Ron Paul supporters: What will convince you that Romney won fair and square?

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 9 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
It would partially convince me if Romney could get more than a couple of hundred people at his rallies.

The fact that Paul is getting thousands and Romnney is at best getting a few hundred who are mostly there because he's visiting their factory etc shows me everything I need to know about the two.




posted on May, 9 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Once someone explains this... once someone explains these anomalies... once someone explains that these graphs are natural and not manipulated. I'll believe it once this is debunked and proven that there is no such thing as VOTER FRAUD AND VOTE FLIPPING!

Vote flipping and rigging (Lite)

Vote flipping and rigging (high calories)

Edit to add:

Basically what those documents explain is that they have found an anomalous algorithm that flips the vote in Romney's favor... usually from Paul to Romney and in some cases from all the other candidates evenly to Romney. Take a look at the document... doesn't take a math wizard to understand this... although it would be appreciated if someone who crunches number for breakfast, lunch and dinner to come forward and explain this.

edit on 5/9/2012 by ugie1028 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by babybunnies
It would partially convince me if Romney could get more than a couple of hundred people at his rallies.

The fact that Paul is getting thousands and Romnney is at best getting a few hundred who are mostly there because he's visiting their factory etc shows me everything I need to know about the two.


I guess you are admitting that Obama would easily defeat Ron Paul...because Obama's first official campaign rally had 14,000+.

But I bet you have an excuse for that.



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by ugie1028
 


Those documents use the same flawed logic that documents about the SC vote did...I'm sure it is probably the same guy.

He uses a small demographic that is favorable to Paul, usually rural areas, finds the percentage and makes the ridiculous assumption that he should receive the same percentage statewide.

It is very very bad math/statistics....have you heard that statistics can be used to show anything...this is an example of that.



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


It took me 45 minutes to push through both doc (total)... I just posted that and you're just debunking it with no sources links... just opinion... just spouting off... did you even read it?

research it instead of.... again... being intellectually dishonest.



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:12 AM
link   
When will I believe?

When he can say a sentence without that stupid, glazed over, semi-amazed, semi-smug face.
Or when he can communicate in modern terms, not like it is 1920, OH BOY, GOLLY GEE! I THINK TREES ARE JUST SWELL...

..

You all know what I am talking about.

He is so out of touch... to the point that I am offended the MSM and TPTB believe, or believed, that he is believable?



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   
With the lobbyist and special interest controlled Mass Media outlets no candidate wins fair and square within the GOP or the DNC. These special interest groups don't give the candidates equal playing ground nor coverage and hence its not fair, even before the votes come in. They market their favorite candidate and carefully diminish the others.

Here is a pretty good article on how the media has unfairly labeled Ron Paul for numerous decades:
communities.washingtontimes.com...


www.thedailyshow.com...

Unfortunately there are people out there that don't believe that the MSM aren't really advertisements for the special interest group and digest everything they put out.

Yeah, fair my Ar$e!!.
edit on 9-5-2012 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


It took me 45 minutes to push through both doc (total)... I just posted that and you're just debunking it with no sources links... just opinion... just spouting off... did you even read it?

research it instead of.... again... being intellectually dishonest.


It is the exact same method that was used in the previous documents from South Carolina.

Tell me...how do you count "x%" of the vote?

Me and another member completely debunked the South Carolina data in two threads here on ATS...still the "author" of the data refused to see his errors....he is using bad math.

I have no interest in looking at more of his bad math...but I guess the pretty graphs is all that is needed to convince some people, even if they don't understand the math at all.

Here is the flawed assumption the author of these documents makes...and he makes the same false assumption for all of these graphs.


If we assume that precinct size has no material correlation with partial count results, as shown historically, we can bring nifty maths to bear. A math trick (called hypergeometric distribution law applied to exhaustive counting)allows calculating the probability of a candidate's reaching his known final result from any point in the chart, given how badly he is lagging or ahead.


