Bruno
08-17-2011, 08:23 PM
http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2011/08/serious-question-was-ames-iowa-straw.html
I've recently learned from a credible source that there were many suspicious voting irregularities in the closely-watched Ames, Iowa Straw Poll this weekend, raising more questions in light of Lew Rockwell's report this Sunday that the election had been rigged:
"I have it from a very good source that virtually all the people involved in Ron's Iowa campaign, and who had worked for other candidates in previous straw polls, believe that Ron actually won, but the GOP establishment fixed the results to give it to the warmonger Bachmann."
But policy disagreements with Ron Paul may not even have been the strongest motivation for Iowa Republicans to fudge the Ames straw poll results in favor of Bachmann, who narrowly led Ron Paul by 1% in a statistical tie for first place.
Consider what would have happened if Ron Paul had actually won, because you can bet that Iowa Republicans have-- the national media would have predictably written off the Iowa Ames Straw Poll as unreliable and meaningless. If Ron Paul had won the whole thing, instead of just ignoring him like they did this weekend, the media would have had to ignore the entire straw poll.
Iowa Republicans would have their credibility, power, and influence diminished for years to come-- perhaps irreparably so. That's a powerful motivation to fudge the numbers in favor of Bachmann had Ron Paul pulled off a close upset. It doesn't even have to be about the politics; it could just be about the power.
As Byron York suggested Monday in the Washington Examiner:
'Republicans dodged a big bullet at the Ames straw poll on Saturday. If just 77 of the 4,283 people who voted for Rep. Michele Bachmann had voted instead for Rep. Ron Paul, then Paul would have won the straw poll. In the end, Bachmann came out ahead with 28.55 percent of the vote to Paul's 27.65 percent. No other candidate was close.
Some well-connected Iowa Republicans viewed it as a bullet dodged because they had long feared the possibility of a Paul victory. 'It would pour jet fuel on the East Coast narrative that Iowa is just too nutty to have such an important place in the nominating process,' says one of those Republicans. Before the poll, they saw a Paul-Bachmann one-two finish as the worst-case scenario.'
So just what kind of shady irregularities happened this weekend at Ames? Write-in votes were allowed for the first time ever at the Ames straw poll this year-- but they were counted in secret. This is highly irregular, as the other votes have always been counted in the open, in full view of the campaigns. Why the secrecy?
Additionally, the votes were all counted multiple times and the results announced especially late. Why the recounts? Was the first place statistical tie even closer than the final tally suggests? Did an earlier count put Ron Paul in first? The remarkably narrow gap between the first two candidates is what makes these irregularities especially suspicious and gives them greater import.
When any kind of vote is this close, all due diligence, openness, and compliance with regular procedure is absolutely necessary to confirm the credibility of the outcome, especially when the stakes both politically and for the Iowa GOP's reputation and power are so very high. So why the irregularities this year?
Of course these facts alone do not add up to a smoking gun. I am not saying that I know for sure that the Iowa Ames straw poll was taken from Ron Paul, but I am saying that I am not so sure that Michele Bachmann won fair and square, and with questions like these, neither are you or anyone in the media commentating on the results of the straw poll.
Given the kind of under-handed treatment and tactics Ron Paul has suffered at the hands of a biased media and a threatened party establishment, these irregularities bear even more scrutiny because their implications are entirely in the realm of possibility. Events in the last few days since the straw poll have unequivocally revealed just how dishonest the establishment is willing to be in its dealings with Ron Paul.
The key lesson for Ron Paul supporters is clear: do not ever let Ron Paul come this close again in any poll, primary, or caucus that the future of his campaign is riding on. Volunteer, donate, and turnout that much more tenaciously to ensure that his margin of victory is so great that the numbers cannot be fudged, that votes cannot be stolen, that the truth cannot be obscured. That's the only way to win this fight.
I've recently learned from a credible source that there were many suspicious voting irregularities in the closely-watched Ames, Iowa Straw Poll this weekend, raising more questions in light of Lew Rockwell's report this Sunday that the election had been rigged:
"I have it from a very good source that virtually all the people involved in Ron's Iowa campaign, and who had worked for other candidates in previous straw polls, believe that Ron actually won, but the GOP establishment fixed the results to give it to the warmonger Bachmann."
But policy disagreements with Ron Paul may not even have been the strongest motivation for Iowa Republicans to fudge the Ames straw poll results in favor of Bachmann, who narrowly led Ron Paul by 1% in a statistical tie for first place.
Consider what would have happened if Ron Paul had actually won, because you can bet that Iowa Republicans have-- the national media would have predictably written off the Iowa Ames Straw Poll as unreliable and meaningless. If Ron Paul had won the whole thing, instead of just ignoring him like they did this weekend, the media would have had to ignore the entire straw poll.
Iowa Republicans would have their credibility, power, and influence diminished for years to come-- perhaps irreparably so. That's a powerful motivation to fudge the numbers in favor of Bachmann had Ron Paul pulled off a close upset. It doesn't even have to be about the politics; it could just be about the power.
As Byron York suggested Monday in the Washington Examiner:
'Republicans dodged a big bullet at the Ames straw poll on Saturday. If just 77 of the 4,283 people who voted for Rep. Michele Bachmann had voted instead for Rep. Ron Paul, then Paul would have won the straw poll. In the end, Bachmann came out ahead with 28.55 percent of the vote to Paul's 27.65 percent. No other candidate was close.
Some well-connected Iowa Republicans viewed it as a bullet dodged because they had long feared the possibility of a Paul victory. 'It would pour jet fuel on the East Coast narrative that Iowa is just too nutty to have such an important place in the nominating process,' says one of those Republicans. Before the poll, they saw a Paul-Bachmann one-two finish as the worst-case scenario.'
So just what kind of shady irregularities happened this weekend at Ames? Write-in votes were allowed for the first time ever at the Ames straw poll this year-- but they were counted in secret. This is highly irregular, as the other votes have always been counted in the open, in full view of the campaigns. Why the secrecy?
Additionally, the votes were all counted multiple times and the results announced especially late. Why the recounts? Was the first place statistical tie even closer than the final tally suggests? Did an earlier count put Ron Paul in first? The remarkably narrow gap between the first two candidates is what makes these irregularities especially suspicious and gives them greater import.
When any kind of vote is this close, all due diligence, openness, and compliance with regular procedure is absolutely necessary to confirm the credibility of the outcome, especially when the stakes both politically and for the Iowa GOP's reputation and power are so very high. So why the irregularities this year?
Of course these facts alone do not add up to a smoking gun. I am not saying that I know for sure that the Iowa Ames straw poll was taken from Ron Paul, but I am saying that I am not so sure that Michele Bachmann won fair and square, and with questions like these, neither are you or anyone in the media commentating on the results of the straw poll.
Given the kind of under-handed treatment and tactics Ron Paul has suffered at the hands of a biased media and a threatened party establishment, these irregularities bear even more scrutiny because their implications are entirely in the realm of possibility. Events in the last few days since the straw poll have unequivocally revealed just how dishonest the establishment is willing to be in its dealings with Ron Paul.
The key lesson for Ron Paul supporters is clear: do not ever let Ron Paul come this close again in any poll, primary, or caucus that the future of his campaign is riding on. Volunteer, donate, and turnout that much more tenaciously to ensure that his margin of victory is so great that the numbers cannot be fudged, that votes cannot be stolen, that the truth cannot be obscured. That's the only way to win this fight.