Total RP Pres. Texas votes 69,824 vs RP district14 Total votes 54,111

[ronpaulbillboards]

Ron Paul votes in the 14th district. If these results are 100% legit, than we have some work to do. People that are already familiar with Ron Paul and voted for him locally but didn't support him nationally. That's a problem, and probably related to the GOP status quo of supporting the endorsed candidate.

Aransas

Congressman
4020

President
300

Brazoria

Congressman
17562

President
3611

Calhoun

Congressman
828

President
91

Chambers

Congressman
3350

President
265

Fort Bend

Congressman
5550

President
1950

Galveston

Congressman
11090

President
1316

Jackson

Congressman
681

President
106

Matagorda

Congressman
1749

President
188

Victoria

Congressman
4939

President
893

Wharton

Congressman
3721

President
357

 

[Shaun]

For the first time in this entire campaign, I can see that in Texas, it was likely, there was some fraud. I have been relentless in attacking other posters on this fraud issue prior to this thread, but even I, a devout anti conspiracy theorist can see that this one is fishy...
God if I'm on this side of the fence others like me must be saying the same thing....
This is suspect. No question.
Well done for raising this...

 

[SteveMartin]

To summarize:

We are supposed to believe that 40,000 people (roughly 40%) of CD #14 voters refused to vote in the Congressional Race, but voted overwhelmingly for McCain, who beat Paul by 40,000 votes in that district. Then, we are supposed to believe that only 1/4 of the people who DID vote for Ron Paul for the Congressional seat also voted for him for President.

Then we are supposed to believe that all of these neocon voters (90% of the voters in the district voted for one on the 2 neocon Presidential candidates) turned their backs completely on the neocon Congressional candidate, Peden. Only 15% of those who went to the polls voted for Peden.

Uh huh...

 

[constituent]

To summarize:

We are supposed to believe that 40,000 people (roughly 40%) of CD #14 voters refused to vote in the Congressional Race, but voted overwhelmingly for McCain, who beat Paul by 40,000 votes in that district. Then, we are supposed to believe that only 1/4 of the people who DID vote for Ron Paul for the Congressional seat also voted for him for President.

Then we are supposed to believe that all of these neocon voters (90% of the voters in the district voted for one on the 2 neocon Presidential candidates) turned their backs completely on the neocon Congressional candidate, Peden. Only 15% of those who went to the polls voted for Peden.

Uh huh...

what's the next step?

 

[SteveMartin]

We are told that Ron Paul got 69,000 votes for President across the entire state--his HOME State--a state where independence movements are born. We are told that 9000 of those votes came from one CD--his own, the 14th.

If you look at the 40,000 vote margin that McCain got over Paul in his own district and see that 40,000 people voted for President who didn't vote in the Congressional race at all, then the question comes up: "Were those 40,000 votes padded on to McCain's total in the district to keep RP from beating McCain there?"

If you allow that this might be the case, and extrapolate that this additional 40,000 votes' percentage was added for McCain across the State, you get a Huckabee win, and a continued hope for a brokered convention.

What is next?? Someone should look at the other Congressional races across Texas to see if in any other CD there was a wide discrepancy between the numbers of people who voted in the Congressional race versus the Presidential race.

Then, we can do some more analysis...

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

We may find out that it is IN FACT voter fraud. But we don't know this for sure. It sounds to me like he is merely suggesting that we investigate it further and really find out what caused it.

I agree with that, completely. Well, not with anyone's intentions on this forum, but with the idea that things deserve honest investigation.

ok then, what are you going to do? What is this whole argument about then? If there is no action that can be taken then what does it matter WHAT the reason was?

That... I don't agree with, and I'm not convinced you agree with it either.


While I don't think vote fraud is a major international conspiracy, there's overwhelming evidence that politicians and their buddies engage in all sorts of sleazy disenfranchisement tactics. They also get away with it quite a bit, and have done so for many years. Joe sixpack doesn't care because it's just crooks stealing from crooks, and they know they're getting the short end of the stick no matter which crook wins.

