Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Nevada GOP Caucus

rated by 0 users
This post has 37 Replies | 3 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135
John James Posted: Sun, Feb 5 2012 12:45 AM

There's no doubt a story with Storey...


Storey County
100% reporting

M. Romney        28.2%    53
R. Paul               27.7%    52
N. Gingrich        25.5%    48
R. Santorum     18.6%    35

 

Even though Nevada's delgates are fully proportional and not apportioned by county winners, this is still a little too coincidental.

 

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Okay, just like New Hampshire, something is up.  It's been at least 6 hours and Clark County is still at 5.8% reporting with no new updates.

 

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Uh...so it's been at least 24 hours since precincts have been closed...and we still don't have a full vote count?

http://www.politico.com/2012-election/map/#/President/2012/Primary/NV

 

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,149
Points 23,875

It's been over 24 hours and its still at 89% reporting. WTF?? Dr. Paul is behind Obamney AND Gingrich now. This is weird. In 2008 Dr. Paul came in 2nd in NV. I'd expect him to take 2nd again if not win.

2012 will go down in history as the biggest fraud election in history.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,612
Points 29,515

There is a hair chance that Paul might get 2nd.

"The Fed does not make predictions. It makes forecasts..." - Mustang19
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Freedom4Me73986:
It's been over 24 hours and its still at 89% reporting. WTF??

Thanks for basically retyping what I just said almost an hour before you.

By the way, how come you're not off in the woods yet?  How about those links you owe me!!

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,149
Points 23,875

Paul campaign is suspecting massive voter fraud. http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-national/paul-camp-cries-fraud-over-nevada-caucus-results

Freedom4Me73986:
It's been over 24 hours and its still at 89% reporting. WTF??

Thanks for basically retyping what I just said almost an hour before you.

I didn't see you there.

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,118
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

I always suspect that there is fraud. During the last election, I remember watching C-Span and seeing RP votes not being counted. I then went on ronpaulforums and other people had seen it too.

 

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Dealing From the Bottom of the Deck

Last night, when CNN shut down its election coverage after Ron won the Adelson caucus, there was no explanation, just a confusing switch to earlier coverage. We still do not know the results for approximately half the votes in the state. I believe Ron came in a solid second, at least, beating Newt and threatening Rom. And who knows, he might have done better than that. We can be pretty sure there are shenanigans going on, because the MSM is not questioning the unprecedented delay. It reminds me of the Iowa strawpoll, which I believe--with good reason--was won by Ron, and not Bach. I guess we will never know, without some courageous whistleblowers, but the US has a long history of stolen elections. Are we supposed to think the present breed of pols is above such things, when trillions and trillions are at stake?

UPDATE from Scott Weisman:

This is why I'm pretty pretty sure (in addition to the "it" in "in it to win it" being the presidency, not the nomination) that the good doctor is going to go all the way. At worst, he'll just rally more people to the cause.

UPDATE from Michael Morin:

I lived in Reno, NV for 6 1/2 years, leaving Dec. 29, 2011. Ron Paul stickers and supporters DOMINATE Washoe County. The only other support I ever witnessed was for Obama. I was there in 2008 caucus..there is no way these results could be real. Something is deeply wrong.

 

The Silver State Heist

GOP pols in Nevada still refuse to explain the outrageous and secretive late count of caucus votes in Clark County, home to Las Vegas. While 71% of precincts in the state were counted last night, that's only about 50% of the people. Apparently the turnout was the smallest in some time.

 

'Nevada GOP dealing with "trouble box" of questionable ballots'

Now, whose votes could those possibly be? (Thanks to Brad Funkhouser)

 

The Nevada Caucus Scandal

Incompetence, as Politico claims? Or something worse, to prevent Ron from trouncing Newt? (Thanks to Brad Funkhouser)

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,149
Points 23,875

Results now say 92% reporting. Dr. Paul is still behind Newt. WTF is going on???

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,028
Points 51,580
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Can we say "bait and switch headline"?

I can't believe I wasted my time reading that.

 

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745

Let's remember that the results are quite in line with the PPP polling done before this, and that Paul in fact outperformed his poll numbers...

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

I understand PPP is supposed to be the best in the business, but you read that Examiner chronology and tell me there isn't something fishy going on.

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,028
Points 51,580

"Can we say "bait and switch headline"?"

 

No.  It talked about exactly what was in the headline.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Okay, "sensationalism" then.

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,118
Points 87,310
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Quite fishy.

 

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,149
Points 23,875

More proof of voter fraud in other states.

 

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745

Hm, I have to say, that with all the evidence coming in (and especially this article: http://www.dailypaul.com/211599/did-only-25-of-the-campaigns-identified-supporters-showed-up-somethings-very-wrong ) it seems like this is something worth looking into.

