Ron Paul supporter asking RP Nev voters to email details for independent recount. Count at 2029

Hi Everyone,

First off, this is my first post on ATS so please be nice. I know that a lot of people disagree with claims of Ron Paul voter fraud and I personally agree with these people. I unfortunately think that a lot of people claim to be supporters online but then do not show up to vote, resulting in Ron Paul winning online polls but not winning actual elections.

While I do not think voter fraud is happening, I am interested in what a Ron Paul supporter is trying to do online. He is asking Ron Paul Nevadan voters to email a newly created gmail account with their name, county, and precinct in order to do an independent count of emails/votes. I understand that this method can be easily manipulated and is by no means "fool-proof" but I do think it is an interesting grassroots effort to try and put some numbers to the claims.

My intention for this post is to hopefully inform some Nevadan Ron Paul supporters of this effort and encourage them to email their info. While I don't know if anything will be accomplished from this, I believe the internet is a powerful tool allowing us to reach masses of people, If injustices have occurred, it is within our power to find out about these injustices. Again, I want to reiterate that I understand this method is open to corruption and manipulation, but I think it's interesting nonetheless.

www.dailypaul.com...

Edit: Sorry mods. I did not post this in the right forum. Please feel free to move. Thanks

this should happen, from what I can see it looks to me as if that vote was rigged, I have been tempting to create a website for a while now where people put who they voted for on the website for almost like a second independent count, but I am still not sure how it will works.

reply to post by definity


Unfortunately I don't think there's enough info available to determine if it was rigged or not. There has been very little in regards to televised counting and what was shown was in overwhelming support of Ron Paul. Because of this, the doors have been opened for talk of voter fraud and I support this simple, grassroots movement to try and put validity into assertions of fraud.

I think there was absolutely voter fraud.
I am not saying it is all a sham.. but I think They didn't want Paul topping Gingrich. I think a legit count would show him far ahead of Gingrich and not far from Romney. Look, there is voter fraud in every big election in history. It is a fact of life. Paul came in second in Nevada in 2008. It is one of his better states. He would only have done better with more support this year.

I think there is something wrong with it. He wont two counties. The county that the whole caucus depended on was way late with their count, live feed showed he won handily with one of the groups he does the worst in. The final county in question should of been his best showing and was adjacent to the two counties he did win.
Something is definitely up.

This is an interesting idea. I cant think of any way to measure this that isnt watertight against possible abuse, but it seems reasonable and I would be interested to see the results.

One thing I am confused about though, is why the televised vote and results are being taken as the rule, rather than the exception? If Ron Paul is acknowledged to have picked up more votes that expected from Jewish voters (an uncommon occurence) isnt it just as likely that his winning of the televised vote is also just an uncommon occurence?

If you replicate a scientific experiment 100 times and get the same result 99 times and a different result once, you would always use the result you got 99 times.

reply to post by ComeFindMe


They aren't being taken as the rule.. they are being taken as a confusing anomaly. Like, how come when everyone is looking Paul wins with three times the vote Romney got, yet does poorly when the votes are counted privately. The fact that he wont by such a margin with a group that is usually adamantly anti Paul is the icing on the cake. Basically, I think everyone wishes there were more live counts so it could be determined whether it was a fluke or not, but for now, it just stands out as highly unusual and is enough to raise a little suspicion in my honest opinion.

I think that the vote count should be hooked up and in real time for all to see.. should have been that way for ten years now. Too bad we live in a technophobic world.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


That's a fair point, but even the most hardened conspriacist would agree that anomalies are common place in electoral voting.

If there is such a concerted effort to keep him out, why was this vote televised?

I think Ron Paul, for an 'outsider' has done tremendously well - I wonder though, given the general leaning to him on these forums (not a criticism) that perhaps those that surf here often are bombarded so much with RP that when they do 'step back' from ATS - where there isnt that RP focus - it makes a relatively innocent and innocuous gap in popularity more sinister.

reply to post by ComeFindMe


One group of like 200 people was all that was televised and I think it was only recorded because it was a special deal after the voting had actually ended for the day. It wasn't during normal voting hours so I guess they wanted to make sure they had it on record since the normal system wasn't in place.

I don't know really. I see lots of people supporting him on facebook as well and not because my friends and I share a lot of ideology either. I see support from him coming from everywhere. I was a dem until last year, so a lot of my friends are still. I know a few that have switched though.

Personally I have seen a surge in popularity for Ron Paul. Recently I had family members that would not vote for him have a change of heart once I sat down with them and explained his stance on issues.

I explained that many people are going through the denial phase of their emotions right now and Anger comes next, sure enough it did. My grandparents who I never thought would vote for Ron went out and voted in the early primaries for him! I can honestly say now that my whole family is voting for Ron Paul.

I think this is an excellent idea and is a step in the right direction for showing how many people voted. Now it is going to be interesting if he gets over 6000 emails....


-Kdial1

Is Ron Paul a Scientist?

reply to post by boncho


Nope sorry...I mistakenly posted this in the wrong forum...Hopefully mods will move for me. :-)

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
I think there was absolutely voter fraud.
I am not saying it is all a sham.. but I think They didn't want Paul topping Gingrich. I think a legit count would show him far ahead of Gingrich and not far from Romney. Look, there is voter fraud in every big election in history. It is a fact of life. Paul came in second in Nevada in 2008. It is one of his better states. He would only have done better with more support this year.

I think there is something wrong with it. He wont two counties. The county that the whole caucus depended on was way late with their count, live feed showed he won handily with one of the groups he does the worst in. The final county in question should of been his best showing and was adjacent to the two counties he did win.
Something is definitely up.