Just looking at the numbers... I want an explanation. It doesn't have to be the explanation I already believe or an explanation that I like. I want an explanation that is true.

These things need to be proven, and people need to be prosecuted. Until low level political party people are being put in jail for vote fraud, we can expect it to continue. Same with voter disenfranchisement. Politicians usually lose their jobs when they commit crimes. They deserve jail, just as they would jail those they believe to be their underlings.

 

[Sandra]

Where's Alvin?

 

[syborius]

bump

 

[SteveMartin]

Someone should look at the other Congressional races across Texas to see if in any other CD there was a wide discrepancy between the numbers of people who voted in the Congressional race versus the Presidential race.

 

[hyoomen]

If you look at the 40,000 vote margin that McCain got over Paul in his own district and see that 40,000 people voted for President who didn't vote in the Congressional race at all, then the question comes up: "Were those 40,000 votes padded on to McCain's total in the district to keep RP from beating McCain there?"

If you're adding up all of the county's results listed on the page for TX-14, did you account for the 30,000 people who don't vote in TX-14 in those counties but actually vote for TX-22? If you add in the 30,000 you get close to the 94806 Presidential votes. Add in the fact that many people don't vote for positions they aren't familiar w/ and you have a simple reason.

I have an Excel spreadsheet I'm looking at right now with figures properly accounted for. 9077 people voted for Dr. Paul in TX-14 and some of TX-22 for President; 37220 voted for Dr. Paul for Congress. Unless you want to extrapolate precinct by precinct, those aren't terrible odds. That having been said, my own quick sum shows a bit more than 13000 votes not accounted for between the Congressional totals in those counties and the Presidential totals in those counties. Even if all 13462 that I haven't accounted for were added back in as votes for Congressman Paul, his percentage across all of those counties would only go up to 12%.

Again, you are basing your argument on a theory that because Texas is an independent-spirited state (hint, as a resident of multiple areas of Texas over the past 27 years, it isn't anymore), these figures can't be correct. Apparently, bad math is also playing a role.

Just because people vote for an incumbent in one part of a ticket doesn't mean they'll vote for the same person (who is at the bottom of the ballot!) in another.

 

[SteveMartin]

EXCERPT IF YOU DON'T HAVE TIME TO READ WHOLE EXPLANATION




I was startled by the explanation.? It seems that there were no Republican primaries in 21 counties, and no Democratic primaries in three counties.? This would explain the numbers, but it would still be a fact that voters of one party or another are disenfranchised, countywide, in many counties in Texas.? To me, this seemed unacceptable in a democracy.







On Mar 7, 2008, at 12:35 PM, Virginia Brooks wrote:


