Did Ron Paul lose by TEN votes, not 152?

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

I was watching the Fox News coverage of the moment that the Iowa Republican party released the results of the Ames straw poll (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8MKYwjYpT0&NR=1) and noticed something I haven't noticed before. I don't understand it, so in the hope that the group can help me to find an answer, I will pose the question:

What did "Scattering 162" mean? Screenshot here (http://oi56.tinypic.com/29uvpzk.jpg).

On the scoreboard, where the vote tallies were listed candidate by candidate, this was the final number listed.

Considering that Ron Paul lost by 152 votes, ten less than "Scattering 162," am I correct in assuming that this is an indication of margin of error?

If so, could I be correct in deducing that Ron Paul lost by TEN VOTES, not 152?

I'm no mathematician and refuse to pretend to be one. Perhaps if one exists among us in the forums, I could find the answer I seek. Something does not seem right about this year's events in Ames.

Because if I'm correct, this video from 2008 would be more true than it seemed upon my initial viewing: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MCjVrDDzlo)

[Ethan]

My guess is these are ballots that couldn't be counted for various reasons. For example, Mickey Mouse regularly gets a lot of votes. Perhaps some of these were also morons voting for "Parry" instead of "Perry" but its hard to say.

[king_nothing_]

I thought it was just a count of write-in votes for people who didn't get enough votes to be listed individually.

[Havax]

Scattering was probably some Gary Johnson votes which would have been really nice to have.

[JTforRP]

Scattering was probably some Gary Johnson votes which would have been really nice to have.

Definitely hoping for a lot of his supporters to flip over at some point. I love Gary myself, but as far as the issues I care most about, he's a less-known version of Ron.

Gary Johnson 2020.

[djruden]

I assumed it was write-in candidates, and I also assumed with Rick Perry's high vote count that they counted pArry as pErry.

[misconstrued]

"Scattering" are miscellaneous write in votes I believe.

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

My guess is these are ballots that couldn't be counted for various reasons. For example, Mickey Mouse regularly gets a lot of votes. Perhaps some of these were also morons voting for "Parry" instead of "Perry" but its hard to say.

Were they really that anal, sir? Even the simplest mind counting the votes would recognize that "Parry" = "Perry." I'm going to call the Iowa State Republican Party for an answer.

[Romulus]

I think Colbert was urging folks to do various write ins too.... Those would have been nice RP votes.

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

"Scattering" are miscellaneous write in votes I believe.

You are correct; I just spoke with Patrick at the Iowa State Republican Party (515-282-8105) and he explained that the "Scattering" was indeed a representation of statistically insignificant votes.

I have my answer.

I have so little trust in American press and media...I'm a little embarrassed for presenting this question to the forum. But hey, truth was found and that's what matters, right?

[king_nothing_]

You are correct; I just spoke with Patrick at the Iowa State Republican Party (515-282-8105) and he explained that the "Scattering" was indeed a representation of statistically insignificant votes.

I have my answer.

I have so little trust in American press and media...I'm a little embarrassed for presenting this question to the forum. But hey, truth was found and that's what matters, right?
Did you ask him about "Parry" write-ins? Someone should, and while doing so explain to him that a comedian asked people to do it as a joke, and was intentionally meant as vote for a completely different, fictional person. It might spark them to recount the Perry and Parry votes.

[Romulus]

You are correct; I just spoke with Patrick at the Iowa State Republican Party (515-282-8105) and he explained that the "Scattering" was indeed a representation of statistically insignificant votes.

I have my answer.

I have so little trust in American press and media...I'm a little embarrassed for presenting this question to the forum. But hey, truth was found and that's what matters, right?

Skeptical is good... welcome to the site.

[king_nothing_]

EDIT: Accidental double post, nothing to see here.

[White Bear Lake]

A good chunk were probably Palin write ins.

[Bruno]

You are correct; I just spoke with Patrick at the Iowa State Republican Party (515-282-8105) and he explained that the "Scattering" was indeed a representation of statistically insignificant votes.

I have my answer.

I have so little trust in American press and media...I'm a little embarrassed for presenting this question to the forum. But hey, truth was found and that's what matters, right?

+ rep for finding the truth.