He assumes precinct size has NO CORRELATION on candidate performance....so he is ASSUMING that if candidate A does good in a small precinct in a rural area...then he should do just as good in a large precinct in an urban area.

It's bad math with bad assumptions being made...someone could make the exact opposite graphs and it will look like Paul is stealing vote from Romney in the smaller precincts.
edit on 9-5-2012 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Indiana

Voter turnout was more about getting rid of Lugar.

Overall voter turnout was 13.76 percent Romney got 65% out of 13. 76%

North Carolina

Voter turnout was more about the ban on gay marriage.

Voter turnout was strong in Tuesday's primary elections, with about 34 percent of the state's registered voters

So Romney got 66% of 34%


West Virginia


Turnout from Tuesday's primary election was 27.72 percent

Romney got 70% of 27.72% of registered republican voters .


Sorry I don't see over whelming support when the real numbers don't even give Romney 25% of registered republican voters in any state primary, and we're not even counting all republican voters or Independents or even democrats.

All three primarys, delegates are awarded Proportionally.



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 

So what else is there? By the sounds of it, the only way Paul supporters will accept that the GOP primaries were fair would be if Ron Paul won, this is what I see. Can any Paul supporter explain to me here what would convince you that Romney won fair and square? Any??

Well, Southern Guardian, at this point NOTHING would do it for me...I was along for the entire ride since his announcement, and witnessed the media effectively burying his campaign with little-to-NO coverage all the while lauding those who have come and gone, despite him consistently polling well ahead of them almost all the way up until Iowa.

I was there watching the various GOPs (namely our good friend DeeDee Benkie prior to the Iowa vote - just let me know if you want the video) promise to ENSURE that he wouldn't be allowed to win by deploying their swing voters to assure the outcome the party - NOT THE PEOPLE - wanted, as well as threatening to disenfranchise and invalidate entire states if they did something so horrible as letting Paul win. I've seen them push back their primaries as - per their own admission - Paul would otherwise have won (LA).

I've otherwise seen the mountain of scorn and dismissiveness heaped disproportionately on Paul's campaign, while the others (who have long sign fallen) were touted as the new front-runners, the inevitable anti-Romney challengers.

ALL of these factors figure into who people are willing to vote for, or even AWARE of having an option for voting for. When you are in essence hiding an option from the people, frightening them out of considering him, or unduly slanting perception of either the candidate himself or the odds of your support for him being worth anything - you're far wrong, and not playing fair.

I won't go so far as others and claim any outright fraud has occurred otherwise - but to say Romney has won fair and square is an out-and-out lie. Had the media coverage been equal and comparable, treatment by the GOP itself alike, then it would have been fair.

It has been anything but, and to claim otherwise in light of memory and even outside studies by independent agencies makes one a liar.
edit on 5/9/2012 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
So what if Romney wins primaries, Paul wins caucuses. If Romney was really the man that people support, why aren't people supporting him at the caucuses? Let's see how the delegate selection actually goes in all the states that Romney "swept" last night, before we come to any conclusions. It wouldn't surprise me if Paul dominates every single convention the same way he has been doing to others for these past couple of weeks.



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Romney supporters : What will convince you that Ron Paul wasn't the victim of voting fraud?



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Fair and square? Like handing out fraudulent slates? Portraying that they are from the Ron Paul campaign. How is that fair and square?
edit on 5/9/2012 by Irish614 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


I asked a question...

If you don't tell me you support Romney,

then I still havn't met a Romney supporter.


Well...? Come on now I'm excited. You can be my first.
edit on 5/9/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)


I am an Romney supporter. Let me be the first. I am for anyone against Obama.
I find it illogical that those who claim to be Ron Paul Libertarians who are supposedly strict Constitutionalists are willing to vote for the man who is destroying the Constitution if their first choice doesn't win.

