Sorry, but I don't have internet access 24-hours a day. As for the poll, last time I checked, polls lie all the time. What, did you never know about the fact that polls can be manipulated by asking certain questions?
That is why you take ALL of the polls and create a 95% confidence interval.
BTW, did you like the tally where I organised the results into multiples of Ron Paul's popular vote?
Which popular vote? Asking who? Asking what questions? I'm sure if the poll is taken of Republican Insiders, Dr. Paul will do poorly.
He pulled his data from the publicly available primary/caucus numbers as they have been posted to Wikipedia. In those numbers, less than 15% of voters in these contests have voted for Rep. Paul.
Honest ballpark question: What percentage of people who have 'voted' for Rep. Paul have had their votes attributed to Gov. Romney (which is the case that generates the best results for your supposition)? Is it 50% (IE Rep. Paul should receive twice as many votes as he has been publicly and officially given)?
Even if that's the case, the Rep. Paul would have still received only 22% of the popular vote - on the order of what Dr. Gingrich has received, and still ~6-8% short of both Sen. Santorum and Gov. Romney have received.
With Santorum now out, It is expected that people in upcoming states will generally vote for either Gov. Romney, Dr. Gingrich, or they will stay home. I honestly don't see a whole lot of them flocking to the arms of the Paul campaign. Are you honestly trying to say that going forward, with Sen. Santorum our of the race, that enough people will vote for Rep. Paul that the convention will not be secured for Gov. Romney?
"I believe in the future. It is wonderful because it stands on what has been achieved." - Sergei Korolev
bobalot wrote:Hey, BrooklynRedLeg, no comment on the 10-11% of the popular vote Ron Paul has managed to scrounge up? Just how much "vote rigging" do you think is taking place?
Sorry, but I don't have internet access 24-hours a day. As for the poll, last time I checked, polls lie all the time. What, did you never know about the fact that polls can be manipulated by asking certain questions?
It's not a poll. That's his actual popular vote.
BrooklynRedLeg wrote:
BTW, did you like the tally where I organised the results into multiples of Ron Paul's popular vote?
Which popular vote? Asking who? Asking what questions? I'm sure if the poll is taken of Republican Insiders, Dr. Paul will do poorly.
Did you even check the link I posted (twice)?
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi
"Problem is, while the Germans have had many mea culpas and quite painfully dealt with their history, the South is still hellbent on painting themselves as the real victims. It gives them a special place in the history of assholes" - Covenant
"Over three million died fighting for the emperor, but when the war was over he pretended it was not his responsibility. What kind of man does that?'' - Saburo Sakai
Honest ballpark question: What percentage of people who have 'voted' for Rep. Paul have had their votes attributed to Gov. Romney (which is the case that generates the best results for your supposition)? Is it 50% (IE Rep. Paul should receive twice as many votes as he has been publicly and officially given)?
I DON'T KNOW, but it doesn't take a fucking genius to see that election fraud is rampant this cycle unless you've buried your goddamn head in the sand shouting "LA LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!".
The race ISN'T over and this sort of delegate count battle has gone on before. Reagan in '76 (he lost to Ford) and Harding in 1920 come to mind instantly.
"This election is going to be very much like 1920's Warren Harding Republican Convention," he said. "General Leonard Wood went in there with 30 percent of the delegates and thought he had it made. Warren Harding went in with six percent of the delegates. After ten ballots, Harding had 70 percent.
"Democracy, too, is a religion. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses." - H.L. Mencken
“An atheist, who is a statist, is just another theist.” – Stefan Molyneux
"If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one." - Robert LeFevre
BrooklynRedLeg wrote:I DON'T KNOW, but it doesn't take a fucking genius to see that election fraud is rampant this cycle unless you've buried your goddamn head in the sand shouting "LA LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!".
SO..
The Fraud is rampant, and everwhere, and ANYONE can see it.
But you can't provide a single instance of such fraud?
Good to know where you stand then in terms of "facts" Your statment of ""LA LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"" seems to fit you rather well.
Praying is another way of doing nothing helpful
"Congratulations, you get a cookie. You almost got a fundamental English word correct." Pick
"Outlaw star has spaceships that punch eachother" Joviwan Read "Tales From The Crossroads"! Read "One Wrong Turn"!
Honest ballpark question: What percentage of people who have 'voted' for Rep. Paul have had their votes attributed to Gov. Romney (which is the case that generates the best results for your supposition)? Is it 50% (IE Rep. Paul should receive twice as many votes as he has been publicly and officially given)?
