Vote fraud Reported in Texas based on entrance polling...

[WhistlinDave]

http://www.dailypaul.com/239494/fraud-confirmed-in-texas-election-judge-says-votes-were-switched-tonight-drkrbn-live


Note: this was first revealed by an alert DP'er, who posted this blog post: http://annebeck58.wordpress.com/2012/05/

Could Ron Paul have gotten 72% of the vote instead of 12%? Anne Beckett, election judge for Austin (Travis County), says it is so.

In fact, she did an entrance poll of Republican voters for their party preference and says that a minimum of 66% offered on their own that they came to vote for Ron Paul. As she polled them she wrote a line on her hand, then, counted the total voters. A minimum of 66% and as high as 72% of all the votes went for Paul, NOT Romney (she wishes to be conservative, but says that at the bare minimum 66%, not 12%, of the votes went to Paul).

For credibility it is important to note that she took a complete poll and was there from 6:00 a.m. until closing (12 hours). The precinct she judged was 247-R.

Here are the 'acclaimed' numbers from the election board:

http://www.co.travis.tx.us/county_clerk/election/20120529/fi... (http://www.co.travis.tx.us/county_clerk/election/20120529/files/20120529reppct.pdf)

Scroll down to pg. 456 (not 301, as noted earlier). The results she is disputing are as follows:

Mitt Romney: 72
Ron Paul: 15

Early voting (absentee ballots)
Mitt Romney: 41
Ron Paul: 4

Don’t feel depressed. Apparently, the real numbers in the live voting are 72 or more for Paul and 15 or less for Romney.

Ms. Beckett states categorically that these numbers are false. In her words, it’s “completely false.”

The judge has filed an affidavit with ElectionFraudRemedy.com.

Tune in to this epic show. Dr. K. will interview Ms. Beckett about her findings and will discuss the full strategy going forward for proving the fraud in other counties and states.

See also: http://www.dailypaul.com/238805/we-can-prove-vote-rigging-an... (http://www.dailypaul.com/238805/we-can-prove-vote-rigging-and-we-have-to-do-it-now-after-action-exit-polls)

Note: here are all the charts by our mathematicians on vote flipping: https://www.sugarsync.com/share/bzvpf3dyq5hre

BIG UPDATE: this Travis County chart is a must see, which confirms Ms. Beckett's findings -

http://www.libertyusapac.org/wordpresspac/2012/06/11/217/

Note how Dr. Paul starts out at a higher vote count level than Romney, only to be suppressed with increasing vote counting.

Previous update:See also this powerful anaylsis by one of our top experts in Riverside, County, CA, also breaking news:

http://www.libertyusapac.org/wordpresspac/2012/06/11/electio... (http://www.libertyusapac.org/wordpresspac/2012/06/11/election-fraud-confirmed-in-riverside-county-to-greater-than-95-confidence/)

[zachrbroussard]

Title should be changed to "entrance polling."

I also, personally, don't think this "confirms" voting fraud. It can't be certain that she polled 100% of those voting and who knows if they were truthful in who they were going to vote for once in the privacy of the booth.

Also I don't understand how that graph that they cite "confirms" vote flipping.

[KingNothing]

Odd definition of "confirmed"

Can we merge this with the crackpot thread?

[Elwar]

Title should be changed to "entrance polling."

I also, personally, don't think this "confirms" voting fraud. It can't be certain that she polled 100% of those voting and who knows if they were truthful in who they were going to vote for once in the privacy of the booth.

Also I don't understand how that graph that they cite "confirms" vote flipping.

Not many Romney supporters would be out there saying that they plan on voting for Ron Paul. Half of the Romney supporters are brainwashed into thinking that Ron Paul is not even in the race if they even know anything about him at all.

It is something that should be looked into.

[zachrbroussard]

It is something that should be looked into.

I definitely agree that it should be looked into, but I'm very weary to believe that it has already been confirmed.

What if she was wearing Ron Paul buttons or something and those being polled felt pressured, etc.

[Elwar]

Hidden video at the polls for 12 hours straight asking that question would be priceless.

[Diashi]

I don't dismiss the idea. What if Paul supporters were more willing to answer entrance polls than Romney or Obama supporters? Mirroring numbers for opposite candidates is highly suspicious.

[sailingaway]

Not many Romney supporters would be out there saying that they plan on voting for Ron Paul. Half of the Romney supporters are brainwashed into thinking that Ron Paul is not even in the race if they even know anything about him at all.

It is something that should be looked into.

Yeah, someone filed a sworn affadavit. Evidence should be examined. If it isn't real, we drop it, but we should follow up.

[Elwar]

What if she was wearing Ron Paul buttons or something and those being polled felt pressured, etc.

I know that in Texas you cannot wear anything supporting a candidate at the polls, much less a poll worker.

As for the phrasing of the question. That is certainly important. Most surveys can be swayed to get one response or another based upon the wording.

[donnay]

Nothing anyone can do if the campaign sits back and does nothing. We have seen this from the beginning, unfortunately.

[sailingaway]

Nothing anyone can do if the campaign sits back and does nothing. We have seen this from the beginning, unfortunately.

Ron said those with evidence should pursue it. There is a lawsuit brought yesterday regarding delegates, supported by 'Lawyers for Ron Paul'. If you decide no one can do anything, that is a choice.

[WhistlinDave]

Whoops! Sorry--I meant to say Entrance polling. I don't seem to have the ability to edit the title of the thread though.

As far as "confirmed," I am simply stating what's in the article. If someone who is a judge says this is what they confirmed, and has filed an affadavit to join the election fraud lawsuit, then that is enough confirmation for me to post here and use the word confirmed. If you don't like it, sorry. Obviously this is not a court of law nor an official media outlet so I don't see the need to use words like "allegedly" if that's what anybody thinks.

[CPUd]

What they're doing now is tracking down the voters who voted at that precinct and asking if they will sign an affidavit confirming they voted for Paul on that day. Since the votes for Paul were only 19, if they get a lot more than that, they're gonna try to show on the strength of the affidavits that the numbers were incorrect. So far, they have found around 7 people.

About the flipping, I'll let someone else take a shot at that one.

[zachrbroussard]

What they're doing now is tracking down the voters who voted at that precinct and asking if they will sign an affidavit confirming they voted for Paul on that day. Since the votes for Paul were only 19, if they get a lot more than that, they're gonna try to show on the strength of the affidavits that the numbers were incorrect. So far, they have found around 7 people.

About the flipping, I'll let someone else take a shot at that one.

Only 19 people in Travis county (Austin) voted for Paul... hmm maybe something fishy did happen!

[Barrex]

What they're doing now is tracking down the voters who voted at that precinct and asking if they will sign an affidavit confirming they voted for Paul on that day. Since the votes for Paul were only 19, if they get a lot more than that, they're gonna try to show on the strength of the affidavits that the numbers were incorrect. So far, they have found around 7 people.

About the flipping, I'll let someone else take a shot at that one.

