Just got off the phone with HQ

[pilby]

Ron Paul could say that he wants the recount because Obama got robbed.

EXACTLY!!! there is quite a bit of evidence of tampering with RP's numbers. maybe enough to move him up a spot. but the big news is Obama/Clinton and the fact that in hand counts, he handily beat her, but machine-counts gave Clinton a completely unexpected and unexplainable victory.

The Obama and Paul campaigns (possible others who might be interested) could team up to pursue this.

 

[Bradley in DC]

Bradley, to me at this point its not really about the recount. Its about the damn lack of communication PERIOD.

I feel your pain, I really do. Most of them are incompetent--or at least not competent for the jobs they're being asked to do--and need to be fired. I'm not saying this is not an important issue. It's just that compared to all of the other problems with the official campaign, the recount call is far less important, IMHO. Again, it's a relative statement.

 

[rexsolomon]

guidance from official RP campaign lacking

If Dr. Paul does not want a recount, he should tell us.

Exactly. There is too much speculation and not much guidance from the source.

A campaign run by not even remote control. $20 million and no mechanism to get the word out to the grassroots on time?

I'd support a recount if Dr. Paul wants it.

 

[romeo2]

idk guys, getting caught cheating an election for the future president of the united states is a big deal. britney spears gets all this media attn and her stupid lil sister, but a rigged presidential primary election with proof cant get any air time? thats pathetic. hq doesnt want to seem like a sore loser but at least a public statement should be made from the good doc addressing the sutton situation and how it wont stop us from continuing spreading our message of liberty blah blah blah. right? we have the proof and a statement that they did make a "mistake" in the handcount (31 vs. 0 lol). it shouldnt be our main focus, continuing in other states should be, but at least rp saying "tsk, tsk, tsk i should sue you for being idiots" would be valid instead of letting this slide

 

[PatriotOne]

Look, I've not been shy pointing out when I think the official campaign staff are screwing up. (Actually, I've been very reserved and only made a small fraction public, but that's another story.)

In this ONE CASE, I think HQ is making the right decision. Only if we thought Dr. Paul got 50% more votes than his total shows would it make enough of a difference to get him in the top three and get awarded any delegates. There is no reason to think that is the case.

There are simply too many other things where HQ is behind schedule, etc., to worry about spilled milk. They need to be working now on making sure they stop screwing up the coming voting.

And yes, I type grudgingly, they are right also about the perception too.

In sum, the costs outweigh the expected benefits.

We don't really have a clue how much voter fraud went on until at least a portion of NH is audited do we? For all we know, RP could have gotten 20% but we wouldn't know it.

Frankly, anyone who doesn't think we should have a recount deserves to have Hillary as their next President.

 

[dsentell]

I am as enraged by this as anyone and I believe that we must challenge the count.

However, let's take a deep breath and look at this rationally:

1) I believe that we must protect Dr. Paul from any negative blowback. Thus, I do not believe that his campaign should have anything to do with the recount. RP could deny any involvement in the recount and place all "blame" on us.

2) We, the revolutionaries should take charge and secure a recount. We are already labeled kooks, tards and everything else by the media so what is a little more blowback going to do to us. We can take it . . .

Remember what CNBC said about us "don't mess with Ron Paul supporters!" That's right.

Besides, the Granny Warriors have already set up a chipin to pay for a recount

Again, my two cents . . .

 

[Redcard]

I got news for you people.

EITHER

Dr. Paul doesn't want a recount and TOLD his staff to tell you that, in which case, if you don't like it , get the FUCK out of his campaign, because that's his decision and you need to COPE.

OR

Dr. Paul doesn't know what his campaign is doing beneath him, in which case, I don't want a man who can't control his own staff.

So which one do you think it is?

 

[Bradley in DC]

I respect your post, but have to disagree. If you're not willing to stand up for every vote being counted, what are we willing to stand up for as a community? I take my right to vote as serious as anyone else here.. and mine better be #$#$ counted.

Given that only three states have voted, Jim Condit, Jr. does not think there was a major fraud problem in Iowa, there was no problem in Wyoming (with fraud, not with HQ dropping the ball there too), and NH's relatively small number of delegates, I think we have to focus now while we still have time on preparing for the upcoming races.

Since we'd be asking people who can't walk and chew gum at the same time to focus on the NH vote, it means we'd then screw up the coming 47 states, DC and all of the territories. Sad, but true.

It does not mean I don't share your concerns or disagree with your opinion.

 

[LinearChaos]

Theyll know what to do.

Bullshit.

You have to see the risks! Vote fraud is a serious accusation.

you act like committing the act isn't as bad as reporting it...

I don't think the evidence is strong enough to proof a significant "misscount".