?
Updated report from Tx.? Virginia Brooks
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.
March 6, 2008
???? Last night I posted a compilation of election results from Tuesday?s presidential primary in Texas, showing that in 21 counties there were no votes cast in the Republican primary, and in three counties there were no votes cast in the Democratic primary. (The original posting is appended).? I asked for an explanation, and I received one from David Rogers, an attorney in Austin, Texas, described as a supporter of election integrity.
?? ??As I had noticed, the 24 counties in question are quite sparsely populated, accounting for 0.73% of the registered voters in the State of Texas.? Rogers explained that a number of these counties "have no county chairmen (particularly on the Republican side).? With no county chairman, there is no one to organize or run a primary.? Perversely, some of the counties with no Republican chairmen consistently go Republican at the top of the ticket in November, but all the local officials are Democrats."
???? I was startled by the explanation.? It seems that there were no Republican primaries in 21 counties, and no Democratic primaries in three counties.? This would explain the numbers, but it would still be a fact that voters of one party or another are disenfranchised, countywide, in many counties in Texas.? To me, this seemed unacceptable in a democracy.
???? Rogers replied that, unacceptable or not, this is the most likely explanation for the results I observed.? "Republicans have been disenfranchised like this in Texas for over a century (in fact, getting the number of no-Republican-primary counties below 25 is a recent and remarkable achievement.)"
???? Rogers explained that while ballots, voting machines, and election workers are all paid for by the state government, the local parties at the county level have to bear the costs of administration and accounting; and they have to find someone to do the paperwork, and somewhere to store the paper.? "The costs in time and money to the parties aren't much, but they aren't nothing."
???? "The failure is almost entirely organizational," Rogers said.? "The state party tries to help the local counties some, so which counties have no party changes some from year to year, but the state party can?t force the locals to
organize if they don?t want to."
???? "If there aren?t enough Republicans in a county to organize themselves and pay the costs required," Rogers concluded, "I would say the Republicans are self-disenfranchising."? A "party whose members can?t bestir themselves enough to set up a primary obviously aren?t that interested."
???? I deeply appreciate Rogers? explanation.? In short, political parties at the county level can decide not to participate in a primary election by deciding not to organize for it and not to pay administrative, accounting, and storage costs.? In the disinterested counties, interested voters must undertake to organize the primary themselves and to find some way to bear the financial burden, or vote in the other party?s primary, or not vote at all.
???? For the record, in the 21 counties in which there was no Republican primary last Tuesday, Kerry outpolled Bush by 21,089 to 19,732 in the 2004 presidential election, and Bell (the Democrat) outpolled Perry (the Republican) by 9,508 to 6,820 in the 2006 gubernatorial election.? In the three counties in which there was no Democratic primary last Tuesday, Bush outpolled Kerry by 3,194 to 456 in 2004, and Perry outpolled Bell by 1,279 to 208 in 2006.
???? The fact that these counties are sparsely populated does not make me feel any better about the disenfranchisement of their voters.? There are 93,131 registered voters in these 24 counties.? Failure to engage in political organizing should not be grounds to deny or abridge the right to vote.
??? But far be it from me to tell the State of Texas how to run its elections.? In the State of New York we have our own methods of voter disenfranchisement.? Voters had to declare their party affiliation by October 12, 2007 in order to vote in the presidential primary of February 5, 2008.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.
March 5, 2008
?
?
???? Didn't anybody notice this?
?
???? It is now 24 hours after the polls closed in Texas.? In 21 counties, with 100% of precincts reporting, nobody voted in the Republican presidential primary.? In three counties, with 100% of precincts reporting, nobody voted in the Democratic presidential primary.
???? In the 21 counties with no Republican voters, there were 87,919 registered voters, and 36,239 ballots cast, all of them Democratic.
???? In the three counties with no Democratic voters, there were 5,212 registered voters, and 1,865 ballots cast, all of them Republican.
???? In Maverick County, all 9,661 ballots cast were Democratic.? In Hansford County, all 1,235 ballots cast were Republican.
ONE-PARTY TEXAS COUNTIES, PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY, 2008
County????????????? Registered??? Republican??? Democratic
??????????????????? Voters ?????? Votes???????? Votes
Armstrong??????????? 1404??????? ? 369????????? ?? 0
Borden??????????????? 432???????? ?? 0????????? ?139
Brooks ?????? ?????? 6385???????? ?? 0????????? 3185
Cottle ?????? ?????? 1230???????? ?? 0????????? ?471
Crockett????? ?????? 2654???????? ?? 0????????? 1166
Culberson???? ?????? 1959???????? ?? 0????????? ?526
Dickens?????? ?????? 1410???????? ?? 0????????? ?612
Duval???????? ?????? 9331???????? ?? 0????????? 5053
Foard???????? ?????? 1043???????? ?? 0?????????? 432
Hall????????? ?????? 2110???????? ?? 0?????????? 813
Hansford???????????? 3101???????? 1235????????? ?? 0
Hardeman????? ?????? 2969???????? ?? 0????????? 1086
Hudspeth????? ?????? 1557???????? ?? 0???????? ? 476
Kent????????? ?????? ?665???????? ?? 0???????? ? 250
La Salle????? ?????? 4071???????? ?? 0????????? 1392
Loving????????????????116???????? ?? 0????????? ? 22
Maverick????????????26224???????? ?? 0????????? 9661
Reeves??????? ?????? 6337???????? ?? 0????????? 2228
Roberts?????????????? 707???????? ?261????????? ?? 0
Stonewall????????????1087????????????0?????????? 483
Throckmorton???????? 1175??????????? 0???????????513
Upton??????????????? 2139??????????? 0???????????823
Zapata??????? ?????? 7148? ?????? ?? 0????????? 3190
Zavala??????? ?????? 7877???????? ?? 0????????? 3718
???? But don?t take my word for it.? See for yourself.
http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04_135_race0.htm
http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04_136_race0.htm
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#TX
???? Election officials in the State of Texas have some explaining to do.
Richard Hayes Phillips is the author of the definitive book on the 2004 presidential election in Ohio ? "Witness to a Crime: A Citizens? Audit of an American Election."? For more information: [email protected]