That would be pretty strong evidence if done correctly. Where did you get those numbers? 19 and 7 (no I dont mean where are they on keyboard).

[zachrbroussard]

If I'm looking at these results correctly:
http://www.co.travis.tx.us/county_clerk/election/20120529/files/20120529reppct.pdf

Only 77 people voted in the primary from Travis country? Wtf?

[CPUd]

That would be pretty strong evidence if done correctly. Where did you get those numbers? 19 and 7 (no I dont mean where are they on keyboard).

7 was a figure given by one of the principals in one of the 15 threads on dailypaul about this (sorry, don't know which one). 19 is the 15 votes on primary day plus 4 early votes for Paul (in the OP). Since this number is relatively small, Anne (the election judge) knows she spoke to more than that many Paul voters who told her voluntarily who they were voting for (example: some of them, when she asked them which ballot/party they want, they told her 'Ron Paul') .



If I'm looking at these results correctly:
http://www.co.travis.tx.us/county_cl...0529reppct.pdf

Only 77 people voted in the primary from Travis country? Wtf?
That is just for 1 precinct.

[zachrbroussard]

If I'm looking at these results correctly:
http://www.co.travis.tx.us/county_clerk/election/20120529/files/20120529reppct.pdf

Only 77 people voted in the primary from Travis country? Wtf?
nvm, that was only one district from the county

[sailingaway]

If I'm looking at these results correctly:
http://www.co.travis.tx.us/county_clerk/election/20120529/files/20120529reppct.pdf

Only 77 people voted in the primary from Travis country? Wtf?

That seems impossible. Yeah, that should be able to be proven. We should be able to come up with a lot more than 77.

And 19 in Austin? Even if a ton of students didn't show up, he had some 6000 people come out to see him there....

[TheGrinch]

I definitely agree that it should be looked into, but I'm very weary to believe that it has already been confirmed.

What if she was wearing Ron Paul buttons or something and those being polled felt pressured, etc.
Interviewer bias cannot account for that kind of discrepency... And it's pretty safe to say that the vast majority of those polled would have absolutely no incentive ot not be honest... Maybe a few, but I don't see how it would be many that would just bold-face lie about who they're voting for after being nice enough to agree to being polled. It really doesn't make a lot of sense, and speaks to why exit-polling can be pretty accurate if you get a large enough sample-size.

Not saying to jump the gun and call fraud, but the possiblity shouldn't be dismissed, particularly when it comes to electronic voting machines. You don't have to be a "flipper" to not trust those things.

[devil21]

Very curious. It'll continue to be hard to prove anything without access to the actual tabulators though.

[Champ]

Anne Beckett, the election judge that the article refers to, will be on http://ronpaulradio.com at 3pm EST on Occupy the Media w/Paco Elijah.

You should be able the join the chat on ronpaulradio.com and ask her questions at that time.

[sailingaway]

Very curious. It'll continue to be hard to prove anything without access to the actual tabulators though.

If we get affidavits of a hundred people who said they voted for Ron, and only 19 were counted, that is pretty telling, tabulators or no tabulators.

[Barrex]

Very curious. It'll continue to be hard to prove anything without access to the actual tabulators though.

No. Lets take this situation:
10 people voted.
5 voted for Ron Paul.
Results say 3 voted for Ron Paul.
There was theft and 2 votes were stolen from Ron Paul.
You contact all 10 people who voted and if more than 3 (4 or 5) sign affidavit that they voted for Ron Paul you successfully proven theft.

If people could prove this just in one precinct it would be huge. It would give reason for further and more invasive investigation.

[minusbear]

I'm very suspicious of this. A poll worker at an entrance wouldn't be allowed to ask that question of everyone coming in and if she were marking her hand, that would certainly draw the attention of other poll workers and election judges and would get her escorted away. Unfortunately we've been burned many times by overly enthusiastic supporters who believe something then embellish their story to make it sound credible. She may believe that most people voted for Dr. Paul and fit her story to create evidence for that fact.

[TheGrinch]

I'm very suspicious of this. A poll worker at an entrance wouldn't be allowed to ask that question of everyone coming in and if she were marking her hand, that would certainly draw the attention of other poll workers and election judges and would get her escorted away. Unfortunately we've been burned many times by overly enthusiastic supporters who believe something then embellish their story to make it sound credible. She may believe that most people voted for Dr. Paul and fit her story to create evidence for that fact.
What on earth are you talking about? As far as I know, entrance polling is every bit as allowed as exit-polling. You're just not allowed to campaign or influence.

Also, it doesn't say she was an poll worker, it says she's an election judge. I'm not sure that's an official title, but one would presume that polling is exactly what an election judge is there to do.

[sailingaway]

I'm very suspicious of this. A poll worker at an entrance wouldn't be allowed to ask that question of everyone coming in and if she were marking her hand, that would certainly draw the attention of other poll workers and election judges and would get her escorted away. Unfortunately we've been burned many times by overly enthusiastic supporters who believe something then embellish their story to make it sound credible. She may believe that most people voted for Dr. Paul and fit her story to create evidence for that fact.

who cares? Say she's a nut. NINETEEN VOTES for Ron in AUSTIN?? Where 6000 people came to see him speak? Even with 'oh those students don't vote' mentality, that is mind boggling.

[WhistlinDave]

By the way, if a mod wants to change the title of this thread to "Vote fraud alleged in Texas" or something like that just for the sake of accuracy, I have no objection. I didn't mean to state something as absolute fact, I was just posting the DP post here and that's the first title that came to mind. I don't seem to have the ability to edit the title of the thread, unless I'm just too dense to figure it out.

[minusbear]

What on earth are you talking about? As far as I know, entrance polling is every bit as allowed as exit-polling. You're just not allowed to campaign or influence.

Also, it doesn't say she was an poll worker, it says she's an election judge. I'm not sure that's an official title, but one would presume that polling is exactly what an election judge is there to do.

Election Judge is what I meant to say not poll worker. Media does entrance and exit polling, not someone who is officially working there.

[TheGrinch]

Election Judge is what I meant to say not poll worker. Media does entrance and exit polling, not someone who is officially working there.
Isn't that a marked difference that she's not a poll worker (who yes, I assume are not allowed to interfere even with exit-polling), and an election judge, who presumably isn't prohibited from doing so... She'd have to be pretty dumb to be coming out about it if she was doing something illegal, no? Further, can anyone confirm that it's an official title that is bound to any restrictions? Seems pretty clear she was doing what she was supposed/allowed to do or she wouldn't come out to incriminate herself.

Further, it is not just the media who's allowed to conduct entrance/exit polling. Anyone can (aside from presumably poll workers, but she wasn't one).

[CPUd]

who cares? Say she's a nut. NINETEEN VOTES for Ron in AUSTIN?? Where 6000 people came to see him speak? Even with 'oh those students don't vote' mentality, that is mind boggling.

It was just 19 votes at one polling location.


She wasn't doing an actual entrance poll; in her job capacity, she would ask each voter which ballot they wanted. The voters were volunteering their preferred candidate during this exchange, and she had made marks on her hand. Once she saw what the official results were, she noticed some discrepancies.

