Nevada results rolling in now!

90.5% (1629/1800) reporting
Romney 15,364 (49.5%)
Grinch 6,591 (21.2%)
Paul 5,871 (18.9%) Paul 720 votes behind Grinch
Santorum 3174 (10.2%)
 
At least i live in the green portion of that map...lol

Are you in Nye County?

If so, what happened to the supposedly 800 new registrants in Pahrump? I would have thought we would have increased the total there by more than 39 votes with how many new people, dems, and indies they got to register GOP.
 
90.5% reporting (1629/1800)
Romney 49.4% 15,382
Gingrich 21.2% 6,605
Paul 18.9% 5,879
Santorum 10.2% 3,181

hmmm some difference from one just above with same precincts reporting
 
Last edited:
unofficial

karoun Karoun Demirjian
Romney: 16,513 (50.1%); Gingrich: 6,958 (21.1%); Paul 6,179 (18.8%); Santorum 3,280 (10%). Total turnout: 32,930.
1 hour ago

karoun Karoun Demirjian
That all means the delegates to be awarded are: Romney = 14, Gingrich = 6, Paul - 5, Santorum = 3. First numbers out, y'all.
1 hour ago
 
90.5% reporting (1629/1800)

Romney 49.5% 15,429
Gingrich 21.2% 6,621
Paul 18.9% 5,901
Santorum 10.2% 3,182

-720
 
Last edited:
Have any of you guys heard news reports on the GROWING number of independent voters? Have you heard the approval rates of Congress lately? If you think about it, more people have been BECOMING independents--It's a political choice made by actual voting people. Seems to me there are more indies than Rs or Ds. If this is the case it really does bode well for an indie run, IMO.

A January article on the subject:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/independent-voters-on-the-rise-but-do-they-matter/

Question: What influence, if any, would the GOP or the Dems exert on an independent run? If the answer is none, how could this not be the "libertarian" way of doing things?
 
Last edited:
Nevada Caucus
February 4, 2012
100% reporting (1800/1800)
This page updates automatically
Cycle Candidates

All Candidates

Romney
50.0%
16,486

Gingrich
21.1%
6,956

Paul
18.7%
6,175

Santorum
9.9%
3,277
 
Turnout a little under 33k, 08' was a little over 42k.

Thats about a fifth less overall... Romney maintained his percentage of ±50%, although he received about 5000 less votes.
Paul had about 100 votes more then last time...

Does anybody have those numbers that were released at 50% reporting ? Before all those recounts ? How many votes were counted before that ?
 
Wow, only 33K votes and they actually had trouble counting them. Sheesh.
 
It is all bs, Ron Paul came in second and it is every American's duty to stick around for the precinct count and to take a photo of results and upload them. We have treason running rampant amongst our party officials.
 
Turnout a little under 33k, 08' was a little over 42k.

Thats about a fifth less overall... Romney maintained his percentage of ±50%, although he received about 5000 less votes.
Paul had about 100 votes more then last time...

Does anybody have those numbers that were released at 50% reporting ? Before all those recounts ? How many votes were counted before that ?

This can't be right. How did we only get 100 more votes than in '08'? I call bullsh!t.
 
This can't be right. How did we only get 100 more votes than in '08'? I call bullsh!t.

Nevada has had a huge population decline since the economy went bust. I'd figure that the many of people that left are in the Paul wheelhouse.
 
Nevada has had a huge population decline since the economy went bust. I'd figure that the many of people that left are in the Paul wheelhouse.

Also, 2008 was an election year with no incumbent. Generally, those years see increased turnout for both parties over those in which there is an incumbent. Don't ask me why this is, it's just generally how it occurs if you look back at all the elections.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top