The facts are that voter turn out was very low in Nevada this year. In relative terms, Ron Paul DID do much better in Nevada this year than in 2008. Romney lost votes and percentage, Paul gained votes and percentage...not by much but he did.

Romney in 2008 had 22,646 votes (51%) in the Nevada Primary. This year he had 16,486 (50%) votes, a decrease of 6,106 votes.

Paul in 2008 had 6,084 votes (12%) in Nevada. This year he had 6,175 votes (19%) in Nevada. An increas of 91 votes. Yes, not a significant increase...but compared to Romney who lost votes...Ron Paul did statistically better in 2012 when compared with Romney.

Also, voter turnout was low this year. Voter turnout in 2008 was 44,315, this year it was 32,894. So it was down by 11,421.

Nevada 2008 Results

Nevada 2012 Results


And in Clark County, he did much better than in 2008. In 2008 he got 2,842 votes (12%), in 2012 he got 3,271 (19%). Romney got about 4,000 less votes in Clark County than he did in 2012.


So tell me...why would you rig a vote to make someone win and appear as the front runner and at the same time decrease his support from 2008???


And please don't try to pretend he did well with the Jewish vote, it is common knowledge now that Ron Paul supporters crashed that caucus and that is why he won.

I also know a lot of people who are Ron Paul supporters from many different backgrounds, so it does raise suspicion as to why so many seem to support him yet the numbers don't show up. And with so much secrecy within the counting system, it again leaves room for suspicion. Something needs to be done and I hope people will flag this thread to at least support a grassroots movement, that may not be perfect but is a start.

Originally posted by curedby432
reply to post by boncho

 

Nope sorry...I mistakenly posted this in the wrong forum...Hopefully mods will move for me. :-)

Well, now you made me feel bad for my sarcasm.




S&F

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


OutkastSearcher, I think the bigger problem is the lack of faith in the current process for counting votes. I think we can all agree there are more efficient and reliable methods for counting votes and that is the major problem for me. As I stated before, I agree with you that voter turnout is simply not happening. I think it is much easier to show support online than it is to actually go out and vote and that is what we are seeing here. Unfortunately, the current system makes it too easy for counts to be questionable or wrong, leading into all this talk of fraud. With all the available technology, I would think it should be easier for the US to come up with something better than Diebold machines which are known to be faulty and easily hacked, or paper ballots that can easily be lost or miscounted.

reply to post by boncho


No prob...This was my first post and now I know that if I am in a specific forum and try to open a new thread, it will open in that forum. Fairly logical but apparently too difficult for me to understand this morning...oh well..there's always next time.

Eventually by the 49th or 50th state they should be on to the tricks and catch them red handed. If not then i guess the old saying is right, its not who votes that counts its who counts the votes.

Originally posted by curedby432
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

OutkastSearcher, I think the bigger problem is the lack of faith in the current process for counting votes. I think we can all agree there are more efficient and reliable methods for counting votes and that is the major problem for me. As I stated before, I agree with you that voter turnout is simply not happening. I think it is much easier to show support online than it is to actually go out and vote and that is what we are seeing here. Unfortunately, the current system makes it too easy for counts to be questionable or wrong, leading into all this talk of fraud. With all the available technology, I would think it should be easier for the US to come up with something better than Diebold machines which are known to be faulty and easily hacked, or paper ballots that can easily be lost or miscounted.

Dibold machines were not used in Nevada...it was all hand written ballots.

And people keep claiming these were counted in "private" or "secret" just because they weren't televised. But each campaign has a staffer at each precinct to monitor the vote and ensure the counts are reported correctly.

This is why you don't hear Ron Paul's campaign calling fraud...they KNOW the votes are accurate. Believe me, if they had any suspicion or evidence of the counts being off...they would be screaming about it.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

Originally posted by curedby432
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

OutkastSearcher, I think the bigger problem is the lack of faith in the current process for counting votes. I think we can all agree there are more efficient and reliable methods for counting votes and that is the major problem for me. As I stated before, I agree with you that voter turnout is simply not happening. I think it is much easier to show support online than it is to actually go out and vote and that is what we are seeing here. Unfortunately, the current system makes it too easy for counts to be questionable or wrong, leading into all this talk of fraud. With all the available technology, I would think it should be easier for the US to come up with something better than Diebold machines which are known to be faulty and easily hacked, or paper ballots that can easily be lost or miscounted.

Dibold machines were not used in Nevada...it was all hand written ballots.

And people keep claiming these were counted in "private" or "secret" just because they weren't televised. But each campaign has a staffer at each precinct to monitor the vote and ensure the counts are reported correctly.

This is why you don't hear Ron Paul's campaign calling fraud...they KNOW the votes are accurate. Believe me, if they had any suspicion or evidence of the counts being off...they would be screaming about it.

I understand the Diebold machines weren't used in Nevada, but they are used in many other states, contributing to this idea of voter fraud.

And while ensuring a campaign staffer is present to monitor votes, I still do not think that method is totally free from possibility of corruption. Obviously difficult and unlikely, but the problem is that Americans have lost so much confidence in their government and its processes, that it is probably easier to cry fraud than accept personal responsibility that most don't vote. Irregardless, I still think that the current system is open to corruption, hence my support of a grass roots movement to review.

reply to post by curedby432


Just looking for an existing thread for this information...

here goes, when I went to take my Grandpa to vote I helped him with his ballot and it was really weird, I saw a whole line of candidates who were not even still in the running, santorum was in that midst and at the bottom almost invisible was Ron Paul! Grandpa could not see Rons name the way it was presented! I had to draw his attention to the bottom before he saw it.

Huh.