posted on May, 15 2012 @ 10:41 AM
It's really funny. I read somewhere (i gotta find the link again) that my town here in CT overwhelmingly voted for Ron Paul during our primary
election. However, it's a small town and people pretty much know each other, and not one person, supermarket, gas station, doctors office etc voted
for the man, in fact when the numbers were tallied our town voted Newt (even though he had dropped out by that point) But Paul sites were reporting
But that can't be fraud, no not at all for a site to report an untruth when it helps Paul...Only when it hurts him? C'mon... it goes BOTH ways, you
can't have one side all fraud and he's not getting voted because of corruption and then in the same breath misrepresent that he won a town where not
ONE person voted for the man, even after 6 recounts asked for by rabid Paulites from New York came in to challenge it. We hand write our ballots, and
it's pretty hard to change them once they are in, plus which most of our in town counters could care less who wins or looses as long as turnout for
the referendum that was the same day was high.
Time for the RP supporters to practice what they preach, they cannot fudge the numbers and then yell at everyone else for doing it (with no real proof
I may add except for some YouTube vids posted on where? the Daily Paul.
Another interesting note... the website that supposedly is being touted as having the "real delegate numbers" anyone run a whois on it? Can't find
much out can you? Who's running it, it's all masked behind privacy and domain masking. If they were so honest about making sure everyone knew the
truth, why hide? No too many unanswered questions from BOTH sides, not just people who dislike Dr Paul