Nationwide Voter Fraud Within Republican Party - 2012

Dragonfly said:

You think one of the two nationally run parties can basically ignore the entire voting/election process, something that distinguishes our country from many others in the world, and just appoint their next candidate?????

And you think all the little lemmings within the party will accept that?

And you think all the little registered voter lemmings who belong to and donate money to the party will accept that?

Or - you're insinuating all the little voter lemmings are too stupid to see what's going on???? All except you? :lamo


If I start a thread about the "faked moon landing" will you drop this insanity and focus on something else?

Click to expand...

OMG you have photographic proof the moon landing was faked! Where did you get this and is there more? Do you have names of those in on it and the whistleblowers?
This is Huge news, escpecially after the Curiosity landing on Mars. I gotta admit I am now wondering if that was faked as well.

Dragonfly said:

You think one of the two nationally run parties can basically ignore the entire voting/election process, something that distinguishes our country from many others in the world, and just appoint their next candidate?????

Click to expand...

I didn't think they could do that either. I don't think anybody did. The rules are there for a reason, right? I don't know if this is the first time republican party rules have been broken, but I 'm pretty sure this is the first time they were broken so extensively where they've addressed it by saying it's their party and they can break their own rules whenever they want.

So basically, Romney was pre-chosen, they saw how big the Ron Paul tsunami was. and they did whatever they had to do to hand the nomination to Romney. They did it by breaking rules of the party and tampering with ballots and refusing to count them publicly. They even tried to leave with ballots from one county but were thwarted by an attendee who chased them out to their car.

How did they pull this off without it becoming a huge deal? All of the GOP officials are Romney supporters (that in itself is a violation of the party rule that states nobody is to support or aid any candidate until there is a nominee). Since all of the people who run the party are Romney supporters, any complaints made are simply thrown out. Can't they charge them criminally? Apparently not. They're saying it's not illegal to break rules and run caucuses however they please. I found this hard to believe. I thought there would for sure have to be some federal laws in place to ensure the integrity of the election process. But, I guess not. Especially the one where CNN had aired live the Maine caucus results (Paul won), but the GOP reported the next day that Romney won. How can this not be illegal???

So then you say "well certainly the media will crucify them and it's all going to come out etc. - Nope. Guess again - If you weren't convinced by the media blackout of Ron Paul that the media reports only what the corporate owners tell them to report, this ought to confirm it. So, with nowhere to turn to, it's up to the people to protest but the people don't really know how to do that, and because the media has everybody convinced that RP is akin to someone who wears tin foil hats, it's difficult because people like you don't believe it.

Dragonfly said:

You mean like saying that "most registered republicans actually voted for Ron Paul, but the Republican Party has falsified results and proclaimed that Romney is the winner"?

Click to expand...

How the Republican Party Stole the Nomination from Ron Paul « Free Words

Okay, Mr. Dragonfly. I recently found this (please click link above). It doesn't appear to be a mainstream news article, but it's a well-put-together summary of what I have been trying to say and includes links to videos and other corroborations. It's an HONEST summary. Check it out and then give me your HONEST opinion. I'm not trying to be "right" - I just want people to be aware of what I consider to be a wrongdoing. A wrongdoing that will have unsavory consequences if ignored.

What do I think?

#1) your link is to a "wordpress" blog. nuff said

#2) There are all kinds of people in the world. The seriously rabid fans of Ron Paul are never going to accept that he's not as popular as they think he is.

#3) I think you're a seriously rabid fan

#4) If you were correct, this site would be plastered with Ron Paul threads. It's not.

#5) I don't believe the majority of things you post

#6) My thread on sh!t-canning everybody and electing nothing but women got a much larger response than any of your conspiracy theory threads about RP and massive election fraud within the Republican party.

#7) Have you heard the term: "pissing into the wind"? Because I think that's mainly what you're doing.

Dragonfly said:

#1) your link is to a "wordpress" blog. nuff said

Click to expand...

I don't care "where" it's to. What matters is "what" it's to, which in this case happens to be a detailed summary of facts regarding the 2012 Rep, party primaries/caucus. Everything in it is verifiable if it doesn't already have a link to a source. I understand that you think that by saying the URL or webpage title and "nuff said", that you've somehow proved that this report is not factual, but that only proves that you didn't read any of it at all.

Dragonfly said:

#2) There are all kinds of people in the world. The seriously rabid fans of Ron Paul are never going to accept that he's not as popular as they think he is.

Click to expand...

He's just not as UNpopular as the media led you to believe

Dragonfly said:

#3) I think you're a seriously rabid fan

Click to expand...