[minusbear]

who cares? Say she's a nut. NINETEEN VOTES for Ron in AUSTIN?? Where 6000 people came to see him speak? Even with 'oh those students don't vote' mentality, that is mind boggling.

Read the results again. 19 votes were just Precinct 101 in Austin, not all of Austin. There were only 50 votes cast in that particular precinct so it wasn't a heavy turn out area.
http://www.co.travis.tx.us/county_clerk/election/20120529/files/20120529reppct.pdf


Looking at this, precinct 101 seems to be a sparsely populated precinct.

http://www.traviscountytax.org/gis/maps/p101.htm

[sailingaway]

Read the results again. 19 votes were just Precinct 101 in Austin, not all of Austin. There were only 50 votes cast in that particular precinct so it wasn't a heavy turn out area.
http://www.co.travis.tx.us/county_clerk/election/20120529/files/20120529reppct.pdf


Looking at this, precinct 101 seems to be a sparsely populated precinct.

http://www.traviscountytax.org/gis/maps/p101.htm

OK, I was reading the comments not the link. Well, then I don't know. But I'd follow up and find out and go on from there.

[RickyJ]

Nothing anyone can do if the campaign sits back and does nothing. We have seen this from the beginning, unfortunately.

We saw this in 2008 as well. When Ron Paul gets the biggest crowds everywhere he goes, yet does not get the most votes, either those coming out to see him don't vote and don't encourage others to vote, or their is massive voter fraud occurring. From what we heard before the Iowa caucus even began was that high level leaders in the GOP there were saying that they can't let Ron Paul win. And TV talking heads were saying if he did win then they would just throw it out. That's what happened I think to many Ron Paul votes in Iowa, they were literally thrown out.

[RickyJ]

Entrance polls done right are fairly accurate. But they are not quite as accurate as exit polls are. The reason is because sometimes people change their minds just before they vote and vote for someone else. I know that is crazy, but some people do that.

[Barrex]

Entrance polls dont matter. They are not conclusive evidence. Affidavits signed by people who voted will matter (if people decide to do this).

[RickyJ]

Entrance polls dont matter. They are not conclusive evidence. Affidavits signed by people who voted will matter (if people decide to do this).

I have to wonder how much even that would matter. In New Hampshire in 2008 they were caught red handed cheating by saying Ron Paul received 0 votes in one county when in fact he got at least 30 or more. Entire families came forth to say they voted for Ron Paul in that county. Yet nothing was ever done about it. The campaign knew about it then as well, and did nothing.

[CPUd]

Did they sign affidavits?

[puppetmaster]

I am quite comfortable saying voter fraud is prevalent in America. Lets prove it if we can

[Barrex]

I have to wonder how much even that would matter. In New Hampshire in 2008 they were caught red handed cheating by saying Ron Paul received 0 votes in one county when in fact he got at least 30 or more. Entire families came forth to say they voted for Ron Paul in that county. Yet nothing was ever done about it. The campaign knew about it then as well, and did nothing.
I dont know why that wasnt pursued further back then....
I am little afraid that same will happen this time too.
Remember 9 trucks in Iowa, Charlie Cheater, Portland delegates etc.

"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."
It is our fault. They will keep doing it as long as they can.


Did they sign affidavits?

I got no Idea but if they plan to get this to court they will have to do it sooner or later....

[RonRules]

It's interesting to me how anecdotal evidence is trusted more than strong statistical evidence.

First: I must say that I totally trust the report from Election Judge Anne Becket and other stories similar to hers.

Often on the Daily Paul or RPF discussions you read stories about people that try to prove Paul's popularity from conversations at family or office party gatherings. Generally there's very few people present (less than 10).

Most people trust these stories because they are very personal. I also believe them.

But here's the problem, actually there are lots of problems: The samples are self-selected and not statistically significant.

There are 100's of Ron Paul supporters that ask other people about their vote preference. I guarantee you that none will report a poor Paul statistic. That what I mean by "self-selected". You don't hear the negative stories, only the positive ones.

Also of course, if you ask family members, it's more likely that they will vote like you and have the same political ideals (on average, but I know there are plenty of exceptions). That's also a self-selected sample.

These family members may want to be nice to you and may tell you what you want to hear.

And most importantly, a small sample such as 3-4 people is extremely unreliable. For example, if you want to estimate 10 million voters with a sample size of 8 (at the 95% confidence level), your measurement will be off by +/- 34.65% ! In other you'll have no idea.

On the other hand, I've done about 500 election charts with REAL VOTE results and I'm producing statistics based on these REAL votes, millions of votes. ANY statistician will tell you those charts are anomalous. Go find a statistician and ask.

The charts flat line when central tabulators are not used. The Libertarian Party charts flat line. Charts of pure Demographics flat line. Charts when Romney is in the elections show an impossible upward slope, unexplained by any demographic.

You can see all my charts here:
photobucket.com/flipping_CA
photobucket.com/flipping_TX
photobucket.com/flipping_VA
photobucket.com/flipping_WI
... (all 50 states, just change the last two letters)

The entire data archive, including all county data, spreadsheets, etc is here:
https://www.sugarsync.com/share/bzvpf3dyq5hre

Yet nobody seems to care.

Right now, I'm doing California's Riverside county in great detail. I have exactly 189087 real votes. There are 853 precincts and I have all the central tabulator data. I have access to 100% of the DRE (touch screen) machine data and soon 1% of the real ballots (they are being hand counted as we speak). I see these paper ballots every day when I'm at the Registrar's office.

I believe that I am very close to find what causes the vote flipping (provided I get everything I asked Riverside County), but I doubt people are going to believe it. We need to reproduce these results in many more counties.

What's most disturbing to me that people even in this very RPF forum don't trust math! Science is not trusted and this is really horrible. They put more faith in an anecdotal story from uncle Fred than hard numbers from statistical tables. Statistics itself, the math part is correct.

In short:
http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/zoom/dae5_science.jpg

[Eisenhower]

It's interesting to me how anecdotal evidence is trusted more than strong statistical evidence.

First: I must say that I totally trust the report from Election Judge Anne Becket and other stories similar to hers.

Often on the Daily Paul or RPF discussions you read stories about people that try to prove Paul's popularity from conversations at family or office party gatherings. Generally there's very few people present (less than 10).

Most people trust these stories because they are very personal. I also believe them.

But here's the problem, actually there are lots of problems: The samples are self-selected and not statistically significant.

There are 100's of Ron Paul supporters that ask other people about their vote preference. I guarantee you that none will report a poor Paul statistic. That what I mean by "self-selected". You don't hear the negative stories, only the positive ones.

Also of course, if you ask family members, it's more likely that they will vote like you and have the same political ideals (on average, but I know there are plenty of exceptions). That's also a self-selected sample.

These family members may want to be nice to you and may tell you what you want to hear.

