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.

 

Evidence of Election Fraud in Iowa and NH?

page: 6
44
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 05:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Ron Paul should wish he got "only a 3rd" of the independendents.
No such luck; that's a lot of votes, and no single candidate got that big a chunk of them.


Well, maybe so, but it appears that a ride range of independents are backing him. According to his campaign they captured 29% of the independent vote in Iowa. I know that's not quite a third, but pretty close. I think more will switch to him because he is more solid on issues than Obama, who also has some independent voter support.

www.unionleader.com...


Paul, a U.S. representative from Texas, said he captured 29 percent of the independent vote in Iowa, and "when we saw those statistics, we knew the obvious opportunities in New Hampshire" with its 44 percent of independent voters.



As for the Boston.Com article, it's obvious that it is a case of misalignment of the columns or some such. I live in NH and I can tell you that there is no way Ron Paul had such wide support. Ten percent, tops. I'm not convinced by some blurry, jittery YouTube videos. That reminds me of those alien or ufo vids that are always cropping up here. I want the figures laid out on my desk so I can analyze them myself.


Yeah well good luck getting access to the REAL figures. I don't think ANYONE really knows what those are except those privy to the fricken code in those damn voting machines.

And I don't agree that it's "obvious." How in the hell do you explain the results dropping in the CNN results, as posted just above in my other post on the previous page? Clearly there is something going on behind the scenes here.

And by the way, youtube videos are blurry due to the video compression most of the time, not due to their content.

[edit on 10-1-2008 by TrueAmerican]




posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 05:30 AM
link   
Again, I shall re-ask my question as it was (by no surprised) ignored



My question to you guys, if Ron Paul was winning the votes and finishing in the top spot, would you still call voting fraud if evidence showed Romney or McCains votes were not counted?


I'm starting to think the Ron Paul crowd wouldn't



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 05:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
I am sorry to disappoint you, but it's coming knowledge on ATS that Rense is far from a credible source.


Now really, I am amazed infinite. Is that the best you got? Attacking the source? I am well aware of the reputation Rense has here. I suppose if you haven't learned by now to evaluate the message and not the messenger, well you are really just fooling yourself. Did you read the article? Makes all the sense in the world to me. I don't care if it's from rense, jones, or even- you. Content counts more than sources for me.


My question to you guys, if Ron Paul was winning the votes and finishing in the top spot, would you still call voting fraud if evidence showed Romney or McCains votes were not counted?


If there was any evidence of anomalies, you're damn straight I would, and I'd be willing to bet Ron Paul would too. He's not the type to go stealing an election unlike some others who are in office. I'd even venture to say he wouldn't accept the Presidency if he felt he got there by questionable means. That's the kind of man he is.

[edit on 10-1-2008 by TrueAmerican]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 05:42 AM
link   
Actually I believe also that some of them would not cry 'foul' if RP was gaining extra votes. But considering the fact that most of the people on this forum are genuinely paranoid (not saying they are paranoid enough), I am pretty sure that most WOULD be unhappy with such events.

After all.. if RP were gaining votes, it would mean he has the backing of the PTB (if they really 'be') and would thus be untrustworthy. There are enough conspiracies as it is about RP being 'too good to be true'.

[edit on 10-1-2008 by Alphard]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 05:56 AM
link   


Now really, I am amazed infinite. Is that the best you got? Attacking the source?


Seeing Rense does not have a good track record, yes. I read the article, Ron Paul is not going to complain cause the mainstream media would have a field day. The biggest weapon to use against Paul is his supporters in the conspiracy field, if he sides with them, it's game over.



If there was any evidence of anomalies, you're damn straight I would, and I'd be willing to bet Ron Paul would too. He's not the type to go stealing an election unlike some others who are in office. I'd even venture to say he wouldn't accept the Presidency if he felt he got there by questionable means. That's the kind of man he is.


Hand on heart, can you honestly say he would reject office? I know, you would be the first to call foul play on election fraud but others wouldn't if Paul was getting the votes. Especially Jones.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 06:04 AM
link   
I reluctantly jump into this thread.

