Nationwide Voter Fraud Within Republican Party - 2012

lpast said:

Man, lol...The far right and the Ron Paulers need to get something in their HEADS...Ron Paul gets the same 8 to 12 % support he has for the last 30 yrs...its never MOVED and it never will...most americans rightfully think hes nuts. The far right needs to get it in their heads that most of the republican party is not far right nutjobs and that should be evident after this ridiculous primary when each of the far right candidates was categorically rejected by their own party. NO there was no voter fraud...republicans CHOSE romny to be their standard bearer...over RON PAUL...Herman Caine, Michelle Bachman, Pawlenty, Santorum and Gingrich..and the other couple of scrub candidates....

Click to expand...

Wait....what? You refuse to believe one anonymous political-debate forum member who says it just can't be that way?

You simpleton.

Don't you know that everything you read on the interwebz is true when it comes from a single, anonymous source?

Sheesh......

Dragonfly said:

Wait....what? You refuse to believe one anonymous political-debate forum member who says it just can't be that way?

You simpleton.

Don't you know that everything you read on the interwebz is true when it comes from a single, anonymous source?

Sheesh......

Click to expand...

In Paul-land, the internet is the one place one can go to get the unofficial scoop, which is purportedly the official scoop. Reality is defined by internet polls and stacking rallies with supporters (usually propagated through the internet) and youthful outrage.

Fiddytree said:

In Paul-land, the internet is the one place one can go to get the unofficial scoop, which is purportedly the official scoop. Reality is defined by internet polls and stacking rallies with supporters (usually propagated through the internet) and youthful outrage.

Click to expand...

In ANY land, the internet is where you get the truth. Thanks to the internet, my only source of information wasn't just the news on tv. I was able to watch videos of the full caucus proceedings that would get posted right after the caucus that night. I saw what went on, firsthand, thanks to the internet. I saw that what the "news" was reporting was very different from what I had seen firsthand, thanks to the internet. I saw how all but a few of those caucus videos would be scrubbed by the next day. That's why I just have to laugh and shrug it off when you start talkin' your smack. I know exactly what happened and you obviously weren't interested enough to watch the videos rhe same night as they were posted but you're going to tell me Romney won fairly with your source just being what the media said. So if you wanna call watching videos of the proceedings in their entirety right after they happened "the un-official Paul-land scoop", go right ahead buddy. Keep fantasizing that you're so well-informed...

RP got screwed so I guess I can take my tin foil hat off now. You've won. You're gonna get your economic collapse. Paul was going to save our ass but you wouldn't have it. It's not difficult to foresee what's going to happen. I don't know jack about politics but I 've been watching what they do, and I see where it's going. It's amazing to me that you think Paul is a whack-o because he was going to RESTORE america. Shouldn't the "whack-o" be the guy who is going to run us into the ground?
Anybody want to guess what Obamney will do as soon as he's in office? They're going to immediately step-up the spending. Bills will be passed overnight that will approve billions for this and billions for that. Pay clos3e attention to what the money (that we don't have) will be used for and ask yourself if we really needed whatever it was. Remember this because when it happens, I will surely bring thia up

Fiddytree said:

I read everything carefully, I am skeptical, but realistic. I don't presume automatically that everything is a cover-up. I have usually discovered that reality is much less sexier than the reality you like to portray. It's mundane, it's sometimes accidental, but it's rarely intentional or sinister.

Click to expand...

Not by any means, whatsoever, do I automatically presume that everything is a cover-up, nor do I "portray" any alternate realities inconsistent with the one we currently subscribe to. I approach everything like a controlled experiment - completely neutral going into it. If I call something a cover-up, rest assured I did not jump to that conclusion, I was pushed there. What's the point of calling something a cover-up if that is not where the evidence took you? What's to gain?


What we're talking about here is not so much a "cover-up". How could it be when everything was videotaped? Despite the ban of video cameras the republicans imposed on the caucus or primary, people still recorded using the camera in their phones. You can see for yourself the mockery they made of our election process.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-us-presidential-election/133996-2012-presidential-election-you-voting.html <-- clicky


This poll says it all.

23 votes for Romney - 4 for Paul

Libertarian Gary Johnson has more votes than Paul does.

But I'll keep watching.

If I see the votes for Paul surpass the votes for Romney then perhaps I'll pay a teeny-tiny bit more attention to the things sKitzo posts.

Perhaps....

Blackdog said:

OK, I guess I can see your point. Although I do like Ron Paul, he would never win because the media makes him a joke. It is unfortunate and stupid, but what can ya do?

Carry on. lol.

Click to expand...

You are so right. I mean, you totally nailed it. People believe whatever the media tells them as evidenced by so many posters here. They have no idea what Ron Paul means. All they know is that because of the media, Ron Paul is the guy that is nuts. He's the guy we are supposed to ridicule like Dan Quayle. They don't stop to think that if Paul were president, their life would be way better. Why would people support the erosion of the bill of rights and WW3? ???????? Everytime you laugh at Ron Paul, throw a chuckle in for the fact that you're screwing yourself and people like me who would prefer to live in a free society.

Dragonfly said:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-us-presidential-election/133996-2012-presidential-election-you-voting.html <-- clicky


This poll says it all.
.

Click to expand...

Lol. You have got to be kidding me. Ron Paul is out. These results are not going to reflect squat as far as
RP is concerned.

Here's what you said about my poll where Paul had 100% over romney and 54% over the entire field including Obama:

Dragonfly said:

You've had over 100 views and only 10 forum members (one being you) have voted.

Hardly proves any point at all. .

Click to expand...

This poll, has only 53 votes of 385 and I'm sure those are not all members, but because Paul isn't winning- "this poll says it all".