And most importantly, a small sample such as 3-4 people is extremely unreliable. For example, if you want to estimate 10 million voters with a sample size of 8 (at the 95% confidence level), your measurement will be off by +/- 34.65% ! In other you'll have no idea.

On the other hand, I've done about 500 election charts with REAL VOTE results and I'm producing statistics based on these REAL votes, millions of votes. ANY statistician will tell you those charts are anomalous. Go find a statistician and ask.

The charts flat line when central tabulators are not used. The Libertarian Party charts flat line. Charts of pure Demographics flat line. Charts when Romney is in the elections show an impossible upward slope, unexplained by any demographic.

You can see all my charts here:
photobucket.com/flipping_CA
photobucket.com/flipping_TX
photobucket.com/flipping_VA
photobucket.com/flipping_WI
... (all 50 states, just change the last two letters)

The entire data archive, including all county data, spreadsheets, etc is here:
https://www.sugarsync.com/share/bzvpf3dyq5hre

Yet nobody seems to care.

Right now, I'm doing California's Riverside county in great detail. I have exactly 189087 real votes. There are 853 precincts and I have all the central tabulator data. I have access to 100% of the DRE (touch screen) machine data and soon 1% of the real ballots (they are being hand counted as we speak). I see these paper ballots every day when I'm at the Registrar's office.

I believe that I am very close to find what causes the vote flipping (provided I get everything I asked Riverside County), but I doubt people are going to believe it. We need to reproduce these results in many more counties.

What's most disturbing to me that people even in this very RPF forum don't trust math! Science is not trusted and this is really horrible. They put more faith in an anecdotal story from uncle Fred than hard numbers from statistical tables. Statistics itself, the math part is correct.

In short:
http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/zoom/dae5_science.jpg

I care :(

+1

[donnay]

We saw this in 2008 as well. When Ron Paul gets the biggest crowds everywhere he goes, yet does not get the most votes, either those coming out to see him don't vote and don't encourage others to vote, or their is massive voter fraud occurring. From what we heard before the Iowa caucus even began was that high level leaders in the GOP there were saying that they can't let Ron Paul win. And TV talking heads were saying if he did win then they would just throw it out. That's what happened I think to many Ron Paul votes in Iowa, they were literally thrown out.

That was the constant noise on these forums after the states primaries, so many people were upset at all the college kids for not voting. :rolleyes: It's easy to blame a group of people rather than look into it and listen to the people yelling about fraud, in the areas, and then lay blame at these people for crying foul.

[TheGrinch]

RonRules, maybe I should address this in the other thread, but a couple observations and questions:

Do you need more help getting this to more of the right people? I remember reading about you meeting with interested people a long time ago and Ben Swann wanting to look at it, but haven't heard anything about that. My apologies if I missed the progress, but with how every thread became a debate about methods, it's been tough for us laypersons to keep up.

Really that's your biggest problem in just preaching it to all of us, because we're not statisticians or poll experts, and so the science is above our heads. Also it makes it difficult to get it out there into the public discourse if you can't get credible people willing to look into it.

(One more thing. I did mean to let you know about one of those executive summaries that presumes far too much, when like you said, all you really need to rely on is the science. I felt it undermined the science to presume conclusions that are much easier to dismiss. Stand on your strongest leg with this. Stuff like how they may actually be doing it aren't nearly as important or provable as the statistical evidence they are doing it).

[Ivash]

No. Lets take this situation:
10 people voted.
5 voted for Ron Paul.
Results say 3 voted for Ron Paul.
There was theft and 2 votes were stolen from Ron Paul.
You contact all 10 people who voted and if more than 3 (4 or 5) sign affidavit that they voted for Ron Paul you successfully proven theft.

If people could prove this just in one precinct it would be huge. It would give reason for further and more invasive investigation.

Well, no, with such small numbers slight discrepancies could be explained away by investigator's bias. If there were only five votes for Paul and yet five hundred people swore they voted for him, then that would be much better evidence.

[Barrex]

@RonRules (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?11642-RonRules)

Read again. Those are not "anecdotal evidence". Her work is not based on statistics but on testimonies.

I can not speak for others but your "strong statistical evidence" thing. You guys lost when you created a thread with how many posts? 10,000? You are running in circles (analyze state after state) and moving slower than snails, your ad hominem attacks (not scientific), to top it off with "not having a plan is a good thing" + things like that.... You have been granted unprecedented privileges on this forum (no critics allowed on your thread) and you start attacking anyone who doesnt agree with you+ you keep posting on other part of this forum about your thread and want people only to agree with you. That kind of behavior and approach is everything except scientific...


...so it is not "strong statistical evidence" it is because people who are posting it.



Well, no, with such small numbers slight discrepancies could be explained away by investigator's bias. If there were only five votes for Paul and yet five hundred people swore they voted for him, then that would be much better evidence.
No it wouldnt and it couldnt. Affidavits are given under oath or penalty of perjury. Right? So "investigator's bias" plays no role in this.

[RonRules]

The problem with the "other thread" is nobody participates anymore. I'll keep posting results for posterity, but I don't see others posting results.

As far as the charts are concerned there is no "math" in them. By math I mean statistics. It's only the addition of all precincts cumulatively. It's grade 2-3 math, but somehow it scares people.

Here's what's needed and you can report in the "other thread" (Vote Flipping):


1) If your county has not provided "Precinct-Level" data, that's the first thing we need. Less than 1/2 counties provide it. That data represents the voting results for EACH candidate, at each precinct. From that I can make the county-wide charts. Some counties only provide summary information for the entire county. We cannot make charts from summary data.

The Precinct-Level data output is from the Central Tabulator and needs to be in computer readable format. (not PDF scanned images). The format can be in ".asc", ".txt", ".csv", ".xls" format. As long as it's some form of text data that can be easily read into a spreadsheet. The data needs to be organized in columns for each candidate.

A chart will tell us if there was a problem in your county. Other charts such as precincts histograms can help pin point things like ballot stuffing.

2) We also need direct voting machine output for each precinct (or as much as possible). This is the direct output from the voting machine in digital form like described in 1) above BEFORE it enters the central tabulator. It should be available, but you may need convincing of the election clerks. If voting machine output is not available, request a copy of the end of the "Poll Tape" that will show the individual candidate results. Some poll tapes only show the total votes and that's not useful.

I've asked for poll tapes many times but only one person supplied it.

3) A detailed directory list of the central tabulator. The central tabulator machine(s) have names like "Deibold/Dominion GEMS", WinEDS/WinETP, Clarity/SOE / ES&S "Unity Server", Hart Inter-Civics.

The county computer technician will need to issue the following command from the Root directory (C:):

dir /s /q > directory_list.txt

This command will produce a full directory list and file ownership of the central tabulator and place the output in "directory_list.txt". I need the file: "directory_list.txt"

4) A network statistic (to find out if the central tabulator is/can be connected to the internet)

The command is: netstat -a -n > "netstat_list.txt". I need the file: "netstat_list.txt".

This minimum request that will prove that vote flipping has taken place and hopefully help find the exact cause.

