It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Ron Paul Votes Not Counted In New Hampshire District

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 06:58 PM
should close this thread and so people can use the larger one of the same thing:

posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 07:02 PM

If you voted for Ron Paul, or if you intend to vote for Ron Paul, register your vote TODAY!

if you intend to vote?

It doesn't offer the option to say "I DID vote" vs. "I intend to vote".

I could say I intend today, then don't actually tomorrow. Nice idea, but flawed.

posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 07:47 PM
reply to post by mirageofdeceit

ah. I see. I didn't read that part. Well, it was a good sentiment. In any case, I cant trust any Diebold machines, or any totals counted by them, especially if they counted over 80% of all the votes.

posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 07:52 PM
reply to post by chris_stibrany

The report doesn't say they didn't count ANY of his votes. It said that in at least one town, they reported 0 votes, when in fact, the Clerk for that town called in and said the real tally for Dr. Paul was 31.

so we're suggesting, if it happened in one town, it may have very well have happened in many others. If one town can mistakingly release an incorrect number without anyone double checking, then all are suspect.

posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 08:40 PM

Ron Paul got more than 7% with 99% precincts counted.

posted on Jan, 9 2008 @ 11:56 PM
reply to post by deltaboy

Not sure you're trying to say with this, as that's the 'official' tally. We bringing into question the uncounted votes that were later proven (AFTER THE OFFICIAL TALLY WAS REPORTED) to be for Dr. Paul. And because it has documented proof in one precinct, there may be more. Obviously, I'm not espousing that Ron won, but he may have gotten more than Giuliani, and maybe even Huckabee.

posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 10:06 PM

What do you mean his votes weren't counted!!!

They were counted and then promptly deleted from the touch screen voting mainframe.

posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 09:24 AM

Ron Paul has said firmly that he does not believe he was cheated of votes by fraud in New Hampshire. A few overzealous supporters aren’t listening—that’s their prerogative. But some of them are also doing things that embarrass Dr. Paul and reflect badly on his movement. The Concord Monitor reports one dismaying episode: a town clerk in New Hampshire, Jennifer Call, is getting harangued by people who refuse to believe she made an innocent mistake when she under-counted the Paul vote in her area.

On election night, she reported zero votes for Dr. Paul. It was an error — Dr. Paul had actually received 31 votes — and by morning it had been corrected. But that wasn’t enough for some folks, and Call found herself getting hostile calls and being attacked on-line: “my name is being splashed across the internet as this horrible person,” she told the Monitor.

Can you imagine Dr. Paul haranguing anybody for a simple mistake? Of course not, and Paul supporters who are acting in good faith shouldn’t do so either. Never be rude to election officials, most of whom, like Ms. Call, are regular people. They should be treated just like your neighbors.

Dr. Paul puts the highest premium on courtesy, and people always deserve the benefit of the doubt. Machines are a different story: nobody has to like the Diebold voting machines. I know I much prefer paper ballots. But here too, Paul supporters need to keep their priorities straight. Dr. Paul is running a political campaign, not a detective agency. If you’re serious about helping Paul, put your efforts into canvassing and getting out the vote. Protests and investigations into Diebold won’t win the nomination.

Yes, New Hampshire counties where votes were cast using machines gave Dr. Paul proportionately fewer votes than counties where votes were tallied by hand; the difference was about 2%. But there were bigger disparities in the machine and hand votes for Mike Huckabee (2.6% fewer votes in machine-counted counties) and John McCain (nearly 3% fewer). And if you think Mitt Romney supporters were rigging things, why wouldn’t they rig them so he’d win the gold, rather than the silver?

There are all kinds of other wacky theories going around that ought to be shot down: for example, the idea that because a Jan. 5 Rasmussen poll pegged Dr. Paul’s support at around 14% in New Hampshire, fraud must account for the final outcome. Trouble is, a final Rasmussen poll in New Hampshire found Dr. Paul’s support at 8%. The numbers don’t suggest any funny business.

Anyone who really wants to see Ron Paul win the nomination should focus their attention on getting out the vote, and should never be rude or hostile to election officials.

Source, Ron Paul's Blog

I have always thought that Ron Paul's greatest weakness is his supporters. There is fanatical devotion that serves merely to undermine what is, in many respects, a good and important message. His supporters have overshadowed his message, fatal to any politician.

This also shows that his campaign has judged that his supporters are doing more harm than good. The fact that it took them this long to figure that out is unfortunately for their campaign.

I think, if they really support him, they owe it to him to pull it back a bit.

[edit on 1/16/2008 by Togetic]

posted on Jan, 16 2008 @ 09:48 AM
Couldn't agree more.

The problem is that a LOT of people who have never had any interest in politics before now do. Ron Paul is bringing people out of the woodwork and a lot of them have no idea how politics works.

It is unfortunate and I do wish people would back off. I mean me ranting on AP is hardly hurting anything but some kids in my town actually spray painted "Ron Paul Revolution" on an overpass, and that is the ONLY mention of Ron Paul that has been on local TV. Harassing poll workers is another example of taking it too far.

It's BS for sure, but these kinds of things don't help.

posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 09:45 PM
Shades of Kenedy's mafia aided election win of 1960. Not that the mafia is behind this. Just the NWO. That's who is responsible for these shenanigans as we all know Hillary is the darling of the NWO establishment and it's 'liberal' left media outlets. It was the same with her campaign in NM last week with that court case.

posted on Jan, 24 2008 @ 12:36 AM
Why don't people see that this action is being taken yet again?! We don't stand up for anything anymore! I am a patriot for this country but its kinda getting old standing with only a few.

RON PAUL 2008! Right?

<< 1   >>

log in