 

[ronpaulbillboards]

If you're adding up all of the county's results listed on the page for TX-14, did you account for the 30,000 people who don't vote in TX-14 in those counties but actually vote for TX-22? If you add in the 30,000 you get close to the 94806 Presidential votes. Add in the fact that many people don't vote for positions they aren't familiar w/ and you have a simple reason.

I have an Excel spreadsheet I'm looking at right now with figures properly accounted for. 9077 people voted for Dr. Paul in TX-14 and some of TX-22 for President; 37220 voted for Dr. Paul for Congress. Unless you want to extrapolate precinct by precinct, those aren't terrible odds. That having been said, my own quick sum shows a bit more than 13000 votes not accounted for between the Congressional totals in those counties and the Presidential totals in those counties. Even if all 13462 that I haven't accounted for were added back in as votes for Congressman Paul, his percentage across all of those counties would only go up to 12%.

Again, you are basing your argument on a theory that because Texas is an independent-spirited state (hint, as a resident of multiple areas of Texas over the past 27 years, it isn't anymore), these figures can't be correct. Apparently, bad math is also playing a role.

Just because people vote for an incumbent in one part of a ticket doesn't mean they'll vote for the same person (who is at the bottom of the ballot!) in another.

Your totals are wrong because there is a total 0f 69,000 votes for Ron Paul for president in the whole state of Texas.

What we are concerned about is the fact that 54,000 people voted for Ron Paul for Congressman in his district 14 which is the only ballot he was on.
In contrast those same voters in District 14 totaled 9,000 for President.

It just seems very strange that 45,000 people voted for an candidate that is 180 degrees against the person they voted for Congressman to represent their district. I would believe it if was reverse, like 45,000 of the 54,000 voted him for President.

Also the fact that he almost received as many votes in one district for Congressman versus Presidential votes for an entire state as big as Texas.

This is the home base for Ron Paul. It's weird and if we have a shot at exposing election fraud I believe this is it based on the difference in votes for the same person in the district. If anything positive can come from this landslide loss, it would be to expose election fraud.

Hopefully there are some people looking at this.

 

[ronpaulbillboards]

Maybe 45,000 of the voters were Democrats and Independents who were really concerned with the Congressional race. Why? This could be a possibility but I don't see any of these parties concerned about a Congressional race when the Clinton\Obama show is going on.

 

[hyoomen]

Your totals are wrong because there is a total 0f 69,000 votes for Ron Paul for president in the whole state of Texas.

What we are concerned about is the fact that 54,000 people voted for Ron Paul for Congressman in his district 14 which is the only ballot he was on.
In contrast those same voters in District 14 totaled 9,000 for President.

It just seems very strange that 45,000 people voted for an candidate that is 180 degrees against the person they voted for Congressman to represent their district. I would believe it if was reverse, like 45,000 of the 54,000 voted him for President.

Also the fact that he almost received as many votes in one district for Congressman versus Presidential votes for an entire state as big as Texas.

This is the home base for Ron Paul. It's weird and if we have a shot at exposing election fraud I believe this is it based on the difference in votes for the same person in the district. If anything positive can come from this landslide loss, it would be to expose election fraud.