If this voter fraud truly occurred, the one who in my opinion should be most upset is none othr than Tom Tancredo!

Watch the video below and try and take your eyes off the Paul and McCain columns. Look at the pile of votes for Tancredo. Here's a guy who has been out of the race for some time. Are people really as dillusional to think Tancredo garnered this many votes?

It is obvious the columns are misaligned. Nothing more.

www.youtube.com...

Becker



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
Seeing Rense does not have a good track record, yes. I read the article, Ron Paul is not going to complain cause the mainstream media would have a field day. The biggest weapon to use against Paul is his supporters in the conspiracy field, if he sides with them, it's game over.


I agree, to a point. But conspiracy theorists represent a rather small portion of his total support, and he really has no need to go out of his way to sign on to their base- because he really doesn't need to. He has a lot of their support regardless.


Hand on heart, can you honestly say he would reject office?


Yes I honestly feel he would not accept office under those circumstances. That my be inconceivable to some.


I know, you would be the first to call foul play on election fraud but others wouldn't if Paul was getting the votes. Especially Jones.


Well honestly I don't know if Jones would or not. But if his site is any indication, as much as he has fought for a fair election system, I'd venture to say he would too.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
I want the figures laid out on my desk so I can analyze them myself.


I am sure we would all like that. It seems that voting has become equivalent to playing a slot machine or roulette.

"Cm'on Ron Paul! Ron Paul, baby! Damn, Mitt Romney..."

If you vote, your vote should count without the possibility to be changed and with a paper trail to be re-countable. With these machines, you leave your future to the will of the men who operate them. I would prefer to vote for the character I see fit and leave these obscure men of the machine out of the process.


Originally posted by infinite
My question to you guys, if Ron Paul was winning the votes and finishing in the top spot, would you still call voting fraud if evidence showed Romney or McCains votes were not counted?

Rense and Alex Jones wouldn't.


Not likely. I would expect the McCain and Romney supporters to speak out for their candidate, and I would neither support nor deny them. If one chooses to allow an injustice occur, then he is responsible to the consequence of the injustices thereafter.

The mismanagement of votes and destruction of results are well documented and easily found with a web search. So you cannot blame the Ron Paul supporters for expecting (Ron Paul live.com) and fighting for a "Fair and Balanced" primary. I do not want the election given to Ron Paul, but at the same time I do not want his potential to win taken from him.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 07:31 AM
link   
LHS Associates, voting oversight, and criminal records

In a new article by Bev over at BlackBoxVoting.org, she points out:


They program every single voting machine in New Hampshire, Connecticut, almost all of Massachusetts, Vermont, and Maine. But did state officials in five New England states ever do a criminal background check on this company's executives? Do the laws of these five states even ALLOW them to hire convicted criminals for services paid for by the state? What about over 500 local towns and municipalities?

According to my sources, LHS Marketing and Sales Director Ken Hajjar grew up with owner John Silvestro in Lawrence, Massachusetts. They both moved to Londonderry, New Hampshire, where Ken Hajjar was arrested, indicted, and pleaded guilty to "sale / CND" and sentenced to 12 months in the Rockingham County Correctional facility, and fined $2000. As things go for the politically connected, he was then given a deferred sentence and $1000 of his fine was suspended.


And then she asks some real good questions:


Did they know of Hajjar's criminal background? If so, why's he toting voting machine cards around in the trunk of his car in case they are "needed" in live elections, and if not, why not?


Which makes me wonder-

Shouldn't it be required by state, or even federal law that election commission officials, due to the sensitive nature of their jobs, have squeaky clean criminal records and also be elected members of the public instead of typically, state governor appointed?