Hope this is explained well enough. If not, please don't hesitate to ask questions in the Vote Flipping thread, which I check daily.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?369316-The-case-for-the-occurence-of-algorithmic-vote-flipping&p=4486585#post4486585

[zachrbroussard]

The charts flat line when central tabulators are not used. The Libertarian Party charts flat line. Charts of pure Demographics flat line. Charts when Romney is in the elections show an impossible upward slope, unexplained by any demographic.



Why is an upward slope in percentage of votes impossible? Say more RP supporters turn out in the morning that in the evening while more Romney folks turn out later. The result would be an upward trend for Romney....

[RonRules]

The interview with Election Judge Anne Becket is on NOW. Click on the upper right of the page:

http://ronpaulradio.com/

[RonRules]

Why is an upward slope in percentage of votes impossible? Say more RP supporters turn out in the morning that in the evening while more Romney folks turn out later. The result would be an upward trend for Romney....

The chart X-axis is not time. It is the cumulative votes from the smallest precinct to the largest precinct.

And no, Romney does not do better in cities. Ron Paul does.

The first post on this thread has documents that explain the charts:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?369316-The-case-for-the-occurence-of-algorithmic-vote-flipping

[zachrbroussard]

The chart X-axis is not time. It is the cumulative votes from the smallest precinct to the largest precinct.

And no, Romney does not do better in cities. Ron Paul does.

I was regarding the chart in the OP, your chart links are broken. The chart in the OP is still not time, but it is votes counted.


Edit: just saw the link you posted. Will look it over.

[KingNothing]

It's interesting to me how anecdotal evidence is trusted more than strong statistical evidence.


If we had statistical evidence, I'm sure people would trust it.

[KingNothing]

The chart X-axis is not time. It is the cumulative votes from the smallest precinct to the largest precinct.

And no, Romney does not do better in cities. Ron Paul does.

The first post on this thread has documents that explain the charts:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?369316-The-case-for-the-occurence-of-algorithmic-vote-flipping

If there is a God and he loves Liberty, he won't let you fill another thread with thousands of posts worth of nonsense.

[minusbear]

Why is an upward slope in percentage of votes impossible? Say more RP supporters turn out in the morning that in the evening while more Romney folks turn out later. The result would be an upward trend for Romney....

DELETED..never mind, answered in another post.

[devil21]

If there is a God and he loves Liberty, he won't let you fill another thread with thousands of posts worth of nonsense.

As opposed to your 2886 posts worth of nonsense?

[dusman]

The problem with the "other thread" is nobody participates anymore. I'll keep posting results for posterity, but I don't see others posting results.

As far as the charts are concerned there is no "math" in them. By math I mean statistics. It's only the addition of all precincts cumulatively. It's grade 2-3 math, but somehow it scares people.

Here's what's needed and you can report in the "other thread" (Vote Flipping):


1) If your county has not provided "Precinct-Level" data, that's the first thing we need. Less than 1/2 counties provide it. That data represents the voting results for EACH candidate, at each precinct. From that I can make the county-wide charts. Some counties only provide summary information for the entire county. We cannot make charts from summary data.

The Precinct-Level data output is from the Central Tabulator and needs to be in computer readable format. (not PDF scanned images). The format can be in ".asc", ".txt", ".csv", ".xls" format. As long as it's some form of text data that can be easily read into a spreadsheet. The data needs to be organized in columns for each candidate.

A chart will tell us if there was a problem in your county. Other charts such as precincts histograms can help pin point things like ballot stuffing.

2) We also need direct voting machine output for each precinct (or as much as possible). This is the direct output from the voting machine in digital form like described in 1) above BEFORE it enters the central tabulator. It should be available, but you may need convincing of the election clerks. If voting machine output is not available, request a copy of the end of the "Poll Tape" that will show the individual candidate results. Some poll tapes only show the total votes and that's not useful.

I've asked for poll tapes many times but only one person supplied it.

3) A detailed directory list of the central tabulator. The central tabulator machine(s) have names like "Deibold/Dominion GEMS", WinEDS/WinETP, Clarity/SOE / ES&S "Unity Server", Hart Inter-Civics.

The county computer technician will need to issue the following command from the Root directory (C:):

dir /s /q > directory_list.txt

This command will produce a full directory list and file ownership of the central tabulator and place the output in "directory_list.txt". I need the file: "directory_list.txt"

4) A network statistic (to find out if the central tabulator is/can be connected to the internet)

The command is: netstat -a -n > "netstat_list.txt". I need the file: "netstat_list.txt".

This minimum request that will prove that vote flipping has taken place and hopefully help find the exact cause.

Hope this is explained well enough. If not, please don't hesitate to ask questions in the Vote Flipping thread, which I check daily.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?369316-The-case-for-the-occurence-of-algorithmic-vote-flipping&p=4486585#post4486585

What I would highly suggest is ro sit in front of a camera and describe this to your best ability vocally. You will be surprised how much better it is perceived and accepted, if someone can sit and watch a video rather than trying to read through scientific "babble".. let alone hundreds of pages of it on a forum. I've seen perceptions change night and day, where the only difference was the message was presented by video, instead of text-based.

An oddity of human nature, I guess. ;)

[kathy88]

As opposed to your 2886 posts worth of nonsense?

Better watch it. He'll ignore you. Then unignore you and neg rep you. Then ignore you again.

[KingNothing]

As opposed to your 2886 posts worth of nonsense?

Everything I post is worthwhile, enlightening and amazing compared to every "VOTE FRAUD VOTE FLIPPER," "AMASH SUCKS," and "RAND IS A TRAITOR!" post.

[RonRules]

What I would highly suggest is ro sit in front of a camera and describe this to your best ability vocally. You will be surprised how much better it is perceived and accepted, if someone can sit and watch a video rather than trying to read through scientific "babble".. let alone hundreds of pages of it on a forum. I've seen perceptions change night and day, where the only difference was the message was presented by video, instead of text-based.

An oddity of human nature, I guess. ;)

You're right about a video, however I was not allowed to record a presentation two of us did at UCR. I'd have to do a separate video presentation.

After the UCR presentation, I made a less technical presentation (about 60 slides ~ one hour) that I have given twice now. In one case out of about 30 people in the room, two Romney supporters walked out in anger. I'm trying to get signed up with the local Republican party to give the same presentation. :)

PS: I've made a couple of other charts from Travis county for the US Senate and US congress district 35. They both flat line. I'll see what else I can chart in Travis county and sent that to the right people. I'll post all of them in a few hours on the flipper thread.

[devil21]

Everything I post is worthwhile, enlightening and amazing compared to every "VOTE FRAUD VOTE FLIPPER," "AMASH SUCKS," and "RAND IS A TRAITOR!" post.

Get real. You're nothing but a troll and it's obvious. I never see you post anything positive, uplifting, or remotely worthwhile about this movement or the members of it. Your entire body of work on this forum is bringing others down. If I was a mod you would have been out the door a long time ago.