The people in Sutten Country CONFIRMED that they put in a 0 instead of a 31, and blamed it on human error. You think this is the only place that happened? Not to mention the fact that BlackBoxVoting.org just came out with solid evidence that the person who was in charge of programming the machines for NH is a CONVICTED COCAINE SMUGGLER. These aren't "nice" people and it isn't "human error" that those 31 votes weren't counted. It should be "unacceptable" that those votes weren't tallied, period.

There are several ways to make us look bad.

1) There is no fraud to begin with.
2) The recounts shows that we have 50 votes more. It's insignificant and will be "human mistakes".
3) There is vote fraud, but those who recount are the same, so we never find out.

All this will make us look like a stupid, conspiracy fanatic, fringe campaign of sore loser.

Or, we can continue to go forward and let the fraud continue full steam ahead. The establishment will see that we didn't do shit about obvious, confirmed fraud (i.e. "human error") in NH, so we won't do shit about fraud in any other state.

The Libertarians have seen people off to jail by demanding a recount for this type of vote rigging.

Is Paul going to be another Kerry or he is actually going to do something about obvious voter fraud and rigged elections?

 

[Ninja Homer]

Look, I've not been shy pointing out when I think the official campaign staff are screwing up. (Actually, I've been very reserved and only made a small fraction public, but that's another story.)

In this ONE CASE, I think HQ is making the right decision. Only if we thought Dr. Paul got 50% more votes than his total shows would it make enough of a difference to get him in the top three and get awarded any delegates. There is no reason to think that is the case.

There are simply too many other things where HQ is behind schedule, etc., to worry about spilled milk. They need to be working now on making sure they stop screwing up the coming voting.

And yes, I type grudgingly, they are right also about the perception too.

In sum, the costs outweigh the expected benefits.

I mostly agree with you. In the end, the decision will be up to Ron Paul, and flooding their lines isn't going to help a bit.

I'd much rather see the campaign spend some money on PREVENTING voter fraud in the next primary than recounting NH. I'd think it would be a lot easier to prevent it from the beginning than to try to detect it after the fact.

Grassroots, on the other hand, can do whatever the hell they want. You want a recount Menthol Patch? Find out how much it will cost and start a chip-in. Better yet, infiltrate Obama boards and get them to do it.

 

[Bradley in DC]

If they don't have a recount then I will stand up and say that Ron Paul is not as principled as I thought he was.

If that's what you need to do to get through this, have fun then. Personally, I'm hoping (without hope) that the official campaign staff will get the epiphany that they could learn from their mistakes and act accordingly to get prepared for the many dozens of elections fast approaching. Truthfully though, I suspect your approach is more likely to have a positive result.

 

[Redcard]

It's your choice. We can spend every day looking backwards at the last day, wondering who screwed us over.. or we can look forward to the next.

That said, if we spend all our time looking back, just throw in the towel, it's done.

 

[dsentell]

Granny Warrior chipin for a recount:



http://grannywarrior.chipin.com/recount

 

[Sandra]

Are you guys even aware that Obama's supporters want to the same?

 

[LinearChaos]

It's your choice. We can spend every day looking backwards at the last day, wondering who screwed us over.. or we can look forward to the next.

That said, if we spend all our time looking back, just throw in the towel, it's done.

What is the fucking point of looking forward if the vote is going to be a rigged fraud?

Do you continue building a house if you notice the foundation is cracked?

 

[dsentell]

It's your choice. We can spend every day looking backwards at the last day, wondering who screwed us over.. or we can look forward to the next.

That said, if we spend all our time looking back, just throw in the towel, it's done.

Your car was stolen yesterday . . . do you forget it and just look forward to tomorrow? Or do you take a little time and try to do something about your stolen car?

 

[JayDee]

Why cant the people of NH demand a recount? It's their vote.

I think that if there is no count then we will see this again and again and our chances for a future are zip. If Ron Paul demands a recount, it may hurt him politically.. but it may also scare poll officials from rigging future elections knowing that people in NH went to jail for it.. as they most rightly should.

 

[dsentell]

Are you guys even aware that Obama's supporters want to the same?

Do you have any connections to them? Is there a possibility that the supporters in our two camps could join forces . . . . ?

 

[Redcard]

What is the fucking point of looking forward if the vote is going to be a rigged fraud?

Do you continue building a house if you notice the foundation is cracked?

If the whole damn game is a fraud, what's the point of even PLAYING? What the fuck are we doing here?

I don't accept your pessimism, sir. I don't accept that I am wasting my time for something that has already been decided.

I'm not that fucking stupid, are you? Do you really believe that we have no chance whatsoever because its' all a fraud? If so, why are you doing this? Don't give me an "Out of principle" response. "Out of principle" would be to call the game a rigged game BEFORE you put the $20,000,000 in , and refuse to play entirely.

 

[CapitalistRadical]

If the votes are clean, we may lose. If they are rigged, we definitely lose. Which one do you prefer?