Does being a Ron Paul supporter equal being a strict Constitutionalist?
If one cannot get Ron Paul, will they vote Socialist? (That is what I am hearing here.)
Does a write in vote for Paul equal a wasted Conservative vote which is essentially a vote away from the Republican and one for the Progressive?
Does that mean Libertarians will settle for Socialism if they can't have Constitutionalism?
Does being a Ron Paul supporter mean those Constitutionalist are really Socialists in disguise?
That's the logical conclusions when a RP supporter says they will vote for Obama, a Constitutional destroyer.
Gimme an answer, please and don't say Romney and Obama are the same. They are not. That is just a ploy that I am tired of hearing.
edit on 9-5-2012 by Nite_wing because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darkinin
So what if Romney wins primaries, Paul wins caucuses. If Romney was really the man that people support, why aren't people supporting him at the caucuses? Let's see how the delegate selection actually goes in all the states that Romney "swept" last night, before we come to any conclusions. It wouldn't surprise me if Paul dominates every single convention the same way he has been doing to others for these past couple of weeks.


Ok, let's look at that.

In North Carolina, the State chairperson allocates the delegates based on the primary vote...each delegate has to publicly declare their support of a candidate...so unless Ron Paul supporters lie about supporting Romney...they aren't "stealing" any Romney delegates in NC.

www.thegreenpapers.com...

The State Chairman shall allocate Delegate positions between the Candidates accurately reflecting the division of votes in the statewide primary. Each person nominated as a Delegate at either the District or State Convention must have publicly declared as a representative of a Candidate on the Presidential Preference Primary ballot prior to the election of Delegates to the National Convention. [North Carolina Republican Party Plan of Organization. ARTICLE VII. F.] [North Carolina General Statutes, specifically Section 163-213.8]


For West Virginia, the vote for "delegate candidates" directly....Romney delegates won 21, Santorum 2, and 5 uncommited. These are the delegates that will go to the national convention.

www.thegreenpapers.com...

Tuesday 8 May 2012: 28 of West Virginia's 31 delegates to the Republican National Convention are elected in the West Virginia Presidential Primary. Each delegate candidate is individually listed on the ballot along with their presidential preference. The candidates receiving the most votes in each contest is elected.

9 district delegates (3 delegates are elected in each of the state's 3 Congressional Districts).
19 at-large delegates (10 at-large plus 9 bonus) are elected statewide.
In addition, 3 party leaders, the National Committeeman, the National Committeewoman, and the chairman of the West Virginia's Republican Party, will attend the convention as unpledged delegates by virtue of their position.


In Indiana, only 27 of the 46 delegates were tied to last nights primary....all 27 are officially bound to Romney and they will be selected at the convention. Doesn't matter who is selected, they are bound to vote for Romney.


www.thegreenpapers.com...

Tuesday 8 May 2012: 27 of Indiana's 46 delegates to the Republican National Convention are allocated to presidential contenders in today's Indiana Presidential Primary.

27 district delegates are to be allocated to presidential contenders based on the primary results in each of the 9 congressional districts: each congressional district is assigned 3 National Convention delegates and the presidential contender receiving the greatest number of votes in that district will receive all 3 of that district's National Convention delegates. [Rule 9-29]
In addition, each county directly elects delegates to the State Convention. [Rule 9-3, IC 3-10-1-4]




So.....doesn't look like Ron Paul is going to get any "stealth delegates" from last night...he got 6 in NC...and that is all he will get from last nights contests.



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Nite_wing
 



I am an Romney supporter. Let me be the first. I am for anyone against Obama.
I find it illogical that those who claim to be Ron Paul Libertarians who are supposedly strict Constitutionalists are willing to vote for the man who is destroying the Constitution if their first choice doesn't win.


I find it illogical for people to vote against someone instead of voting for someone.

At least the Ron Paul folks have the integrity to actually support who they like and are unwilling to bend...but it seems like you have no beliefs you stand behind...just someone that you are against.