[WhistlinDave]

...I've done about 500 election charts with REAL VOTE results and I'm producing statistics based on these REAL votes, millions of votes. ANY statistician will tell you those charts are anomalous. Go find a statistician and ask.

The charts flat line when central tabulators are not used. The Libertarian Party charts flat line. Charts of pure Demographics flat line. Charts when Romney is in the elections show an impossible upward slope, unexplained by any demographic.

You can see all my charts here:
photobucket.com/flipping_CA
photobucket.com/flipping_TX
photobucket.com/flipping_VA
photobucket.com/flipping_WI
... (all 50 states, just change the last two letters)

The entire data archive, including all county data, spreadsheets, etc is here:
https://www.sugarsync.com/share/bzvpf3dyq5hre

Yet nobody seems to care.

Right now, I'm doing California's Riverside county in great detail. I have exactly 189087 real votes. There are 853 precincts and I have all the central tabulator data. I have access to 100% of the DRE (touch screen) machine data and soon 1% of the real ballots (they are being hand counted as we speak). I see these paper ballots every day when I'm at the Registrar's office.

I believe that I am very close to find what causes the vote flipping (provided I get everything I asked Riverside County), but I doubt people are going to believe it. We need to reproduce these results in many more counties.

What's most disturbing to me that people even in this very RPF forum don't trust math! Science is not trusted and this is really horrible. They put more faith in an anecdotal story from uncle Fred than hard numbers from statistical tables. Statistics itself, the math part is correct.

Well fwiw, I care, and I read the Google docs linked in the "Case for Algorithmic Vote Flipping" with great interest, and I understood it. I'm one of those strange people who enjoys math, so I took the time to figure out what you were saying (was that you? I don't remember now but it sounds like you're talking about the same thing here).

You're right, it really isn't all that difficult to understand once you get the concept of adding more precincts as you go along. It's like adding one more pancake to a stack of pancakes, and another pancake, and another. If you're counting blueberries in the pancakes, and you start out averaging 10 blueberries per pancake, and this continues for a while, then the larger the stack of pancakes gets, then the harder it is to get the average number of blueberries to change. Even if you have one pancake with 17 blueberries, if you're throwing it on top of a large stack that was averaging ten blueberries, then your average is still going to be about 10 blueberries per pancake. (Your A.B. or "average blueberries" will go up to 11 or more only if your stack of pancakes was six pancakes or less, if you add one pancake with 17 blueberries and the stack was previously averaging 10 blueberries per pancake. The larger the stack of pancakes, the harder it is to change the overall average.)

You'd have to start adding several pancakes each with 20 or 30 blueberries to get the overall average to move significantly. That kind of anomaly--assuming the cook is not deliberately messing with the batter as you go along--is extremely unlikely. And yet that is what is happening with Romney's blueberries as you add more pancakes (precincts) to the stack of pancakes. His overall percentage starts going way up, and it defies logic. Unless there is something fishy going on with the vote counting.

I thought your analysis was pretty convincing, actually. (Even if my pancake analogy was a really crappy one.)

I'll be really curious to see what you come up with when you're done with Riverside County. If it indicates fraud, and if we can ever get a reliable confirmation that everything is on the up and up with that electionfraudremedy.com (http://www.electionfraudremedy.com) lawsuit/website/group of lawyers, then I hope you'll throw in your own testimony & affidavit with your evidence. The more, the better.

[kathy88]

Nice one Dave. Pancake flippin'.

[WhistlinDave]

Algorithmic blueberry pancake flippin'. :)

[zachrbroussard]

Algorithmic blueberry pancake flippin'. :)

But what if one scoop of pancake mix had a higher affinity for blueberries? I just don't see how anybody can positively state that there isn't a demographic correlation of any sort.

I would love for this to be true so that something will come of it. But I am still not a believer. Life does not play by the rules of statistics.

[bcreps85]

But what if one scoop of pancake mix had a higher affinity for blueberries? I just don't see how anybody can positively state that there isn't a demographic correlation of any sort.

I would love for this to be true so that something will come of it. But I am still not a believer. Life does not play by the rules of statistics.

If you had read the 8 billion pages, you would have found the part where they explored the demographics theory and came to the conclusion that it wasn't a good explanation. I'm not digging through to find it again, but it seemed like solid methods being used.

As for life not playing by the rules of statistics...sure it does. How in the hell do you think they tell us who won elections with about 2% of the votes counted...magic?

[zachrbroussard]

If you had read the 8 billion pages, you would have found the part where they explored the demographics theory and came to the conclusion that it wasn't a good explanation. I'm not digging through to find it again, but it seemed like solid methods being used.

As for life not playing by the rules of statistics...sure it does. How in the hell do you think they tell us who won elections with about 2% of the votes counted...magic?

Can you at least give me a link as to what thread or document you are talking about.

And who is "they"? Ron Paul supporters on the internet who want there to be proof of voting fraud? Or sociology/ political science PhDs who have done research on the topic? You can't fit data to your conclusion, you must collect as much data as possible first and then draw a conclusion. More people need to think like research scientists when it comes to issues such as these.

[bcreps85]

Can you at least give me a link as to what thread or document you are talking about.

And who is "they"? Ron Paul supporters on the internet who want there to be proof of voting fraud? Or sociology PhDs who have done research on the topic? You can't fit data to your conclusion, you must collect as much data as possible first and then draw a conclusion. More people need to think like research scientists when it comes to issues such as these.

It's one of the vote flipping things on this forum...it was the first one though, not the one that gets traffic now, unless someone has moved that data over. No, I'm not searching for it right now...12 hour day at work and Tosh.0 is waiting for me on my DVR.

As for who "they" is...think for a second. Who is it that tells us who won elections when only 2% of the votes has been counted? If you guessed the MSM, you are correct. They use simple statistical equations to calculate the winner based on a large enough sample size that will give a prediction within a specific margin of error. You don't need a very large sample to make a guess with 95% certainty, provided that your sample is truly random. This is 6th grade math; it doesn't require a fracking PhD...

[zachrbroussard]

Not the they I was referring too. I meant
they explored the demographics theory and came to the conclusion that it wasn't a good explanation

[RonRules]

Well fwiw, I care, and I read the Google docs linked in the "Case for Algorithmic Vote Flipping" with great interest, and I understood it. I'm one of those strange people who enjoys math, so I took the time to figure out what you were saying (was that you? I don't remember now but it sounds like you're talking about the same thing here).
The more, the better.


The Algorithm Vote Flipping document was a group effort. There was an initial one written by one person, but it was a bit hard to follow. Then we had a couple more versions, a short one and a long one. I wrote about 1/4 of the long one. Drummergirl put the whole document together and wrote at least 1/2. We have a couple of one page flyers too.

I like the pancake analogy, and I'll probably add it to my presentation. For people to understand stuff, they often need to see it from different angles. I need to find colored balls and a jar for my presentation. That works too.

However, there is a possibility while using actual blueberries in pancake batter that the blueberries will either float or sink in the bowl. That would cause an uneven distribution of blueberries and could result in sloped charts.