Hopefully there are some people looking at this.

What results are you looking at?

http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04_135_race4.htm indicates that he received 37220 votes for TX-14 Congress of 53,033 total votes cast for either of the two candidates in that race.

By clicking on the individual counties you can further see that 94806 votes were cast in those counties for President. When you factor out the 28311 votes cast for TX-22 instead of TX-14, the total number of TX-14 votes for President is 66495. This indicates a total of 13462 votes were people who voted in the Presidential race but not the TX-14 Congressional Race. If anything, my reading of the stats was in favor of Ron Paul, and more realistically, 13,462 people decided to only vote in their Presidential Primaries and left out Ron Paul's Congressional bid altogether.

This would actually be in line with the idea that people weren't as interested in his Congressional bid as RPF people would like to believe. Please show me what 54,000 people you are talking about.

Again, I'd love to see actual affidavits demonstrating voter fraud. I really would. But in the mean time don't try to drum up conspiracy charges until you know you are correct and demonstrate it to everybody beyond a shadow of a doubt.

-Rob

 

[SteveMartin]

Some will always believe the government is honest and wouldn't cheat.

Some have seen the cheating with their own eyes and know it is real.

Too bad our entire campaign staff was made up of the former, or we could have broken through and done something, but they dissed anyone who ever brought up even blatant and totally documented front-end fraud.

 

[ronpaulbillboards]

What results are you looking at?

http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04_135_race4.htm indicates that he received 37220 votes for TX-14 Congress of 53,033 total votes cast for either of the two candidates in that race.

By clicking on the individual counties you can further see that 94806 votes were cast in those counties for President. When you factor out the 28311 votes cast for TX-22 instead of TX-14, the total number of TX-14 votes for President is 66495. This indicates a total of 13462 votes were people who voted in the Presidential race but not the TX-14 Congressional Race. If anything, my reading of the stats was in favor of Ron Paul, and more realistically, 13,462 people decided to only vote in their Presidential Primaries and left out Ron Paul's Congressional bid altogether.

This would actually be in line with the idea that people weren't as interested in his Congressional bid as RPF people would like to believe. Please show me what 54,000 people you are talking about.

Again, I'd love to see actual affidavits demonstrating voter fraud. I really would. But in the mean time don't try to drum up conspiracy charges until you know you are correct and demonstrate it to everybody beyond a shadow of a doubt.

-Rob

Again what results are YOU looking at.

For the last time the total votes for Ron Paul for President in Texas in all counties is 69,954.

http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04_135_state.htm

If you add all the totals for casted for Ron Paul in District 14 for Congressman it's 54,000 votes.

District 22 is not a good reference because it isn't his Congressional district thus people can't vote him for Congressman.

We are contrasting the votes casted in district 14 by the same people and the fact that they overwhelmingly chose him for their Congressman vs President.

Don't compare counties and add this or that. Just look at the votes casted for him for Congressman and President in District 14 counties. These are the same people voting and they chose to support him as Congressman but not for President on the same ballot when they voted. This is all we are illustrating with this data, if it's legit or fraud it's up for you and the experts to decide.

I'm just saying it's weird either way it goes, this is about as simple as I can put it.

 

[haaaylee]

Maybe 45,000 of the voters were Democrats and Independents who were really concerned with the Congressional race. Why? This could be a possibility but I don't see any of these parties concerned about a Congressional race when the Clinton\Obama show is going on.

This wouldn't be possible though, if you voted for a republican in the congressional race you would be bound to vote republican for the president as well. You can't vote twice.

 

[haaaylee]

What results are you looking at?

http://enr.sos.state.tx.us/enr/mar04_135_race4.htm indicates that he received 37220 votes for TX-14 Congress of 53,033 total votes cast for either of the two candidates in that race.