And shouldn't it be federal or state law that the election process not be subject, ever, to private monopoly control over voting machines? Shouldn't the code be accessible for pertinent public review?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Becker44
 


Becker44,
I saw that as well when I printed the results the first time before they changed them on the Boston Globe website. If indeed Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo really did receive that many votes the only thing I would be surprised about would be Tancredo as you pointed out. I have not heard very much about him at all with even less coverage than Ron Paul so that is something I noticed right off the bat as well. However, this still doesnt alleviate the fact that Ron Paul votes in various counties, like Sutton, did not count or lost the Ron Paul paper ballot votes because of "human error"....ALL 31 OF THEM!!!! THAT'S LIKE SAYING I WENT TO THE SUPER BOWL AND OOPS...I LOST MY TICKETS!! Seriously, this stinks of voter fraud and malfeasance but again I'm not really surprised. Guess I should have expected this all along. On another note, wouldn't McCain have raised more money if he had that many votes in the most Independent state in the Union???? One would think that to be the case but then again you would think that since 70% of Americans oppose the war that it would have some effect. Did McCain's followers think he was going to continue the race for the Whitehouse without money since he has less than Ron Paul to this date??? Just my opinion folks, let's hope things get set right.


Purduegrad05



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Here is an interesting piece on how Hillary shocked New Hampshire with her upset victory over Obama in the state's primary:


mediatake out.com
...So when she emerged from the Tuesday primary with an 8,000-vote and 3-percentage-point victory over Obama, perhaps — considering the notorious unreliability, not to mention hackability, of Diebold machines — the media might have hoisted a few red flags in the coverage, rather than immediately chalk the results up to Clinton’s tears and voter unpredictability. (Oh, if only more reporters considered red flags patriotic.)


There are some interesting charts and images to document the discrepencies of hand-counted to Diebold counted ballots.

I don't know the cred of this site but since we are posting up some potential fraud in the primary, I thought I would post it up for you to take a look at.

One thing for sure, the infamous Diebold voting machines must go, maybe some serious scrutiny in these caucuses/primaries can raise enough attention that something could be done prior to the general election this November.

The vote count should be transparent and videotaped and available to the public at will. If it is an honest count, there should be no complaints about documenting the process in a completely open way.

The fraud allegations have made it to the Dallas Morning News as well, it covers most of the same here but it is nice to see this is making some news.

dallasnews.com



[edit on 1/10/2008 by JacKatMtn]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Becker44
 



Originally posted by TrueAmerican
And I don't agree that it's "obvious." How in the hell do you explain the results dropping in the CNN results, as posted just above in my other post on the previous page? Clearly there is something going on behind the scenes here.

Well, McCain's numbers dropped also, at around the same time. So what caused it? Who knows?


Originally posted by Becker44
Watch the video below and try and take your eyes off the Paul and McCain columns. Look at the pile of votes for Tancredo. Here's a guy who has been out of the race for some time. Are people really as dillusional to think Tancredo garnered this many votes?

It is obvious the columns are misaligned. Nothing more.

www.youtube.com...

Becker

I noticed that too. It's gotta be a misalignment/formatting problem.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Instead of crying voter fraud, can't you just accept the fact that Racist Paul is the loser he is ? Its like Sanjaya on American Idol. They are both freaks that were fun to watch up to a point. But the amusement factor has run its course and its time to get serious in this election. If this racist piece of garbage had any decency, he would get out now and not try and turn this election into more of a circus that it already is.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:26 AM
link   
There's multitude of pollforgers running loose - each supporting his own canditate and rigging the memory cards accordingly. Or then they just want Hillary to win.


Originally posted by TheArchAngel
All of the kooks are packed in Ron Paul's corner now. They cannot even get by one primary without crying foul.


... And shouldn't you be backing up your own canditate instead of trying to mock someone's else canditate? I get feeling you're getting paid for getting laid. Anyway, no use to reply on this cuz I will block you like any decent one would.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:31 AM
link   
I know that alternet is not everyones cup of tea, and frankly, I check with other sources before I post their articles, as I find their spin can be a little misleading at times (wow - a new skill, diplomacy
)
But they have been producing articles warning of the dangers of electronic voting for months now.
www.alternet.org...

