Examiner: Iowa Vote Fraud Official

page: 4
70
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by AliceBlackman
reply to post by MidnightTide
 


How is that possible that RP got no delegates from Iowa ?
I was listening to Neil Bortz on WSB Radio the night of the Iowa cacus, where exit polls were also showing him in the lead and he said there were lots of RP supporters there waiting for the longer process to get themselves appointed as delegates.




It's easy and perfectly possible, because it is a SCAM SHAM bag of fu*k!


U
edit on 22-1-2012 by USarmyFL because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by eLPresidente
 


Of course? Where did they go? Are they sitting somewhere, are they counted but not verified? No .. they are "missing" .. I'm not sure about you.. but I've never known inanimate objects to sprout legs and run away, hide, conceal themselves or otherwise manage to vanish into thin air. The ballots are gone .. if vanished then they vanished by someones actions not of their own accord.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bilder
reply to post by eLPresidente
 

Hardly surprising that they are pulling this sh*t what is surprising is the absolute apathy shown by the population in general,you guys know RP is much more popular than the MSM is letting on but its still bussiness as usual



It is incredibly dissapointing to see the general level of naievety of a supposedly savvy bunch of people.
why the hell didn't the ron paul voters organise to tally there votes amongst themselves to provide an actual number against which the official count could be measured.
Ron Paul voters in pursuit of libertarian ideals would not mind providing the information to ensure a fair and honest process, after the way Ron Paul was dropped out of the 08 race i thought you guys would try and be prepared for it again this time round.
The one politician motivating the people to donate and become activist is losing to people that have polled lower than ron paul, well, up until the voting process started and as if by majick they were equal and now ahead.
ORGANISE to collect EVIDENCE of the ACTUAL NUMBERS, or forever be sitting on the sidelines moaning that your democracy is being defrauded, and the process subverted.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by litterbaux
 


I never claimed the voting process was completely accurate...not anywhere.

My issue is with claiming that this somehow screwed Ron Paul out of some amazing victory in Iowa. Ron Paul was not going to win Iowa...no matter how many votes were lost.


So If votes were lost or uncounted, thats not an issue to you? Well, as long as its RP its ok, right? RP finished a close third in Iowa, the percentage of lost or uncounted votes might of changed that.

I havent been a member long but have followed the site for awhile. I did notice the mod tag, and I'll admit I havent noticed the mod tag before, but I do hope the others have a more honest and unbaised point of view.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kristinaso
So all the voter fraud comes from Republicans?
Interesting.


Yeah, only republicans.


Hi, I'm Earth. Have we met?



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 06:10 PM
link   
The way I see it: They were going to discredit Iowa if Ron Paul won. But, by these actions of corruption for whatever reason, the GOP has now discredited every caucus to come.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by The_Phantom
 


It's not speculation. The only votes that are under contention here are those from the missing 8 precincts. Those votes...coincidentally enough...could not have won the race for Paul even if the vast majority of them were for him.


I see your point about it not effecting the outcome but does that mean that it's ok for this kinda thing to happen in an election? I personally think the elections in Iowa should be considered void and they should all vote again, except this time, don't 'lose' ANY of the votes. I thought these things were supposed to be fair... hahaha



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   
These votes are now tallied in an undisclosed location for security reasons. Posted a link from the DesMoines Register on Facebook. We have got to start waking people up in this country. Our votes are just there to make us feel like we can change the landscape. They were tallied the day before the election process began.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


You seem awfully sure who is supposed to win and who isn't. Where are your sources, sir, and just how credible are they? I suppose moderators here on ATS have some latitude in how they participate in threads, but frankly you're being a bit pissy and have no more credibility than anybody, or anything, else.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by Mimir
 


Wow...thanks for randomly posting two sources that really have nothing to do with the bigger point you were trying to make. Most of the sources are from non-credible places that don't lend much credibility to your theory.

Now if you would like to discuss why you believe this is true then by all means we will...but don't patronize us with this crap.


these are facts. how can you say that. do your research and prove otherwise before making comments like that.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital
Hell Yeah, i was right
I caught a lady on CNN who was counting and seemed to skip 10 numbers, from 50 to 60 or something!
edit on 22-1-2012 by daaskapital because: (no reason given)


In the thread you made on this, I was the one that went back and replayed (5 times) to see if you heard what you thought you heard. She did not count wrong.

I do believe there was outrageous voting fraud in this caucus, just not in this instance you refer to.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
Just one point here; when talking about missing ballots, rigged voting machines, or anything involving the counting of votes you should use the term Election Fraud.

Voter Fraud is this concept that you can effect an election by busing a bunch of volunteers to cast votes in long lines on election day, or register as a dead person. All these things have happened -- but it's really hard to do on a large scale.