In a real debate with real people of intellect. this was supposed to be where you talk about the content of the stuff I posted, and specifically detail which fact it is you disagree with or are unable to verify. Your above statement doesn't address any of it. It's a personal opinion that doesn't corroborate, and is corroborated even less by this thread. You have to ask yourself. who is really the "rabid fan" here?

Dragonfly said:

#4) If you were correct, this site would be plastered with Ron Paul threads. It's not

Click to expand...

It's no wonder. Who wants to debate serious issues with children that are pretty much brainwashed. I say that with reason. I have had more people resort to childish Ron Paul tauntings because they couldn't intellectually put up a valid argument, and others that after seeing irrefutable evidence will put up a wall and refuse to believe it, defying plain logic ..........and simple and easily understandable terms.....................like they're brainwashed or something.

Dragonfly said:

#5) I don't believe the majority of things you post

Click to expand...

Great. But if you don't dissect what I've posted and then tell me specifically which part of it you claim to be false, then you're just saying you're unwilling to believe something, even though you were unable to refute it.

Dragonfly said:

6) My thread on sh!t-canning everybody and electing nothing but women got a much larger response than any of your conspiracy theory threads about RP and massive election fraud within the Republican party.

Click to expand...

I couldn't have thought of a more prime example to prove my point...that noone here intends to face reality anytime soon. A sad state of affairs.

Dragonfly said:

#7) Have you heard the term: "pissing into the wind"? Because I think that's mainly what you're doing.

Click to expand...

I'll have to agree with you there, fellow Amerikan.

No. People are just angry at the primary and caucus process which has come through largely without contention (I leave an exception to the Paulites who believe they have won every caucus and primary).

Fiddytree said:

No. People are just angry at the primary and caucus process which has come through largely without contention (I leave an exception to the Paulites who believe they have won every caucus and primary).

Click to expand...

It's odd that I'm having to correct a neocon "expert" with over 8,000 posts but you may kindly take note that Paul Americans who support the Constitution of the United States of America and who prefer not to have our government hijacked by bankers and the military industrial complex who plan to continue to profiteer from endless false flag wars. buckle the world economy and remove our liberties, do not believe Paul has "won every caucus". They are upset, as you should be whether you like Ron Paul or not, that the rules of every caucus were broken, or in some cases adhered to depending on which would aid Romney best.

sKiTzo said:

It's odd that I'm having to correct a neocon "expert" with over 8,000 posts but you may kindly take note that Paul Americans who support the Constitution of the United States of America and who prefer not to have our government hijacked by bankers and the military industrial complex who plan to continue to profiteer from endless false flag wars. buckle the world economy and remove our liberties, do not believe Paul has "won every caucus". They are upset, as you should be whether you like Ron Paul or not, that the rules of every caucus were broken, or in some cases adhered to depending on which would aid Romney best.

Click to expand...

Actually you have claimed that without the cheating RP would have won every caucus by 80-100%.

Here in Michigan we have a huge voter fraud scandal of epic proportions. Thad McCotter served several terms in Congress when he should never have been on the ballot due to a lack of proper petition signatures as a result of a deliberate effort to defruad the state and the voters of his district. He sat in Congress for at least three terms when he actually failed to qualify to be on the ballot due to fraud of him and his office.

http://www.freep.com/article/201208...e-fake-petitions-Thaddeus-McCotter-discovered

A review of the nominating petitions turned in for McCotter's elections from 2002 through 2012 shows he did not have enough signatures to qualify to run in at least the 2008, 2010 and 2012 elections. The skullduggery wasn't detected until this year, when a part-time staffer for the Secretary of State found that of the more than 1,800 signatures turned in by the McCotter campaign for 2012, only 244 were valid. McCotter's spokesman, Randall Thompson, did not return calls seeking comment on the latest revelations in the scandal that led to McCotter's resignation from Congress in July.

The petitions from McCotter's previous campaigns surfaced this week from Mark Grebner, president of Practical Political Consulting, one of the premier developers of voting lists for political candidates. As part of compiling such lists, the East Lansing company uses voting records and nominating petitions and had McCotter's going back to his first run for Congress, in 2002. "I started with 2010 and immediately thought, 'This is unbelievable,' " said Jim Daggy, data archivist for the consulting firm. "It was like a giant 100-foot sore thumb sticking out. My God, what were these people thinking?"

The 2002 and 2004 petitions were relatively clean with few duplicates, but in 2008, at least 67 of the 177 petition pages submitted were either copies or had been doctored by cutting and pasting dates from other documents onto the petitions. The 2006 petitions were apparently the source for cut-and-paste jobs in 2008 and 2010. Some of the 2006 petitions, however, also were duplicates.

