Either the first precincts to report were widely unrepresentative of Iowa as a whole, or something screwy happened.
Conclusion
If my three assumptions are correct, the probability of observing partial results like we saw is extremely small. It’s much more likely that one of the assumptions is wrong. It could be that the early reports were wrong, though that seems unlikely. The other websites showed the same information or very similar, so it seems doubtful that an error occurred in passing along the information.
Was there something odd about the precincts that reported early? This is not something you could tell just by looking at split vs final data. The data clearly show that the later precincts disfavored Ron Paul, but that’s just what we want to know: did they really disfavor him, or was the data manipulated in some way. The question is, were any of the results faked, tweaked, massaged, Diebold-ed?
To answer that question, we’d need to know if these later precincts to report were expected, beforehand, to disfavor Ron Paul relative to the others. It would also help to look at entrance polling from all of the precincts, and compare the ones that were part of the early reporting versus those that were part of the later reports. At this point, I have to ask for help from you, citizen of the internet. Is this something we can figure out?
Originally posted by Ex_CT2
All I know is that if Rove is involved in any way whatsoever, it's crooked and fraudulent.
Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by TupacShakur
You should all chew on this and let me know what you think: Iowa: Was the fix in? (a statistical analysis of the results):
Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Praetorius
I hope the media idolizes Huntsman as much as they do Rick Santorum, because once he gets up there. He won't go anywhere but up! Name me one bad thing about the guy??? You can't because it's as close to a true Ronald Reagan conservative as we have. Huntsman is the man to beat Romney. Ron Paul sadly is too fringe for the rest of America. If he couldn't win Iowa, He's not going to do any better in New Hampshire where everybody can vote.
I hope the media idolizes Huntsman as much as they do Rick Santorum, because once he gets up there. He won't go anywhere but up! Name me one bad thing about the guy??? You can't because it's as close to a true Ronald Reagan conservative as we have. Huntsman is the man to beat Romney. Ron Paul sadly is too fringe for the rest of America. If he couldn't win Iowa, He's not going to do any better in New Hampshire where everybody can vote.
Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by Shark_Feeder
I requested that it was deleted because all of the so-called "evidence" basically amounted to nothing.
There's a YouTube video of Karl Rove describing a "gentlemens agreement", which I originally thought happened in two counties, but that actually only applied to a single precinct in one county.