>> For years we've been talking about ELECTION FRAUD -- especially when Bush and Republicans increased votes but ONLY in places where electronic voting machines were in the 2000 elections. 80,000 registered voters were thrown off the ballot -- 95% of whom were not felons -- it was a ten fold increase from prior years.

Having ignored Election Fraud to concentrate investigations onto Voter Fraud and apprehend about 12 people - the far more massive and problematic issue of manipulating elections with rigged voting machines and the tally process, and of course, a vast network of evangelical election officials who are loyal to some "cause" for which God demands they lie, cheat and steal -- I expect that the Ron Paul fans are seeing a bit of what the Democrats for the most part have been complaining about.

As soon as you see situations where your candidate has a clear lead and an hour before polls close, the lead flips to the opponent -- you'll wish that election polling were still legal to find evidence of this manipulation.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Ron Paul should have won Iowa, hands down. The exit poll data, combined with the fact that there were many university-heavy precints that had yet to be tallied, shows just how skewed the results were at the end. This is a blatantly illegal tactic, and IF Ron Paul is to be denied the presidency, it will NOT be legitimately.

There are those who think Ron Paul won't win, but many of you have no clue how large his support base actually is. I guarantee there will be more skewed results, ie CHEATING, as that is the ONLY way to keep Ron Paul out of the White House.

It is a sad truth, and something needs to be done about it. I want to see people go to JAIL over this. I am so sick of election fraud. Remember when Gore should have beaten Bush? Was anything done about it? I openly state that if Ron Paul does not win the presidency, and there is ANY evidence of fraud, then the people need to rise up against this tyrannical government, who obviously must have a hand in it. And if they didn't, they obviously are doing nothing about it.

So they think they can get away with it, but they are mistaken. It will be much worse if Paul DOESN'T win.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:17 PM
link   
I, and many friends, in a recent past election, Observed, all day at our city's polling places. We wanted a bond to pass in our town and we were on our 4th try. We really felt we had the numbers to pass it in previous trys, but it always lost by a small number of votes.

Well, guess what, we were diligent, we had people sit all day just observing the process and then stayed until close to then observe the counting, organization, packaging and delivery
to headquarters . I could see there was a lot of room for "error" and am glad we did this. Wouldn't you know, the bond passed!

I can tell you this, we all need to do just this type of thing. OBSERVE the process, everywhere.

It is legal, at least it is in my state.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by 6Eyengineer
 


I never said it wasn't an issue.

Why is it that anytime I say anything negative about Ron Paul (even though I'm really not here) that I get words put in my mouth?

And being a moderator has nothing to do with being "fair and balanced". I'm a member here just like you and I'm entitled to my opinions, whether you agree with them or not.
edit on 22-1-2012 by nyk537 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Ron still has my vote even if I am penning it in! Unshakeable resolve should be more common when it comes to Ron. We know the MSM will paint RON in a bad light and say he has no consensus. A clear agenda and a few paid actors should not tarnish your resolve folks! Please keep up the good fight, and if you feel defeated let it motivate you to do even more. Touch those around you and ask them to do the same!

You know that Ron is right! Don’t let them shake your faith! Win or lose at least you did not just lie down and submit to their agenda. When we start to recognize the faux control and reject it we are on our way real victory!

No bullets are required to topple this fascist regime! We need only deny them control! Never submit, never surrender!

Remember that Ron most certainly won Iowa and that if one state was rigged they all are. We can still hope for an independant run and we need only let Ron know how many stand with him! We need real leaders not more plastic men!

Ron Paul 2012!
edit on 22-1-2012 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:46 PM
link   
When are we going to begin voting via the internet!?



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by White Locust
When are we going to begin voting via the internet!?


We need to do something for sure! Our electoral systems are outdated and highly susceptible to fraud! Counts should be public and in real time with the possibility of human error removed! Anyone caught tampering with election results should face the death penalty!
edit on 22-1-2012 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by litterbaux
 


They didn't tamper with them enough to affect Paul. You don't honestly believe Ron Paul got enough votes to win do you?


You keep saying that.How much do you know? i am guessing not enough.They were more then enough scared of him to tell everyone in advance that iowa would not count if Ron paul would win.

First you come up with a line of defence stating the source is not reliable (you rather have it come from fox news)

Then you give in with "ok yes there was fraud"

and then you come up with and keep repeating things like "they did not tamper enough to affect ron paul"


HOW WOULD YOU KNOW?



you dont, you are just spouting unsubstantiated BS and with it you are apologetic to the fraud going on here.



edit on 22-1-2012 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Rafe_
 


How would you know?

That's my point! This is all just speculation and theory. Nobody knows.

That's why they are called opinions.





top topics
 
70
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join