Click to expand...

But that is getting little play around the nation.

sKiTzo said:

It's odd that I'm having to correct a neocon "expert" with over 8,000 posts but you may kindly take note that Paul Americans who support the Constitution of the United States of America and who prefer not to have our government hijacked by bankers and the military industrial complex who plan to continue to profiteer from endless false flag wars. buckle the world economy and remove our liberties, do not believe Paul has "won every caucus". They are upset, as you should be whether you like Ron Paul or not, that the rules of every caucus were broken, or in some cases adhered to depending on which would aid Romney best.

Click to expand...

Heh.

who support the Constitution of the United States of America

Click to expand...

And the implication is that the rest of us do not, right? A bit presumptuous.

who prefer not to have our government hijacked by bankers and the military industrial complex who plan to continue to profiteer from endless false flag wars.

Click to expand...

A bit over the top, and false flag wars. Marching into Truther territory.

They are upset, as you should be whether you like Ron Paul or not, that the rules of every caucus were broken, or in some cases adhered to depending on which would aid Romney best.

Click to expand...

Please. Paulities are the most dishonest folks out there about the entire election process.

Quag said:

Actually you have claimed that without the cheating RP would have won every caucus by 80-100%.

Click to expand...

I may have said 80% but you threw in the -100%. That has nothing to do with what I said about what the neocon expert said. He said the "Paulites".

Fiddytree said:

And the implication is that the rest of us do not, right? A bit presumptuous.

Click to expand...

This is not an implication, by any means. Obama has perjured himself many times over with his desregard for the constitution and Romney has expressed his desire to do the same if he takes office. If you support either Obama or Romney, you are letting yourself be deceived and you are supporting the destruction of freedom. The coup d'etat article I posted about Obama and the NDAA is no joke. Because it undermined the constitution, It showed very clearly that they intend to target americans, period. So what kind of government turns on its own people? Well, the kind that you currently support.

Fiddytree said:

A bit over the top, and false flag wars. Marching into Truther territory.

Click to expand...

How do you figure? Are you that uninformed? They use false flags for everything now, not just war. They are using it to take down the constitution and it's working because of people like you.

Fiddytree said:

Please. Paulities are the most dishonest folks out there about the entire election process.

Click to expand...

I'd like to see ONE incidence of dishonesty by a Paul supporter. Let's see just ONE to put up against the massive fraud that the Republicans have perpetrated.

How do you figure? Are you that uninformed? They use false flags for everything now, not just war

Click to expand...

I'm not uninformed, just tired of an old argument that the internet folks have liked to use for the last 11 years. There's a good reason why most professional literature makes no extensive use of false flag operations in the narratives of American political or foreign policy history. It's saved for the wackos and the amateurs pretending to be historians.

sKiTzo said:

I'd like to see ONE incidence of dishonesty by a Paul supporter. Let's see just ONE to put up against the massive fraud that the Republicans have perpetrated.

Click to expand...

Paul SHOULD Easily Win In Alaska, North Dakota, and Idaho | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution

Sorry, but Ron Paul, though he won a large chunk of the vote, is not hitting the social conservative inclinations of our state. Anyone who lives here would know that social conservatism is important here, and would make it easier to figure out that Santorum won that night. Before you start, it was a non-binding caucus. Quit whining. The ones who are whining the most are you out-of-staters.

Fiddytree said:

Paul SHOULD Easily Win In Alaska, North Dakota, and Idaho | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution

Sorry, but Ron Paul, though he won a large chunk of the vote, is not hitting the social conservative inclinations of our state. Anyone who lives here would know that social conservatism is important here, and would make it easier to figure out that Santorum won that night. Before you start, it was a non-binding caucus. Quit whining. The ones who are whining the most are you out-of-staters.

Click to expand...

Was that the incidence of dishonesty by a Paul supporter?

Fiddytree said:

I'm not uninformed, just tired of an old argument that the internet folks have liked to use for the last 11 years.

Click to expand...

So you think it's an argument that people "like to use". Maybe they "like to use" it because it's a valid argument. I'm sorry that false flags engineered by the american government have put a damper on the little fantasy world you live in where you think the american government would never do that. Fact is, they've done it and they plan to do it again soon.

Fiddytree said:

There's a good reason why most professional literature makes no extensive use of false flag operations in the narratives of American political or foreign policy history.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it's called standard program of denial.

Fiddytree said:

It's saved for the wackos and the amateurs pretending to be historians.

Click to expand...

See the irony?

Dragonfly said:

It's been claimed here (DP) that voter fraud has run amuck within the Republican party.