I DON'T KNOW, but it doesn't take a fucking genius to see that election fraud is rampant this cycle unless you've buried your goddamn head in the sand shouting "LA LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"
Again: Show proof of your allegations of fraud. This is an actual rule about posting on this website.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
An outline of fraudulent activity in the 2012 Maine Republican Primary from The Political Guide:
* Congressman Paul’s support was strongest in two counties: Aroostoock and Washington
o The Maine GOP postponed the election in Washington county under very questionable conditions and then stated that because of that delay those votes would not be counted. They eventually reversed this position.
o Aroostoock county is the only one which does not have precinct by precinct results available. It also had a voter turnout that was far lower than any other district and statistically out of sync with Maine results. However, this was consistent with 2008 results.
* The Maine GOP announced Romney as the winner when he was leading by less than 200 votes with entire counties yet to vote and numerous municipalities showing no votes where votes were known to be held
o Governor Romney had recently suffered a string of losses and losing a north eastern state to a different rival would have been very detrimental to his campaign.
* The Maine GOP established rules to prevent caucus results from being read aloud at the caucus – a detriment to any attempting to verify their caucus results with the official results.
* Maine is the only state that went more than a few days without achieving a 100% vote count and sill remains at 87% more than a month later.
* The AP and other sources are still reporting the Feb 17 results and not the final Feb 24 results.
* There are documented specific cases of incorrect results which favored Governor Romney.
* The results presented by the Maine GOP remain incorrect
o The spreadsheets presented as the results contain errors that any nominal election official would have sought to resolve prior to publishing the data yet no effort was made to do this.
o This means that we cannot for sure what data is correct and what is incorrect.
* There are unexplained changes in data from one update to the next.
o Presumably, these changes are the result of the Maine GOP rechecking the results with the caucus chairs.
o The results of these changes harmed only Congressman Paul and benefited every other candidate evenly.
Eight Missing Precincts in Iowa, 131 Inaccurate
* Cerro Gordo County’s Mason City Ward 2, Precinct 3
* Emmet County’s Estherville Ward 2
* Franklin County’s Geneva-Reeve
* Lee County’s Fort Madison 4A
* Lee County’s Fort Madison 4B
* Lee County’s Franklin-Cedar-Marion
* Lee County’s Washington-Green Bay-Denmark
* Pocahontas County’s Center-South Roosevelt-North Lincoln
Selective Counting in Nevada
After the events in Iowa, the national media decided to cover the counting of votes out loud. When it was clear that Ron Paul (number one in the polls) was doing well, Read the full timeline of events here.
(From Examiner.com)
2:00am EST: CNN and Fox News had blacked-out their coverage, opting instead to run reruns for the first time of any election so far this primary season. Online news outlets also froze their coverage, stopping all blog entries at midnight. With that, your author went to bed.
9:00am EST: Your author wakes up to a Nevada Caucus vote count with 71 percent of precincts reporting. The totals and percentages, even though the added 24 percent appeared to overwhelmingly favor Ron Paul by a staggering margin of more than 3 to 1 over Mitt Romney, had somehow managed to match the first 47 percent of the vote reported earlier in the evening that overwhelmingly favored Mitt Romney. The new state-wide totals now read Mitt Romney 47, Newt Gingrich 22, Ron Paul 18 and Rick Santorum 11.
10:00am EST: The Nevada Republican Party announces they are not going to release any of the missing Clark County vote totals until all the precincts in Clark County are turned in.
11:00am EST: The Nevada Republican Party announces they are not going to release the final and complete vote results. Instead, they are going to hold an internal recount.
"Democracy, too, is a religion. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses." - H.L. Mencken
“An atheist, who is a statist, is just another theist.” – Stefan Molyneux
"If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one." - Robert LeFevre
fraud
/frɔd/ Show Spelled[frawd] Show IPA
noun
1. deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.
It is IRRELEVANT how small or 'insignificant to the outcome' the action is to be considered fraud.
"Democracy, too, is a religion. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses." - H.L. Mencken
“An atheist, who is a statist, is just another theist.” – Stefan Molyneux
"If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one." - Robert LeFevre
"Democracy, too, is a religion. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses." - H.L. Mencken
“An atheist, who is a statist, is just another theist.” – Stefan Molyneux
"If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one." - Robert LeFevre
On the(Overly optimistic) hope that you are done claiming fraud from no evidence, I can now participate.