Some people probably voted for Randy Travis and the Iowa State Fair Buttercow, as well. :D

[RonPaul101.com]

My understanding is that they represent a bunch of ad-hoc write-in votes; like someone writing in themselves as a vote, or Jesus, or God, or Ronald Reagan, etc.,.

However the 162 of these would mean if they ALL went for Ron Paul he would have WON by 10 votes, not lost by 10 votes. Its all speculation though.

[sailingaway]

I don't think it is something we want to push. Media coverage is a clear win, Randy Travis tickets not being given until you register with Bachmann and vote is a definite factor, but I would not go in this direction.

[PeacePlan]

I don't think it is something we want to push. Media coverage is a clear win, Randy Travis tickets not being given until you register with Bachmann and vote is a definite factor, but I would not go in this direction.

I agree it makes us sound like poor losers.

[parocks]

I agree it makes us sound like poor losers.

I don't know why discussing that we were beaten by better music makes us sore losers. It just means that we should know that we need to win music. Which we can.

[Valli6]

There are also an additional 56 votes listed as "Remainder". What is that?

218 people paid to cast a vote that was not counted. Paul paid 30 grand plus to attend and receive votes. Why should we be left to guess about it?

According to the Rules:

Campaigns who reserved space at the Iowa Straw Poll are allowed to have one representative to observe the voting process per voting location, and up to two representatives to observe the tallying process. http://iowagop.org/iowagop/?p=630

Did Paul's representitives get a chance to view all these "scattered", "remainder" votes? If not, why not? What did they see?

Why should I accept the word of someone called "Patrick at the Iowa State Republican Party (515-282-8105)" (<This info posted by someone who just joined the forum last month - nothing personal intended)

Members of the Iowa GOP have admitted they didn't want Paul to win because it diminished their egos. It's already been reported that they feel they "dodged a bullet". http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/08/gop-operatives-fear-lasting-ron-paul-problem

Furthermore, the announcement of only the first place winner, followed by the abrupt ending of the event was out of the ordinary and indicates a problem. Compare for yourself. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?308940-Compare-how-Ames-Straw-Poll-winner-is-announced-2007-vs-2011&p=3468771#post3468771

Many of you witnessed the behavior of GOP officials in 2008 and they were not pilliars of integrity! If at all possible, I would like to see all avenues verified and then move on.

[speciallyblend]

Win nh,sc,nv!!!!!

[bigfische]

I was watching the Fox News coverage of the moment that the Iowa Republican party released the results of the Ames straw poll (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8MKYwjYpT0&NR=1) and noticed something I haven't noticed before. I don't understand it, so in the hope that the group can help me to find an answer, I will pose the question:

What did "Scattering 162" mean? Screenshot here (http://oi56.tinypic.com/29uvpzk.jpg).

On the scoreboard, where the vote tallies were listed candidate by candidate, this was the final number listed.

Considering that Ron Paul lost by 152 votes, ten less than "Scattering 162," am I correct in assuming that this is an indication of margin of error?

If so, could I be correct in deducing that Ron Paul lost by TEN VOTES, not 152?

I'm no mathematician and refuse to pretend to be one. Perhaps if one exists among us in the forums, I could find the answer I seek. Something does not seem right about this year's events in Ames.

Because if I'm correct, this video from 2008 would be more true than it seemed upon my initial viewing: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MCjVrDDzlo)



scattering just meant write ins that were not in any meaningful amount. The only reason Bachmann won was because of Randy Travis.

[FreedomRings]

Furthermore, the announcement of only the first place winner, followed by the abrupt ending of the event was out of the ordinary and indicates a problem. Compare for yourself. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?308940-Compare-how-Ames-Straw-Poll-winner-is-announced-2007-vs-2011&p=3468771#post3468771

The guy who announced the winner looked like he had a nervous breakdown and couldn't continue. Maybe he assumed that the vote count had been manipulated and his conscience caught up with him.


Campaigns who reserved space at the Iowa Straw Poll are allowed to have one representative to observe the voting process per voting location, and up to two representatives to observe the tallying process. http://iowagop.org/iowagop/?p=630

According to Lew Rockwell the Paul campaign thought until the last moment they were going to win. That didn't sound like they were invited to actually observe the tallying process.