The claim is that Romney is not the popular favorite among the registered, voting republicans/conservatives.

The claim is that some other candidate is actually much more popular, and has received more votes than Romney (or any other candidate), but that the republican party leaders have ignored and falsified votes in order to "plant" Romney as the victor.

So my question to you Republicans/Conservatives is this:

Has massive, nationwide voter fraud taken place during this election cycle with a focused effort on placing Romney as the winner at the expense of any and all other candidates?

Click to expand...

There was a graph in an issue of Bloomberg that charted the voter turnout in the GOP primary for the various GOP candidates.

Now is it true that Romney is not the top popular GOP nominee? Yes, that is true.

However, all of the GOP nominees were in the top position at one point or another. Then they dropped in popularity as the primary went on.

But Romney was consistently in the top 2nd or top 3rd spot. Which means Romney is the most consistent candidate of the GOP nominees.

Also, I think this show just how factionalized the Republican Party truly is. Which emphasizes how bad labeling GOP politicians as a RINO really is for the party.

So after all is said and done, it appears that the republican party can, at whim, bypass the rules of the party set forth to ensure a fair election process. How dumb of me to assume there were federal laws in place to ensure the parties played by the rules. I have to blame my stupidity on the illusion we were presented with growing up in america, you know, about the checks and balances. So I'll have to change my vote to "No - Nothing illegal has taken place with the RP regarding Romney's nomination".

sKiTzo said:

So you think it's an argument that people "like to use". Maybe they "like to use" it because it's a valid argument. I'm sorry that false flags engineered by the american government have put a damper on the little fantasy world you live in where you think the american government would never do that. Fact is, they've done it and they plan to do it again soon.



Yeah, it's called standard program of denial.



See the irony?

Click to expand...

Yes, because it's an incredibly lazy and stupid method of analyzing American politics and foreign policy. Stop looking for the easy answers-it's lazy.

Fiddytree said:

Yes, because it's an incredibly lazy and stupid method of analyzing American politics and foreign policy. Stop looking for the easy answers-it's lazy.

Click to expand...

This is irony to such an insane extent that I'm having a hard time believing you really think that. Look at what you just said and condider the following:

A) Getting your information by simply believing without question everything the media tells you, but still not getting sll the answers

B) Meticulously doing your own exhaustive research to find answers that were previously unanswered because they were part of some cover-up by the US government and media

Which is a "lazy and stupid" method of analyzing American politics and foreign policy? A or B?

sKiTzo said:

This is irony to such an insane extent that I'm having a hard time believing you really think that. Look at what you just said and condider the following:

A) Getting your information by simply believing without question everything the media tells you, but still not getting sll the answers

B) Meticulously doing your own exhaustive research to find answers that were previously unanswered because they were part of some cover-up by the US government and media

Which is a "lazy and stupid" method of analyzing American politics and foreign policy? A or B?

Click to expand...

Or C, which is I don't do either. I don't believe everything "the media" tells me, and B, I don't do independent research "because they were part of some cover-up by the US government and media." You already assume it is a cover-up, which it usually isn't. Laziness.

Fiddytree said:

Or C, which is I don't do either

Click to expand...

That sounds like the laziest choice so far, unless you care to elaborate on what your non-lazy method of analyzing american politics is...

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....

sKiTzo said:

Interesting. I don't know if you're just uninformed or if I'm wrong about what should be perceived as voter fraud. The republican party is supposed to deliver caucous results that represent what the people want. If GOP officials are pushing Romney, they are already violating party rules. If they suppress true vote counts and disallow or ignore participants because they do not support Romney, they are further violating party rules and I would call this voter fraud because they are delivering fixed results. How would you argue that this is not voter fraud ?

ignoring and violating caucous rules................UNETHICAL

Omitting the caucous results of several counties where Romney did not win.....VOTER FRAUD

Postponing a caucous in a county where Romney is not expected to win, then refusing to accept the results a week later after the caucous was held because they missed the deadline...........UNETHICAL

Rigging vote machines to flip votes for Romney.............VOTER FRAUD

Refusing to count votes in front of everyone and refusing to allow anyone to watch as they secretly tallied the votes.........................UNETHICAL - BORDERLINE VOTER FRAUD

Those barely scratch the surface....so much crap went on, but again, if none of this is voter fraud to you, then what is??

Click to expand...

Upon reviewing this thread, I noticed that the above post has some points that apparently nobody could argue. I'll say it again:
If none of this is voter fraud to you, then what is?? What is your argument for why it's not voter fraud?

sKiTzo said:

That sounds like the laziest choice so far, unless you care to elaborate on what your non-lazy method of analyzing american politics is...

Click to expand...

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.