Ron Paul's machinations here are increasingly likely to worsen, not improve, his standing, in my view. Republicans don't like Romney, but Ron Paul is taking a legalistic loophole approach; it's likely to anger lots of people who didn't vote for him. It's one thing to get the GOP to fall in line with the winner via votes; it's another thing entire to convince this group of people who have a natural predeliction to assuming they are being persecuted to accept a guy who gets in via legal minutae. It will cause alot of acrimony, and will not endear Ron Paul to the majority of the GOP.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
SirNitram wrote: It will cause alot of acrimony, and will not endear Ron Paul to the majority of the GOP.
A simple question SirNitram
What does the current GOP majority think of Ron Paul as it stands?
Dr Paul reliably has 10% of the US population willing to vote for him representing the true believing libertarians who love him because of his economic libertarian positions or his social libertarian positions. One might argue he's not as 100% libertarian committed but whenever discussion a core issue he's quite happy to take a position that's libertarian in nature even if both the democrats and republicans both agree on it (See drug war, auditing the fed, killing popular government agencies).
There is a point to be made we might see something crazy tonight if Paul wins a state because that's a perfect spark for the media to melt down as the race that was suddenly over becomes back on again as Paul uses his people to capture dozens of Romney delegates and if Santorum gives even a slight nose twitch that he might give his delegates to Paul the media will melt down.
I put the chances of that happening at roughly 4% that Paul supporters come out, protest votes come out and Romney people don't which considering the narrative at the moment is a possibility... a remote one to be sure but possible.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
Just so I have this straight, I'm going to confirm it with you, the users in this thread.
Dr. Maddow reported that because the new party chairman is a Ron Paul guy, he will ruthlessly appoint delegates whom he believes will faithlessly vote with him, for Ron Paul? The same Ron Paul who finished a (close) third in this contest? Do I have this right?
If anyone else did this, there would be howling for the guy's blood. I can't see how anyone, even a Ron Paul supporter, would see this as a smart move. If it were somehow to gain Rep. Paul the nomination, it would be easy fodder in the general election. "You cheated your way into the nomination, Dr. Paul. How can you expect anyone to believe a word out your cheating mouth?"
Yeah, even if it's true, even if it works, it can't be very helpful if the goal is to hear the words "President-Elect Paul" in November.
73% of all statistics are made up, including this one.
SirNitram wrote: It will cause alot of acrimony, and will not endear Ron Paul to the majority of the GOP.
A simple question SirNitram
What does the current GOP majority think of Ron Paul as it stands?
Dr Paul reliably has 10% of the US population willing to vote for him representing the true believing libertarians who love him because of his economic libertarian positions or his social libertarian positions. One might argue he's not as 100% libertarian committed but whenever discussion a core issue he's quite happy to take a position that's libertarian in nature even if both the democrats and republicans both agree on it (See drug war, auditing the fed, killing popular government agencies).
There is a point to be made we might see something crazy tonight if Paul wins a state because that's a perfect spark for the media to melt down as the race that was suddenly over becomes back on again as Paul uses his people to capture dozens of Romney delegates and if Santorum gives even a slight nose twitch that he might give his delegates to Paul the media will melt down.
I put the chances of that happening at roughly 4% that Paul supporters come out, protest votes come out and Romney people don't which considering the narrative at the moment is a possibility... a remote one to be sure but possible.
(Standard issue comment on how I won't refer to Paul as 'Dr.' because this isn't a medical situation.)
I think the current GOP majority doesn't think of Ron Paul. Don't pay much attention to him at all. The vote totals don't support them viewing him highly. However, my watching of the right wing's media doesn't support alot of acrimony to him at present. He seems largely ignored; the race is between Newt and Romney, with a few hangers-on wishing Sanotorum would come back. Now, if he were to win via votes tonight(Or any of the remaining primaries), we could see some big reactions, which would better highlight what outcomes might happen.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
My referring to Representative Paul as Dr Paul is a long running joke left over from 2004 that will never ever die. But to be blunt Nitram the establishment hates Paul to begin with. They do think of him and they are terrified of a third party run because if he made such a run then Romney loses. Worse by their estimation if Paul does well enough (Say 20% of the vote) it puts Libertarians on notice that there is a chance at viability as a real third party rather than just a wing of the Republican party as I mentioned there's enough social Libertarians and more importantly these days, bored libertarian billionaires that a real viable run becomes possible in 2016.