Now, being good Austrians, we should know that those graphs may show a correlation, but not necessarily a law and definitive proof. Evidence to consider, but not a 100% valid argument.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,922
Points 79,590

Remember, if voting actually changed anything, it would be illegal.

The keyboard is mightier than the gun.

Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.

Voluntaryism Forum

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,149
Points 23,875

Fox News reports on voter fraud.

 

 

 

Remember, if voting actually changed anything, it would be illegal.

Didnt a communist say that?

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Freedom4Me73986:
Didnt a communist say that?

Didn't you say you were going off to live in the woods?

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,149
Points 23,875

 

Freedom4Me73986:
Didnt a communist say that?

Didn't you say you were going off to live in the woods?

Yes and I will soon enough. I'm researching survival shelters. What are you doing to prepare for collapse?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Still?  Wasn't that your excuse 4 months ago?

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 814
Points 14,875
Moderator

I'm suspicious of this whole process but this guy makes a decent attempt to argue why voting fraud didn't take place in Nevada. He's part of the Paul campaign in someway.

http://robertfellner.blogspot.com/2012/02/we-were-not-cheated-but-we-appear-to-be.html

The atoms tell the atoms so, for I never was or will but atoms forevermore be.

Yours sincerely,

Physiocrat

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,149
Points 23,875

Still?  Wasn't that your excuse 4 months ago?

Ive advanced my skills since then. Learning takes time.

Why are you pro-civ?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745

Division of labor

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 47
Points 985
Robert replied on Thu, Feb 9 2012 6:31 PM

Thanks for the link. Just to clarify I am not saying voter fraud absolutely didn't happen in Nevada, I'm saying there is no evidence of it, and it is absolutely not the reason Ron Paul lost.

The DailyPaul crowd is one thing, but this is the LvMI forums, let's remain loyal to the intellectual standard set by Mises.

Displaying a bar graph of the the 2008/2012 Ron Paul votes and using it to suggest there was voter fraud is so absurd. It could mean many things, we should know this. But to put Nevada's vote totals next to Florida is totally invalid.

In Florida there were over 1.2 million votes cast.

In Nevada there were 33,000.

See a problem?

Also, since we are comparing proportional changes from 2008-2012, why is there no mention of the fact total Nevada votes decreased by 25% from 2008 to 2012. And if the total pie goes down by 25% and our absolute number remains the same then....You know like inflation, we've gone over this stuff.

I saw a link of Nevada GOP chairwoman resigning in this thread too. She announced she was resigning Feb 5, 2012  (the day after caucus) over a month in advance. So again, trying to make Mises' head explode with frustration and imply her resignation is "proof of voter fraud!" is really lame.

I made my blog post not to prove that voter fraud was impossible. I just stated the fact that there is no actual evidence of it, and the Ron Paul campaign assigned our loss in Nevada to extremely lower than expected supporter turnout. I go into more detail as to why on my blog.

But the #1 reason I wrote that blog post was to ensure we maintain our intellectual honesty and not sink to the level of our opponents. When I posted it on the dailypaul.com forum it got down voted like crazy. It appears I chose the wrong venue, I would think it would fit in much more nicely here at the LvMI forums. As this is where I learned that message.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 47
Points 985
Robert replied on Thu, Feb 9 2012 6:39 PM

Forgot to quote the guy who linked to my blog! It's the robertfellner.blogspot one.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,149
Points 23,875

Division of labor

What makes you think the DoL won't naturally occur after civ's pending collapse?

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Robert:
Displaying a bar graph of the the 2008/2012 Ron Paul votes and using it to suggest there was voter fraud is so absurd. It could mean many things, we should know this. But to put Nevada's vote totals next to Florida is totally invalid.

In Florida there were over 1.2 million votes cast.

In Nevada there were 33,000.

See a problem?

a) The title just asks if there's anything fishy.  (Yes, I'm aware this largely implies foul play, but it's not exactly making a claim of fraud and then purporting to use the chart as evidence.  There's a difference.)

b) If you follow the link, you'll see it's merely a repost from Lew Rockwell's own personal blog.

c) I thought it was obvious the point of the chart was to show the differences between 2008/2012 in each individual state...not to compare totals of one state versus another.

 

Also, since we are comparing proportional changes from 2008-2012, why is there no mention of the fact total Nevada votes decreased by 25% from 2008 to 2012. And if the total pie goes down by 25% and our absolute number remains the same then....You know like inflation, we've gone over this stuff.

Yes, I read this in the comments on your blog.  But you have to admit, if votes were confiscated and placed away in a safe in a casino, that would decrease the vote total too.

