Maine GOP Recounting Votes!!!

Results posted at Maine GOP website.

recount results 2/17/12

Shows Romney ahead Romney:2269 Ron Paul:2030

Washington County votes will be added after the caucus tomorrow.

Originally posted by ogbert
Results posted at Maine GOP website.

recount results 2/17/12

Shows Romney ahead

Romney:2269 Ron Paul:2030

Washington County votes will be added after the caucus tomorrow.

I still see lots of zeros in that list, and they are not from Washington county. And aren't these the same numbers they released the other day with the uncounted caucuses?

reply to post by SpaDe_


They claim that it is the new numbers for 2/17/12 as they had promised yesterday, would be released today.
Washington County will be tomorrow; and, will be added.

posted at the main site.

Maine Republican Party Releases Presidential Preference Updated Results
– FEBRUARY 17, 2012
POSTED IN: LATEST NEWS, PRESS RELEASES, SLIDESHOW
The Maine Republican Party releases this information after informing both the Mitt Romney and Ron Paul campaigns with the understanding that we were doing so today.

Click here for Presidential Preference Poll Results. (February 17, 2012)

Beginning to perceive a pattern.

They cheat, we complain.

They do it over, cheating again, we complain.

They say, nothing is ever good enough for ya'all.

Like the Obama comment "can't wear my BC on my head all the time".

More of the same. Ron Paul supporters = fringe crazy people

Nothing changes...They pretend, public perceives effort, disinformation is disseminated.

(In Boss Hogg accent) "How many time we gotta falsify the results of this lection for ya'll to be satisfied?"

(In Rosco accent),,"coo, coo, coo, those Dukes"

Originally posted by ogbert
Results posted at Maine GOP website.

recount results 2/17/12

Shows Romney ahead

Romney:2269 Ron Paul:2030

Washington County votes will be added after the caucus tomorrow.

I'm looking at some these numbers and knowing the size of some these towns they just don't make sense. There are towns that have just a few hundred people you have more votes than towns that have few thousand people.

Another issue I noticed was that at least one town is completely missing, Dover-Foxcroft which is the county seat of Penobscot county. Then Aroostook county (Maine's largest county, though not most populated) is just lumped all together. Overall the southern counties are what decided the primary, not surprising if you know how politics works in Maine

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
The Maine GOP are pretty much damned if they do-damned if they don't. If they don't do a recount then Paul supporters are going to complain about voter fraud. If they do a recount and Paul still comes in second they're going to complain about voter fraud. While I definitely agree that all the votes in Maine need to be counted, nothing is going to change if Paul doesn't win the state. Even he does win things really won't change. Maine is a fairly minor state and he will win by such a small margin that it won't give him much of a surge in other states and most of the delegates are already Paul supporters who would vote for him regardless of who who their precinct actually voted for.

No they are not all they need to do is have an open fully transparent recount of all the votes instead of doing it in secret and then proclaiming winners. If this recount is not done with complete transparency and Paul does not win there is no reason to accept it and it should not be accepted period. To act like Paul supporters are being unreasonable is ridiculous until there is full transparency.

reply to post by hawkiye


I don't think people really get how in the bag this election was for Paul. They would have to personally know some people in Maine. Romney's own spokesperson said it was pretty much in the bag for Paul. This isn't corruption from the Romney campaign, it's corruption from the state GOP that are doing it on Romney's behalf.

reply to post by hawkiye


So you're saying that if Paul wins the recount but its not open you will dispute the results? Or do those rules only apply to everyone that isn't Paul?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by hawkiye

 

So you're saying that if Paul wins the recount but its not open you will dispute the results? Or do those rules only apply to everyone that isn't Paul?

The question is moot since if this is not an transparent recount I guarantee Paul will not win.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


I know it seems petty and it seems biased, but when you consider that the GOP is likely conspiring against RP alone it is less so. Also you have to consider there is motive and the same crooked people are doing the recount which I will never understand. All recounts should of course be done by a third party.

The motive of course would be a chance to widen the gap so it is harder/impossible to close tomorrow when more votes come in AND to discourage people questioning the count again. Also it does wonder for killing the story. If they can make Paul lose several times and get the spotlight moved on then it will severely hurt the story if he does win. People will say, look how much they had to do to get him to win, then start turning the rigging allegations towards Paul's camp even though that would really be impossible. They could announce the same count 5 times and then when he finally won say well there is manipulation because we had him behind and we counted 5 times. It's all a mess really.

reply to post by Carseller4


As much as I like Ron Pail, it doesn't matter. Right is right...

reply to post by elouina


Huh? So the same crooked guy that prematurely announced a crooked win, does the same thing a second time and now it's right? You kinda just got tricked into admitting you think the first time everything was ok.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Yeah, that was my first thought. "A leopard never changes his spots"