Paul loses nothing doing what he's doing. Because he's the constant under-dog this is not going to be viewed as the election theft if Santorum had tried it or desperate gasps if Newt had. Ron Paul is running on his own time table with his own marching band and that en d goal is not Washington but the Republican convention. Speaking to a friend who works for the Paul campaign as one of their ground organizers he gave me a NASCAR analogy. Ron Paul's goal is not to blow the doors off in his qualifying lap at the Daytona 500 but to place high enough to be in the front row when the for real race comes around in 2016 because they are convinced that with Romney holding the nomination they have zero chance to win back the Presidency because Mittens can't dodge the press for eight months till election day and expect to win, he will have to talk and the more he talks the more people hate him being a son of privilege, living in privilege, if he were an actor he'd be acused of being a way to obvious one dimensional evil CEO character in your Saturday morning special.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
An interesting strategy for Ron Paul, but again, I would not bet on him highly for 2016. The Establishment of the GOP still has a strong grip on the media, and Ron Paul would need to massively expand his small donor list to be competitive in 2016 because the big businesses won't touch him. Alternately, get himself a sugar daddy like Newt.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
SirNitram wrote:An interesting strategy for Ron Paul, but again, I would not bet on him highly for 2016. The Establishment of the GOP still has a strong grip on the media, and Ron Paul would need to massively expand his small donor list to be competitive in 2016 because the big businesses won't touch him. Alternately, get himself a sugar daddy like Newt.
Ahah but here's the tricky part, is he to be President in Ron Paul or RAND Paul who is a sitting senator and a well known corporate whore.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
SCRawl wrote:Just so I have this straight, I'm going to confirm it with you, the users in this thread.
Dr. Maddow reported that because the new party chairman is a Ron Paul guy, he will ruthlessly appoint delegates whom he believes will faithlessly vote with him, for Ron Paul? The same Ron Paul who finished a (close) third in this contest? Do I have this right?
If anyone else did this, there would be howling for the guy's blood. I can't see how anyone, even a Ron Paul supporter, would see this as a smart move. If it were somehow to gain Rep. Paul the nomination, it would be easy fodder in the general election. "You cheated your way into the nomination, Dr. Paul. How can you expect anyone to believe a word out your cheating mouth?"
Yeah, even if it's true, even if it works, it can't be very helpful if the goal is to hear the words "President-Elect Paul" in November.
I have yet to see a single Ron Paul supporter justify this behaviour given Ron Paul has only managed to achieve 10-11% of the popular vote. Every time I bring it up, wild conspiracy theories about election fraud are trotted out.
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi
"Problem is, while the Germans have had many mea culpas and quite painfully dealt with their history, the South is still hellbent on painting themselves as the real victims. It gives them a special place in the history of assholes" - Covenant
"Over three million died fighting for the emperor, but when the war was over he pretended it was not his responsibility. What kind of man does that?'' - Saburo Sakai
Block wrote:Gallup polls suggest it would be a massacre of epic proportions in favor of Obama.
Rasmussen, The NYT/CBS polls disagree and by massacre of epic proportions I assume you mean Romney-Paul-Obama rather than Paul-Obama which traditionally Paul wins, the ones he loses are typically by three or less points which falls well within margin of error at this date.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
Block wrote:Gallup polls suggest it would be a massacre of epic proportions in favor of Obama.
Rasmussen, The NYT/CBS polls disagree and by massacre of epic proportions I assume you mean Romney-Paul-Obama rather than Paul-Obama which traditionally Paul wins, the ones he loses are typically by three or less points which falls well within margin of error at this date.
No, unless there's been large changes in the last few weeks Ron Paul vs Obama straight up is something like 65% -35% in favor of Obama.
As for Paul-Obama, it would be VERY interesting to see Mr. Paul vetted. Of course, the hazards of Ron Paul actually implementing any of his policies.. (Or the stock markets believing he might) could do massive damage to the world economy.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
Destructionator XIII wrote:How would the vote change if the choice is between just Doctor Paul and King Obama?
If you're choosing between Dr. Paul, Dr. Gingrich, Gov. Romney, and Senator Santorum, that's going to be different than simply choosing between continuing tyranny or a prescription for change.
With these numbers, how can Ron Paul's supporters justify using some bullshit technicality to ignore the will of the other 89-90% of voters?
As for your question, Obama vs Romney is closer than Obama vs Paul. The graphs there combine multiple poll results. It's been like that for a long time.
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi
"Problem is, while the Germans have had many mea culpas and quite painfully dealt with their history, the South is still hellbent on painting themselves as the real victims. It gives them a special place in the history of assholes" - Covenant
"Over three million died fighting for the emperor, but when the war was over he pretended it was not his responsibility. What kind of man does that?'' - Saburo Sakai
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi
"Problem is, while the Germans have had many mea culpas and quite painfully dealt with their history, the South is still hellbent on painting themselves as the real victims. It gives them a special place in the history of assholes" - Covenant
"Over three million died fighting for the emperor, but when the war was over he pretended it was not his responsibility. What kind of man does that?'' - Saburo Sakai