Plus, if you want to play that game, total Florida votes decreased by 14.21%, yet Paul's total increased by nearly 87% there...in a decidedly not libertarian state. (And on top of that, I don't have to tell you he essentially didn't even campaign there.)

 

I saw a link of Nevada GOP chairwoman resigning in this thread too. She announced she was resigning Feb 5, 2012  (the day after caucus) over a month in advance. So again, trying to make Mises' head explode with frustration and imply her resignation is "proof of voter fraud!" is really lame.

Again...just aggregating posts from Ron Paul support world.  This is a Nevada Caucus thread in a forum run by the non-profit founded and chaired by Lew Rockwell.

The first post you attacked here was a direct replication of a Lew Rockwell personal post.  The GOP chairwoman is a link to a personal post of Robert Wenzel, advisory board member of RevolutionPAC, and as far as I know, at least friendly with Rockwell.

I realize I am responsible for my own actions in reposting their material, but not only are they the originators of the content, their sites get a lot more traffic than a single thread on the "old" Mises.org forum.  You might take up your concerns with them.

 

I made my blog post not to prove that voter fraud was impossible. I just stated the fact that there is no actual evidence of it, and the Ron Paul campaign assigned our loss in Nevada to extremely lower than expected supporter turnout. I go into more detail as to why on my blog.

But the #1 reason I wrote that blog post was to ensure we maintain our intellectual honesty and not sink to the level of our opponents. When I posted it on the dailypaul.com forum it got down voted like crazy. It appears I chose the wrong venue, I would think it would fit in much more nicely here at the LvMI forums. As this is where I learned that message.

I understand this, I have read your post and the comments, and I agree with you.  I can appreciate the fact that you were there and you were involved, so I will take your word.  I was not there.  I appreciate your writing the blog and sharing your experience.

However, I am quite interested to hear your explanation of the other posts in this thread...In particular the chronology of the vote tally, and how you chalk up 24+ hours needed to tally <17,000 votes to simply "bad organization."

I'm also interested to hear your take on the excess vote tallies.  More "sloppiness"?

Again, I'm not saying this is proof of anything, but there comes a point when the aggregation of circumstantial evidence adds up to more than the sum of its parts.  (And for more clarity, I'm not saying that point has necessarily been reached, but I have to agree with one of the commenters on your blog that you are being a bit dismissive.  However I can understand why you may overcompensate so as to combat the DP types.)

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 47
Points 985
Robert replied on Thu, Feb 9 2012 7:26 PM

Can't waste too much more time on this. I wasn't calling you out, I honestly just skimmed this thread in 10 seconds, I don't even know your username or that you were the one posting all the objectionable sources.

I liked your extensive explanation of lew rockwell and the non-profit nature of mises.org that was kind of odd, but funny.

 

I am basically making a plea for my fellow stewards of the Misesian teachings to not indulge in crap that we would rightfully dismiss as nonsense if coming from the other side.

Like this: "c) I thought it was obvious the point of the chart was to show the differences between 2008/2012 in each individual state...not to compare totals of one state versus another. "

If that graph were used to suggest some conclusion you strongly disagreed with, boy I might think you'd have serious qualms with it.

 

Including the results of a 1.2M sample size and a 33k next to each other in the same graph that uses a Y-axis to display absolute vote totals, which Nevada is mathematically incapable of achieving, is fundamentally invalid and delibartely misleading.

Which is precisely why the data was presented in this way, and we all know it. That's my main gripe.

 

Take care.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,953
Points 118,135

Robert:
or that you were the one posting all the objectionable sources.

I wasn't.  I just posted the specific ones you attacked.

 

Robert:
I liked your extensive explanation of lew rockwell and the non-profit nature of mises.org that was kind of odd, but funny.

The point of that explanation was to point out those posts (including the chart) are coming from the same source that essentially owns this forum.

 

Robert:
Including the results of a 1.2M sample size and a 33k next to each other in the same graph that uses a Y-axis to display absolute vote totals, which Nevada is mathematically incapable of achieving, is fundamentally invalid and delibartely misleading.

Which is precisely why the data was presented in this way, and we all know it. That's my main gripe.

That is not the way I saw it at all.  I saw a bunch of low blue bars next to much higher red bars...except for one column where they were virtually the same height.  That is what the chart was supposed to illustrate.

Again, Judge Napolitano showed the same chart on Freedom Watch to make that very point.  (Which you would have seen had you bothered to actually read my post, which you obviously didn't.)

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 814
Points 16,290
No2statism replied on Fri, Feb 10 2012 12:39 AM

Just in: http://www.dailypaul.com/212690/maine-caucus-results-ron-paul-is-winning

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (38 items) | RSS