In a place like Travis TX, where Ron Paul is certainly not hated and where he does great in college towns like Austin, the resulting chart clearly exposes the fraud. Here it is again:
http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj80/RonRules/Elections2012_Primaries_TX/2012_TX_TravisCountyPresPrimariesRepcsv.png

As far as demographics, we beat that to death. I do however believe that in the case of Obama, the black vote is highly polarized in the larger cities and that can explain some small slopes I've seen.

On the other hand, I don't think the demographics, in TX for Romney, Santorum and Gingrich are not that different from each other. (To my knowledge there's not many Mormons in TX)

[RonRules]

As for who "they" is...think for a second. Who is it that tells us who won elections when only 2% of the votes has been counted? If you guessed the MSM, you are correct. They use simple statistical equations to calculate the winner based on a large enough sample size that will give a prediction within a specific margin of error. You don't need a very large sample to make a guess with 95% certainty, provided that your sample is truly random. This is 6th grade math; it doesn't require a fracking PhD...

I don't have a problem with sampling to declare elections and I guess you don't either. I have much more of a problem with polling as it affects the outcome of the election very much. That's a tough problem for a Libertarian. If I had to choose, there should not be polls.

What's different this year, and this is the first time I see this, they called some states with exactly ZERO votes. It was all done with Edison Research exit polling. I think DC was one such state and possibly MA. There was more than one.

[WhistlinDave]

However, there is a possibility while using actual blueberries in pancake batter that the blueberries will either float or sink in the bowl. That would cause an uneven distribution of blueberries and could result in sloped charts.

True. So that's probably not the best analogy in terms of convincing people. Unless you state that the cook doesn't mix the blueberries into the batter; each time a pancake is poured onto the grill, the cook scoops up a handful of berries and sprinkles them into the pancake.

LOL You can probably come up with a better, easier analogy that works as well so people can see a visual. It was just the first thing that came to mind when I was imagining stacking the numbers from one precinct on top of the existing stack of precincts.

[drummergirl]

What if she was wearing Ron Paul buttons or something and those being polled felt pressured, etc.

That would be illegal in this context. Electioneering.

[drummergirl]

Can you at least give me a link as to what thread or document you are talking about.

And who is "they"? Ron Paul supporters on the internet who want there to be proof of voting fraud? Or sociology/ political science PhDs who have done research on the topic? You can't fit data to your conclusion, you must collect as much data as possible first and then draw a conclusion. More people need to think like research scientists when it comes to issues such as these.

Document links:

brief explanation:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/13hw9DEn11oYHRnZOw5zZhWrKJNqahdkt6Fbk4bDl0jE/edit?pli=1

one page flyer:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nycaPPtpBCyc1DOt9ybWT1tnOXeczMHav3nfdkBzdBw/edit

executive summary (lots of math after page 10):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EokVx9tDsrjAJ-7H9XoPv3KmZYDvVjSFJ4cuxJTo1iE/edit

if you search only for the threads with the "vote integrity" prefix, the threads show up pretty fast.

[drummergirl]

True. So that's probably not the best analogy in terms of convincing people. Unless you state that the cook doesn't mix the blueberries into the batter; each time a pancake is poured onto the grill, the cook scoops up a handful of berries and sprinkles them into the pancake.

LOL You can probably come up with a better, easier analogy that works as well so people can see a visual. It was just the first thing that came to mind when I was imagining stacking the numbers from one precinct on top of the existing stack of precincts.

I like it; blueberry pancake flippin' :D

[bcreps85]

Not the they I was referring too. I meant

Sorry about that. The "they" that were active in the thread in question. This whole thing started quite a while ago now, I've slept since then and don't remember all the names. Looks like drummer found it for you though.

[S.Shorland]

The vote flipping thing was more likely just to throw sand in the eyes during super tuesday and hinder grass roots information and projects at that crucial time.Post 10,000 charts and :eek::(:confused: wait for the fun to start.I didn't realise it until 'Liberty1789' couldn't resist my private message to an accomplice and he 'confirmed' it in fun.I knew him from a trading website.

[drummergirl]

I'm not sure how you get that from the discussion. There were several chronic trolls in those threads, but Liberty1789 was definitely NOT one of them. DSW and da31230 were the ones dragging out the conversation with the same arguments over and over again.


The vote flipping thing was more likely just to throw sand in the eyes during super tuesday and hinder grass roots information and projects at that crucial time.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

I care :(

+1

Yep, I care about all evidence, everywhere.

[zachrbroussard]

After reading through all the evidence that you provided, I'm still not 100% convinced. However, I'm dropping my argument, not because I'm conceding defeat, but because I realize that I've come in too late in this argument and the sides are already too polarized.

I would like to see more investigation to this particular case in Texas though!

[RonRules]

I'm still not 100% convinced.

Will 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999% do?

That's all statistics can provide.

[drummergirl]

I think that the thing to keep in mind is that the Travis County Texas case is just one example of what's happened in most counties and states this primary season. It's much easier psychologically to think about this as being an isolated incident.

I realize that it does take awhile to let it sink in, because the implications of this being something that is happening in 80% or so of the election jurisdictions nationwide are staggering. The concept of free and fair elections is central to how we view ourselves as Americans. Consequently the idea that nowhere is safe from election fraud is more terrifying than 9-11.

I can't change the truth; I can only shine a light on its ugliness.


After reading through all the evidence that you provided, I'm still not 100% convinced. However, I'm dropping my argument, not because I'm conceding defeat, but because I realize that I've come in too late in this argument and the sides are already too polarized.

I would like to see more investigation to this particular case in Texas though!

[affa]

After reading through all the evidence that you provided, I'm still not 100% convinced. However, I'm dropping my argument, not because I'm conceding defeat, but because I realize that I've come in too late in this argument and the sides are already too polarized.

I would like to see more investigation to this particular case in Texas though!

Regarding the demographics argument. It's important to realize pretty much every person that encounters the flipping discussion first thinks 'demographics!'. Including the people who are doing the charts and research. However, while some people just continue to yell demographics over and over, many of us have actually crunched the numbers. We've absolutely proven it's not based on any urban/rural/suburban divide. We see the same oddities even if a country's precincts are all within a city's limits. We see Romney flip with Gingrich in one county (Paul unaffected) and Romney flip with Paul in a neighboring county (Gingrich unaffected). We see the same progressive increase in flipping whether precinct votes are counted in the dozens, or thousands.

I'm absolutely convinced this election was an exercise in fraud. Unfortunately, I also think it's impossible to prove, since there's no paper trail and we're basically trying to prove something the vast majority of people desperately don't want to believe.

[drummergirl]

I'm absolutely convinced this election was an exercise in fraud. Unfortunately, I also think it's impossible to prove, since there's no paper trail and we're basically trying to prove something the vast majority of people desperately don't want to believe.

I think the evidence we have is mathematically incontrovertible. The math is as clear as a west Texas summer sky. i.e. crystal clear.