I also fine it more than a tad ironic that this thread is getting so much attention, when a thread that warned of the flaws of electronic voting got only 9 replies and was swamped by a thread about government porn filters


Maybe it's just me



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 


Ok so let's see:
The columns were just misaligned in Boston Globe's case. Aight.
CNN's computers were just misaligned too. Ic.
Sutton, NH just forgot to report the votes. ok.
The Director of Sales and Marketing of LHS just happens to be a former criminal. no prob.
It was just that ONE machine in Bev's video that couldn't count properly. Uh huh. (By the way, how in the hell do you show up to a state hearing with a voting machine that doesn't even count right, when you're going specifically to validate it's integrity?
Doesn't that say something about how ridiculous these machines are?)
There is no voting fraud here people, move along, nothing to see here.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
Hand on heart, can you honestly say he would reject office? I know, you would be the first to call foul play on election fraud but others wouldn't if Paul was getting the votes. Especially Jones.


And why is it that you will never see such an instance where votes from other candidates are given to Ron Paul? Because the votes are no more counted by Ron Paul than Mitt Romney, or John McCain, or any other candidate. It is those who count the votes that should be investigated should such fraud and corruption be found existent and it is the fraudulent and corruptible qualities of these individuals that you will not find in Ron Paul. This is why I disbelieve that Ron Paul would neither gain office by fraudulent activities, nor retain office if clear evidence of activities were apparent.

It would be unfortunate for any candidate to have a primary stolen from him or her due to fraud as much as it would be unfortunate for any candidate to have a primary given to him or her by the same circumstance. Each act is no less a crime. And I would let the individuals who support their candidates speak out against whatever falsifications may arise should they have the passion and courage to do so regardless of the benefit or loss.

My main concern would be the act of deceit itself as a corrupt vote for one candidate would be a distorted vote for all. If Ron Paul had won the primary due to fraud how could any Ron Paul supporter say it would be a commendable act or a victory, since Paul stands for all those moral and constitutional principles that they who would deceive us with such a tactic are against?

Understand that the tables are turned and it is the McCain crowd and the Romney crowd who are absent from this debate calling out against the possibility of voter fraud against Ron Paul and possibly Barack Obama. If a thread was started entitled "Evidence of Election Fraud" in some state and the individual on whom the fraud was committed was John McCain or Mitt Romney you would not find me on that thread. I support neither of these men and my appearance on such a thread would probably reflect that, but quite unlike those who have come to this thread to express their disagreement. That does not mean I would condone such deception, or would disrupt a thread where evidence of such deception was asked to be compiled.

Ron Paul Vote Fraud New Hampshire District Sutton Pt 1. Alex Jones on New Hampshire, for what it is worth




Pt 2 | Pt 3 | Pt 4 | Pt 5 | Pt 6 | Pt 7 | Pt 8



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:04 AM
link   



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by TheArchAngel
 


Ron Paul has already addressed this FALSE report..and is now doing so again since sokme people obviously did not read it the FIRST time..so here you go.

www.ronpaul2008.com...

Press Releases › Ron Paul Statement on The New Republic Article Regarding Old Newsletters
January 8, 2008 5:28 am EST

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA – In response to an article published by The New Republic, Ron Paul issued the following statement:

“The quotations in The New Republic article are not mine and do not represent what I believe or have ever believed. I have never uttered such words and denounce such small-minded thoughts.

“In fact, I have always agreed with Martin Luther King, Jr. that we should only be concerned with the content of a person's character, not the color of their skin. As I stated on the floor of the U.S. House on April 20, 1999: ‘I rise in great respect for the courage and high ideals of Rosa Parks who stood steadfastly for the rights of individuals against unjust laws and oppressive governmental policies.’

“This story is old news and has been rehashed for over a decade. It's once again being resurrected for obvious political reasons on the day of the New Hampshire primary.

“When I was out of Congress and practicing medicine full-time, a newsletter was published under my name that I did not edit. Several writers contributed to the product. For over a decade, I have publicly taken moral responsibility for not paying closer attention to what went out under my name.”

###


©2007 Ron Paul 2008 PCC Contact Us | Privacy Policy Paid for by the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by dirtonwater
Instead of crying voter fraud, can't you just accept the fact that Racist Paul is the loser he is ? Its like Sanjaya on American Idol. They are both freaks that were fun to watch up to a point. But the amusement factor has run its course and its time to get serious in this election. If this racist piece of garbage had any decency, he would get out now and not try and turn this election into more of a circus that it already is.


Is Ron Paul a racists?



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join