Write-ins don't win. Now that Paul isn't the nominee, this poll will not be accurate. However, the one I'm going to start in about 94.6 seconds will accurately reflect the power of Paul.

Hahaha...you can't do anything remotely correct.

You started a "fantasy" thread with three choices and no option for "other" and you think that might prove something?

The poll I linked to is far FAR more reasonable to use as a benchmark. It's got all the actual options. Plus, to add to my contention that it's far more credible, it's been made a sticky.

You, on the other hand, tried to stack the deck as much as possible in your favor.

Please be careful - your bias is showing.

That being said - even your craptacular poll is proving what most of us have been saying.

RP couldn't win a national election. Period.

Most voter fraud happening at the polling place by poll workers. There is virtually no way to stop it and it is both easy and common.

Having been an election judge (once, Democrat), I could have cast hundreds of votes if I had cared to with it essentially impossible that I would get caught or it even detectable. I would simple have waited until before voting shut down, looked to see who had not voted out of the registered voters booklet, and cast votes for them. I suspect this is very, very common.

Even if it proven those people had not voted or some even were dead, that would prove I did it nor would there be any way to remove those fraudulent votes from the voting total - nor could they just erase everyone's vote. So even if it could be proven that 300 votes casts in the precinct were by dead people, that would not change the vote counting totals one iota.

The reason for wanting IDs (a legitimate reason) is to try to hold that down. I could not record numbers off an ID I didn't see and therefore poll workers could not cast many fraudulent votes. Voter fraud happens either by poll workers at the voting level or within the computers at the that level.

Dragonfly said:

Hahaha...you can't do anything remotely correct.

You started a "fantasy" thread with three choices and no option for "other" and you think that might prove something?

The poll I linked to is far FAR more reasonable to use as a benchmark. It's got all the actual options. Plus, to add to my contention that it's far more credible, it's been made a sticky.

You, on the other hand, tried to stack the deck as much as possible in your favor.

Please be careful - your bias is showing.

That being said - even your craptacular poll is proving what most of us have been saying.

RP couldn't win a national election. Period.

Click to expand...

Hah that is the problem people are getting their information from the mainstream media that lies and contorts everything to keep Ron Paul, the only one who can save America and the wolrd, down. If everyone only got their information from online sources that praised the great and rightous Ron Paul he would win and save us all from the depths of hell that we are headed to with our unrightous ways.

I say follow the money. People can cry about the mainstream media all that they want. But who owns the mainstream media? How much influence do the owners have over what types of information is reported and not reported...or bias the flow of information?

Remember, corporations like GE are part owners of our government via big lobby money. And they also own a lot of big media organizations so they can play both sides of the fence...anyway they choose.

Meanwhile people are still buying the bull**** from a political system and government gone "self-will-run-riot".

Voter ID laws require voters to have a photo ID in order to vote. While voter identity fraud may appear to be a significant problem facing the electorate, the reality is that requiring voters to have a photo ID will disenfranchise black/minority/elderly voters, who could otherwise legally vote, until now.

What percent of people in Pennsylvania cannot vote in 2012 because of the voter ID law but were eligible to vote in 2008?

It's sickening.

Regardless of how radical your views, how unpopular your speech, you have the right to say it.

Imagine you never owned a car, thus you never needed a drivers license. Furthermore, you do not have a passport because traveling out of the country was not on your two-do list in this life time. Should you be forced to obtain a photo ID before you are eligible to vote? That would cost money to get a photo ID. Are you paying to secure your right to vote? Attempting to win an election by eliminating a population's right to vote simply because they will not vote for you?

billmaher said:

Voter ID laws require voters to have a photo ID in order to vote. While voter identity fraud may appear to be a significant problem facing the electorate, the reality is that requiring voters to have a photo ID will disenfranchise black/minority/elderly voters, who could otherwise legally vote, until now.

What percent of people in Pennsylvania cannot vote in 2012 because of the voter ID law but were eligible to vote in 2008?

It's sickening.

Regardless of how radical your views, how unpopular your speech, you have the right to say it.

Imagine you never owned a car, thus you never needed a drivers license. Furthermore, you do not have a passport because traveling out of the country was not on your two-do list in this life time. Should you be forced to obtain a photo ID before you are eligible to vote? That would cost money to get a photo ID. Are you paying to secure your right to vote? Attempting to win an election by eliminating a population's right to vote simply because they will not vote for you?

Click to expand...

Try withdrawing money out of your bank account without having shown an ID.

joko104 said:

Most voter fraud happening at the polling place by poll workers. There is virtually no way to stop it and it is both easy and common.

Having been an election judge (once, Democrat), I could have cast hundreds of votes if I had cared to with it essentially impossible that I would get caught or it even detectable. I would simple have waited until before voting shut down, looked to see who had not voted out of the registered voters booklet, and cast votes for them. I suspect this is very, very common.

Even if it proven those people had not voted or some even were dead, that would prove I did it nor would there be any way to remove those fraudulent votes from the voting total - nor could they just erase everyone's vote. So even if it could be proven that 300 votes casts in the precinct were by dead people, that would not change the vote counting totals one iota.

The reason for wanting IDs (a legitimate reason) is to try to hold that down. I could not record numbers off an ID I didn't see and therefore poll workers could not cast many fraudulent votes. Voter fraud happens either by poll workers at the voting level or within the computers at the that level.

Click to expand...

I know that there would be no shortage of volunteers to count the votes by hand, but at this stage in the game how do we go about organizing such a demand and to let them know that while using the machines was a great way for them to bypass the real vote, we're onto it and it's not going to happen??