Webster: Paul Supporters 'Are Just Being Conspiracy Theorists' The Politico article then goes on to quote Webster sliming supporters of Ron Paul for objecting to his own faulty numbers and for not including the votes of voters who have yet to caucus when he announced Romney as the "winner" by just 194 votes last Saturday. Paul supporters "are just being conspiracy theorists," said Webster. "If they talked to any other legislators in Maine who are Ron Paul supporters, they would be told that I have been fair. ... What angers me is that people who question that I'm neutral don't know me." But, of course, we don't have to "know" Webster to know that he has, in the past, tried to deny legal voters from voting at all in the state of Maine, failed to include votes of voters who had already voted in caucuses in this year's results, and attempted to entirely disenfranchise voters from two entire counties. Thankfully, when votes are counted transparently and publicly, it doesn't matter if we "know", or even trust, any election official. The only thing that matters is what we are all able to oversee with our own eyes. Massive election fraud, as attempted by Charlie Webster here, is very difficult to pull off under those circumstances, as it is likely to be after tomorrow's final caucuses are held. As Swann correctly noted in his report last night: "There is stricter accountability when everyone can see and hear who is voting for whom. At least that seems to be happening as the people of Maine are demanding it." Just two days ago, according to the pretend rightwing "news" site, The Daily Caller, Webster claimed the state party had gone back to correct the original numbers, but would not report them to the public. "There will be no access" to the correct results, Webster said. "We will give it to the [state GOP] committee on March 10. We are not going to release them. People can whine and complain and plead, but I'm not going to make them public." So, there you have it. Webster doesn't believe that we, the people, should have the correct results about how the people of Maine voted. Instead, presumably, what the whining and complaining people deserve is only what he told them in his televised announcement of inaccurate results on Saturday night, when he said: "I'm now gonna announce the winner of the Maine GOP poll. And that winner is Mitt Romney." Webster reportedly told The Daily Caller that the updated numbers actually show Romney with a greater lead over Paul than he had on Saturday, and that the reason he would not release those numbers until the state committee meets on March 10th is that "people are going to sense a conspiracy and this is going to keep going." All Webster wants, the reports says, is for the "press feeding frenzy" to end.

Brad Blog

reply to post by ogbert


Yeah.. If I had committed massive fraud and then been an arrogant douche about it I would want the spotlight off of me as well. It should have been taken out of his hands the minute there was a hint of corruption. Instead they let him play with it further.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Well, at this point all I can say is lesson learned. The whole way of doing things needs to be revamped. Until then it will be farce after farce...

They need verbal counts of votes with a camera aimed on everything and everyone involved. Open to review by any citizen. And as much as folks hate it, I think every vote needs to be tied to a social security number. Plus even more needs to be done to make the system tamper proof. But what? Dunno... But I suspect a computer database in a locked room with armed guards (plural) would help. With encoded discs with the tabulated results hand carried to this databse. The results being entered onto the disk would need about 12 witnesses from all parties. The database is also accessed with a room full of witnesses and a video camera aimed on it. And each area would then need to review their results ( a printed rough draft) to confirm validity before any winner is announced. Yeah it would take longer to find the real winner, but worth it.

reply to post by elouina


In this day and age it could be as simple as a live feed. The second someone presses the button a ticker could show the room and world what the vote was and private citizens could get together to test it randomly all that would have to do is get a group together discuss their votes openly and then fill up all the booths at once and have on person watch and see if the predetermined votes matched up with what was shown outside at the same time. That way any like minded strong willed group could test the system themselves at any time without the vote organizers knowing.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


They can definately devise some sort of fail safe method. Look, we both spewed our ideas out with just a couple of minutes thought. I will no longer trust squat until they do. Whose idea is it that we do it the old way anyways. This is a country by the people for the people. And we should have a say. I have had enough of the US gov. or political parties telling me how things need to be done,

There is a term for only believing in things that support your own view...it is called confirmation bias.

It's not a good thing to have...it's a big negative trait.

But apparently...that is what Ron Paul supporters have. The only way they will believe that fraud hasn't taken place is if Ron Paul wins....anything else and the vote was rigged and Ron Paul was robbed.

It doesn't matter to me what happense tomorrow....if Ron Paul wins...great...I guess I was wrong about the voter turnout in Washington county. If he loses....great....I guess I was right.

You won't see me crying fraud just because in my OPINION, Ron Paul is very unlikely to pull out a win.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


No what we are seeing is dowright fraud. The system is broken. Right now all we can only hope for is close to perfect until they revamp it. At least we are getting a recount for now. But that is just a bandaid. I don't think we have any choice but to be satisfied with this bandaid. For now... Since the only way to do it right is to revamp things and do the caucus over.

And to be honest, all I ever see are mostly Ron Paul supporters. Something I have never seen before. Usually the folks around me are split. And the more fraud there is, the more RP supporters will come out and vote. And the more difficult it will be for the election fraud to not be noticed. I haven't voted in over a decade due to disgust. But you will be seeing me on election day if Ron Paul is on the ballot.

A vote count should never be an approximation, it needs to always be exact.

The public seems to have developed a tolerance for errors in these events which should not be tolerated.

I do not believe that they can not get this right with current technology (paper ballots, huge black pens and optical readers).

They should go to jail for this. We lost the ballots is no excuse.