NV CAUCUS-GOERS: Please post your observations / live results in this thread!

[cornell]

DOMINATED the special caucus!

Gingrich 42, Paul 153, Romney 49, Santorum 11, 1 No Vote

 

[Maximus]

Washoe came in:

Romney 2,836
Grinch 1,876
Paul 1,168
Santorum 817

 

[The Tatami Galaxy]

Like?

 

[jllundqu]

Newts quoting the deceleration of independence and the constitution. Who does he think hes fooling?

lol... deceleration.... like slowing down....huhuh

 

[affa]

It's really, really, really hard to juke the numbers in a caucus. I mean, we literally have Ron Paul supporters there while the votes are being counted. On paper ballots. After our supporters had a chance to speak to every person in the room, and get a feel for what the makeup of the room was.

If the numbers in ANY precinct differ from what our supporters expected, we will know about it.

In Iowa, they started collecting ballots in boxes... from 'people on the ground', this used to be done with a simple raise your hand count.

this opens up a number of ways to easily 'juke' the vote. For example, some people might surreptitiously add more than one ballot into the box. They need not be obvious about this; they could have been handed blank ballots before the event by a single nefarious insider. Second, unless the box is shown to be empty before you begin, you have no idea if it is. I am not saying these things happen, but I am saying they could happen.

if you want me to believe your vote total at the end of the night, then at the very least, do an official head count at the beginning, and ensure that the totals match up. Also, have each ballot numbered, and when the ballot is counted, read out the number so that people can see their vote is accounted for.

That's just two simple ideas off the top of my head; I'm sure with any level of real discussion we could sort something very streamlined out that allows for anonymous, secure voting. If the goal is for people to trust that no fraud is going on, it's worth the effort. If, instead, it's assumed anyone crying vote fraud will be called a paranoid conspiracy theorist, then, well, you could probably even convince people to vote on a black box machine with no paper trail...

 

[Jackie Treehorn]

Washoe went back to Romney!! Thought Newt won that!

Surge.

 

[Maximus]

Washoe went back to Romney!! Thought Newt won that!

No it was only at 15.3% then just jumped to 100%

 

[Pauls' Revere]

Only two votes separate Mitt and Newt in Mineral County.

 

[KramerDSP]

mollyesque Molly Ball
Vote total at Adelson School caucus: Ron Paul 153, Romney 49, Gingrich 42, Santorum 11. #nvcaucus

 

[pauliticalfan]

Like?

LIKE!!!!!!

 

[Pauls' Revere]

No it was only at 15.3% then just jumped to 100%

Thanks.

 

[Maximus]

Haha we KILLED the special caucus

 

[Lavitz]

We officially won the special caucus.

 

[EndTheECB]

1,300 votes over Gingrich needed

Yup Ron Paul would have to win with around 7% over Newt to get 2:nd. I've tried to count on a possible outcome were Paul got enough votes in Clark to move ahead Gingrich. This is what i concluded:

Considering that the vote in Nevada has shrunken by alot since 4 years ago and Clark then had 24000 voters turning out, i'd guess that we get something around 20 000 this time. With those numbers we would need:

Romney: 11000 55%
Ron Paul: 4600 23%
Gingrich: 3200 16%
Santorum: 1200 6%

 

[jax]

Hahahah ron paul KILLED newts special JEWISH caucus

 

[Txrose4ever]

Paul wins in a landslide at the special caucus!

 

[MsDoodahs]

With all the insanity we've witnessed, does anyone trust the voting process in this country anymore?

 

[sailingaway]

DOMINATED the special caucus!

Gingrich 42, Paul 153, Romney 49, Santorum 11, 1 No Vote

love it!!

but what dedication to go to a caucus for a 'no vote'!

 

[jllundqu]

Nice! Those caucus goers just showed the country how its done!

 

[alucard13mmfmj]

In Iowa, they started collecting ballots in boxes... from 'people on the ground', this used to be done with a simple raise your hand count.

this opens up a number of ways to easily 'juke' the vote. For example, some people might surreptitiously add more than one ballot into the box. They need not be obvious about this; they could have been handed blank ballots before the event by a single nefarious insider. Second, unless the box is shown to be empty before you begin, you have no idea if it is. I am not saying these things happen, but I am saying they could happen.

if you want me to believe your vote total at the end of the night, then at the very least, do an official head count at the beginning, and ensure that the totals match up. Also, have each ballot numbered, and when the ballot is counted, read out the number so that people can see their vote is accounted for.

That's just two simple ideas off the top of my head; I'm sure with any level of real discussion we could sort something very streamlined out that allows for anonymous, secure voting. If the goal is for people to trust that no fraud is going on, it's worth the effort. If, instead, it's assumed anyone crying vote fraud will be called a paranoid conspiracy theorist, then, well, you could probably even convince people to vote on a black box machine with no paper trail...

Gabriel: Have you ever heard of Harry Houdini? Well he wasn't like today's magicians who are only interested in television ratings. He was an artist. He could make an elephant disappear in the middle of a theater filled with people, and do you know how he did that? Misdirection.
Stanley: What the fuck are you talking about?
Gabriel: Misdirection. What the eyes see and the ears hear, the mind believes.