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   
yeah nothing here either! you could have two people one completely evil and one a perfect saint, fill news media with nothing but person A and how great he is and only mention person B when you say he doesn't have a chance and he's a nut job and his policies are way out of wack. i wouldn't consider that fair. accompany that with millions of retards that cant think for them selves or actually research any thing. it's a game on the mind, put someone on a pedestal and start cheering naturally everyone will jump in. i my self have not met a actual romney supporter. i get lots of comments when i where my paul shirt tho.

even if the straw polls show romney win fair and square and there is no manipulation of numbers, its still biased based on the media opinion and peoples lack of ability to think for them selves. The media should keep their mouth shut and speak the facts but that will sadly never happen.

RONPAUL2012!!



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


in all honesty..

it just seems like another religious vote...

and if you can not get any of those voters to believe any facts..

that the USA can operate in a different manner?

then how can you convince them that the candidate is bad?

or that their source of information is slanted?

or that the fix is in?

or in some cases a flat out lie?

I'm sorry but with all the slick media ..

and voter fraud.. exit polls not matching up.. disenfranchised voters...

and worst of all.. electronic voting machines programmed for vote flipping..

they have the masses so confused they do not know they do not even know..

so with out any honesty.. in Americas actions.. the Fed.. and if

they can not even tell the difference between what the Constitution says..

and what is happening in Washington DC today.. the spin..

and seriously, people in America today BELIEVE..

that WAR is PEACE!!

go attack over there where people aren't guilty of anything, right? WMD in Iraq? remember?

so you and know ..

FREEDOM is SLAVERY, right?

inflation tactics by the FED ring a slave labor national interest debt owing bell?

so hopelessly enslaved are those who falsely believe they are free..

and with out a doubt..

IGNORANCE is STRENGTH..

you know it.. and their using it.. you can see it..

so then.. sorry.. there is no convincing me that any candidate sponsored by corporations..

will ever win in a honest, fair election in this country..

because we do not have honest fair elections...

or news media...





I understand where your coming from asking this question.. I just do not see Why your so assimilated still.



see ya at the next round of mainstream medias painful admissions that Ron Paul is still a viable candidate.

and you can scream oh no he doesn't.. but not have one shred of honest truth of WHY the corporate shill should be POTUS.


as soon as I went to check the current Delegate count..

look what I found..

edit on 9-5-2012 by reeferman because: current delegate information..



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:47 AM
link   
What would convince me?

Checks and Balances
instead of relying on just a computer program or private ballot counting to tally the votes correctly.

How about a voting papertrail that can be viewed by the voter to make sure that the vote was made correctly with these electronic machines, then have it put in a sealed box that is allowed to be watched by both candidate party representatives, to make sure there is no tampering of the ballots.

Then allow for a public count (at the voting location) of each box to make sure the counts match the totals registered with the computer program.


Then post the results for each computer count matched with the papertrail count, then post the results side by side online for all to see.

This will allow the public, candidates, and candidate representatives to assure accuracy with county state and national results to assure they actually do have a voice.

All counting should be public and allowed to be counted by appointed candidate representitive at each voting location as well as county and state wide level. All Public, no more hiding behind a computer program or private county.

There should be rules put in place to keep the crowed quiet however and any rowdy crowed members should be escorted out and given a ticket. This will assure that it is quieted enough to be counted correctly.

I also feel a video record of the counting should be available as a secondary measure to add another check to the process in case an error not originally caught is accounted for.

edit on 9-5-2012 by tw0330 because: (no reason given)
edit on 9-5-2012 by tw0330 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2012 @ 11:49 AM
link   
OP this is a VERY vaild question...

As the days go by the RP fans become way more delusional than should be accepted in normal society (eventually some of these people are going to get put into a mental ward)

It's like they are living in a different reality, where RP has 1000 delegates and 25% of the popular vote...

also it seems the RP fans are less intelligent, they don't understand the election process at all.. Manipulate rules and laws in order to fufill their agenda (sound like someone in office right now?)





top topics
 
4
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join