By clicking on the individual counties you can further see that 94806 votes were cast in those counties for President. When you factor out the 28311 votes cast for TX-22 instead of TX-14, the total number of TX-14 votes for President is 66495. This indicates a total of 13462 votes were people who voted in the Presidential race but not the TX-14 Congressional Race. If anything, my reading of the stats was in favor of Ron Paul, and more realistically, 13,462 people decided to only vote in their Presidential Primaries and left out Ron Paul's Congressional bid altogether.

This would actually be in line with the idea that people weren't as interested in his Congressional bid as RPF people would like to believe. Please show me what 54,000 people you are talking about.

Again, I'd love to see actual affidavits demonstrating voter fraud. I really would. But in the mean time don't try to drum up conspiracy charges until you know you are correct and demonstrate it to everybody beyond a shadow of a doubt.

-Rob

You're not adding in the early votes, that's where people are coming up with two numbers. The 37,220 is only the March 4th day of votes. You have to add in the 16,951 early votes (I.E. 54,171)

 

[Proemio]

Some will always believe the government is honest and wouldn't cheat.

Some have seen the cheating with their own eyes and know it is real.

Too bad our entire campaign staff was made up of the former...

Not likely, regarding the last sentence.

In October I started to compile a list of faux-pas by TheCampaign on another site, and ended the effort almost as soon, stating: "It's not possible for chance to allow for a rapid series of odd decisions to all result in negative consequences. The law of averages requires at least an occasional screw-up with brilliant results."

I then wrote a few hundred lines here, trying to paint the necessary distinction between TheCampaign and Ron Paul, and why this is systemically unavoidable, while also telling us absolutely nothing about Ron's managerial capabilities as President. That preposterous inference was very ably - and often - exploited by the establishment team, and my words were quickly buried and ignored.

I also argued that Paul could not just dump TheCampaign (as for example McCain did), even though I am confident that he was perfectly aware of the situation all along. That also has everything to do with the rigged system itself.

Now he can, and has done it - the unavoidable albatross is going or gone. You already have soon-to-be former staffers handing self-serving statements to the media, reinforcing the impression that Paul is calling it quits. They wish... Anyone actually contemplating the man's words will realize that notion to be the furthest from the truth.

Paul is simply recognizing that the biggest movement in generations cannot move TheSystem even an inch "Though victory in the conventional political sense is not available in the presidential race..."; something, some of us have contended from the beginning. This reality had first to be convincingly demonstrated in order to have a solid footing from where to move to the next phase. That great grassroots' effort in the preceeding months was essential, because it forced TheSystem to pull out all the stops and reveal it's weakness and ugly face, by doing so.

Both Ron Paul and the rest of us are now free to start the process of overwhelming the self-preservation defenses of TheSystem - mostly smoke and mirrors.

Nothing has changed. As before, Ron Paul will only give up if we do, and probably not even then.

No reason to feel dejected, - the fun part is only just beginning. I believe that we are in much better shape than most imagine...

 

[ronpaulbillboards]

This wouldn't be possible though, if you voted for a republican in the congressional race you would be bound to vote republican for the president as well. You can't vote twice.

You are right in that aspect, you would only receive a republican ballot so you could only vote Republican in the Primary
But in the general election in Texas, you can vote for whoever and are not bound to a party.
I thought you were bound at the general election level but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Excerpt from Texas election rules

Voting in the Primary Elections

If you are a registered voter in the state of Texas, you will simply choose your party and vote in that party's primary. To explain, we do not register by party in Texas. One becomes "affiliated" with a party by voting in a party's primary and the affiliation lasts for that primary year. As an example, if a voter voted in the March 2006 primary or April 2006 runoff primary, the voter affiliated with that party for the rest of that year, but on December 31, 2006 the affiliation expired. The affiliation means that the person may not vote in another party’s primary or participate in another party’s convention or sign an independent candidate’s petition for place on the ballot if the independent candidate’s position appears on the primary ballot.
Note that in the general election in November, a voter may vote for whomever he/she wishes, regardless of how or whether he/she voted in the primary or runoff primary election, since all candidates are on the same ballot.