Why was Rand so mad last night?

like i always say, "OVERVOTE THE HACK" - in other words, the more they hack the vote the more legitimate votes we need to get so after they rape the vote talleys, WE STILL HAVE MORE THAN ENOUGH TO WIN.

they cant win no matter how bad they hack the vote if we have an over-abundance of votes.
 
like i always say, "OVERVOTE THE HACK" - in other words, the more they hack the vote the more legitimate votes we need to get so after they rape the vote talleys, WE STILL HAVE MORE THAN ENOUGH TO WIN.

they cant win no matter how bad they hack the vote if we have an over-abundance of votes.

Don't tempt them to update the Diebold software to count Ron Paul votes on a logarithmic basis, relative to the number actually cast...
 
Last edited:

Ballots are cast, or hands are raised.

If ballots were used, they are hand cast and hand counted with reps from each campaign watching, then results reported to the state (and the organized campaigns have their folks report up to them too, so they can verify no human error occurred over the phone/record keeping).

If hands were used, hands are counted, then results reported to the state.

It's impossible to cheat and a ridiculous claim...
 
Last edited:
is it a fact that santorum never had more than 100 people show up to any of his Iowa appearances?? I think it is simply miraculous how he had so many votes without much support until yesterday....
 
Ballots are cast, or hands are raised.

If ballots were used, they are counted with reps from each campaign watching, then results reported to the state (and the organized campaigns have their folks report up too, so they can verify no human error occurred over the phone/record keeping).

If hands were used, hands are counted, then results reported to the state.

It's impossible to cheat and a ridiculous claim...

Serious question: Are there no Diebold [or other voting] machines in Iowa and/or at caucuses? My state is a primary state (so I've never been to a caucus), but I could have sworn I voted into a machine last time.
 
Serious question: Are there no Diebold [or other voting] machines in Iowa and/or at caucuses?

Correct(as far as I know, don't want to say an absolute).

But there's no need, each caucus is generally not very large and ballots are counted immediately after being cast.
 
At each precinct caucus, the ballots were publicly distributed, collected, and counted with observers from the campaigns allowed. After the count is established, it is phoned in and totaled with other precincts in the county. It's about as accurate transparent a system of voting as can possibly be devised.

Watching the vote is good, and competent campaigns will take care of it. But it's really not helpful to our image to suspect cheating any time the results aren't what we want. In Kentucky, machines counted our votes and Rand was running against the Secretary of State in charge of the election. Some people on the forums insisted "THEY wouldn't let us win...." But we did.
 
Personally, I think it's amazing that Paul even came in 3rd considering all the 24/7 lies the media was telling for the last couple of weeks. Not to mention what the other candidates were saying. It was unbelievable. I've never seen anything like it in my entire life.

That's not to say that I'm not disappointed, because I am. But, it ain't over yet.
 
I don't think there was any kind of ballot-rigging in the Iowa polls. I do believe the story that the Iowa Republican higher-ups worked to convince undecided voters and people who had come supporting Bachmann, Gingrich or Perry to go for Romney or Santorum in order to avoid the "embarrassment" of having Ron Paul win their state, however.
 
Rand was mad for the same reason I am mad.

Some of us would actually like to experience liberty before we die, and are growing impatient.
 
Rand was mad for the same reason I am mad.

Some of us would actually like to experience liberty before we die, and are growing impatient.
We are doing our best, but how are we supposed to get rid of tyranny within the law when tyranny makes the law? We make fun of places like North Korea where you can only vote for one person.
 
Agreed. That aside, he isn't even "there." Look at him, he isn't focused on the speech or the people in the crowd, he is deep in thought. How interesting and novel, a politician that thinks.

My husband said the same thing - that he wasn't mad, he was thinking.
 
He sounded under the weather on Hannity that day. He may have just looked pissed cause he needed to hawk a lugie.
 
This is what I was thinking, too. There's been a nasty virus going around (I am an IL resident, 1 mile across the river from Iowa). I purposely avoided trying to shake Ron's hand or get an autograph, etc. when I attended a town hall meeting because I was full of it, too. This thing takes nearly a month to totally clear. Anyway, noticed that Rand was coughing during applause on atleast 2 occasions during the condolence speech. It's a bummer trying to restrain a cough, waiting for a time when it won't disrupt a speech.
 
He probably means "condolence speech," which is technically what Ron Paul's speech was called, given he didn't place first. I considered it a bit of a victory speech myself though, because our placement gave us a foothold in the mind of ordinary voters. :)

Well...

Well, Rush and Dick Morris said Ron is "done".
 
Back
Top