Unfortunately, this reality stands in sharp contrast to what we believe when we walk in to the polling place to cast our ballot on election day. It's like learning that you were raped while you were under anesthesia. Many people just can't cope with that.

[RonRules]

I'm absolutely convinced this election was an exercise in fraud. Unfortunately, I also think it's impossible to prove, since there's no paper trail and we're basically trying to prove something the vast majority of people desperately don't want to believe.

Most counties use scanning equipment to a large extent. Paper ballots are therefore available. About 95% of the election was made with paper ballots in Riverside and they have to keep them (per California law) for 22 months.

When votes are entered on a touch screen machine (at least in California), each vote is printed on a tape roll and the final result is tabulated at the end.

As far as California is concerned 100% of the votes are available on paper. I have already shown with a small sample of 181 votes that those results flat line.

This afternoon, I will try to get more DRM (touch screen) machine output poll tapes.

I must say however, that they're not always happy to see me. :)

Please get the poll tapes form your county and take a picture of the end of the tape. Make sure that it's not just the total vote count but the individual candidate totals. Report your results in the vote flipping thread.

[affa]

I think the evidence we have is mathematically incontrovertible.

Absolutely. But you're dealing with a populace that no longer deals with, cares about, or understands 'proof'. Heck, the entire media told us during the Osama death that anyone 'sane' should believe without proof, and that anyone who requires proof is a wacko that won't believe the proof anyway... so there's no reason to give proof. And the vast majority bought that. Hook. Line. Sinker. Nobody wants to believe our country is as far gone as it is.

[drummergirl]

Nobody wants to believe our country is as far gone as it is.

It's a grieving process. Denial is part of that. Some people stay there indefinitely. And part of the reason that they do stay there is the inherent thought that if things really are as bad as they are, what will I have to do about it?

It's that last thought, if this really is true, it means I will have to... which sends people running to the beach to bury their heads in the sand at the speed of sound.

There are precious few peaceful remedies left for us. We desperately need to stop the ostrich treatment while we can still utilize them.

EDIT: FWIW, it is the exact same psychological phenomenon that allowed the Nazis to run death camps all through WWII.

[WhistlinDave]

Most counties use scanning equipment to a large extent. Paper ballots are therefore available. About 95% of the election was made with paper ballots in Riverside and they have to keep them (per California law) for 22 months.

When votes are entered on a touch screen machine (at least in California), each vote is printed on a tape roll and the final result is tabulated at the end.

As far as California is concerned 100% of the votes are available on paper. I have already shown with a small sample of 181 votes that those results flat line.

This afternoon, I will try to get more DRM (touch screen) machine output poll tapes.

I must say however, that they're not always happy to see me. :)

Please get the poll tapes form your county and take a picture of the end of the tape. Make sure that it's not just the total vote count but the individual candidate totals. Report your results in the vote flipping thread.

So I can just go show up at the OC Registrar of voters unannounced, and they will produce all the tapes for me to take pictures of? I think this is going to be hundreds of tapes if I'm understanding correctly... (One from each machine) How long do you usually end up waiting for them? Is there any limit to the number they'll allow you to inspect in one day? I just want to know what to expect so I'll know if I need to do this on a day when I have absolutely nothing else going on... LOL It does sound like fun though...

Also, do you know, is there any law saying I couldn't do the same thing in a county I don't reside in, like San Diego, San Bernardino, or Los Angeles?

[tttppp]

Nothing anyone can do if the campaign sits back and does nothing. We have seen this from the beginning, unfortunately.

This is why its hard to support Ron at this stage. Its hard to support someone who refuses to stand up for himself. If they pulled this shit on me, I'd do everything I could to let people know what is going on, and would demand a full transparent audit of all the elections.

[drummergirl]

So I can just go show up at the OC Registrar of voters unannounced, and they will produce all the tapes for me to take pictures of? I think this is going to be hundreds of tapes if I'm understanding correctly... (One from each machine) How long do you usually end up waiting for them? Is there any limit to the number they'll allow you to inspect in one day? I just want to know what to expect so I'll know if I need to do this on a day when I have absolutely nothing else going on... LOL It does sound like fun though...

Also, do you know, is there any law saying I couldn't do the same thing in a county I don't reside in, like San Diego, San Bernardino, or Los Angeles?

I don't know the rules in california well enough to answer completely. What I can tell you is that it's public information which should be available to any member of the public who requests it. If they claim to have specific procedures, ask for a copy of them. And yes, there is one poll tape from each voting machine. And they can be very long indeed.

[RonRules]

This is why its hard to support Ron at this stage.

It's not about Ron. It's about opposing tyranny and it's tools. It's about an extremely shoddy and shady election process. We need full visibility and electronic voting machines that obfuscate everything.

I'm not necessarily against voting machines. Using paper ballots and scanners provide a paper trail AND a mechanical count that verifies that humans have counted correctly.

In Riverside they manually check 1% of the precincts. That's probably not enough and I don't like the way they do the 1%. I'd like to see 5% AND an assurance that at least one high county precinct is checked manually. I did get them to agree to count one large precinct this year, but it only had 283 votes.

It's also important that the chain of custody of the paper ballots is secure, but that's also the case if everything is manual.

[RonRules]

And they can be very long indeed.

The tapes are long, but that's not a problem. You only need a picture of the very end where the voting report is.

Speaking of poll tapes, how many of you are willing to go dumpster diving like Bev Harris?


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-758105072598465368

[RonRules]

It's not too late, probably in ALL US jurisdictions to get the poll tapes:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x455399

if you are a poll worker, or a poll watcher, or just a voter who can go back after the polling place is abandoned, GET THE TAPE!!!
poll workers, in most places, are entitled to a copy of the tape. watchers, generally, are allowed to have one if the judges want to print one. tapes that are posted are fair game once the poll workers leave.
if you cannot do any of the above, please return to your polling place, and write down the totals, at least for the top of your ticket. (in some locations, you might get a good photo, but if it is hanging in a window, it will be hard to get a good shot.)
and, for everyone- if your results are not available in a timely fashion, please make sure that gets reported to an election protection group.

then make sure that the official canvass matches your tape. there may be additions of absentee/early votes, if those are not counted in the precinct. but this should be a small number. if you are a poll worker, please note the possible number for this.

[donnay]

We saw this in 2008 as well. When Ron Paul gets the biggest crowds everywhere he goes, yet does not get the most votes, either those coming out to see him don't vote and don't encourage others to vote, or their is massive voter fraud occurring. From what we heard before the Iowa caucus even began was that high level leaders in the GOP there were saying that they can't let Ron Paul win. And TV talking heads were saying if he did win then they would just throw it out. That's what happened I think to many Ron Paul votes in Iowa, they were literally thrown out.

Yep to the latter. But the story was, the campaign didn't want to look like sore losers. I was there, I partook in the NH recount. Bev Harris from blackbox voting was there, she called shenanigans on it too. The challenges were brought forth by the grassroots.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJfj9ySYg0Q



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqJCm38MEuU&feature=relmfu


Then we had this, this time around:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-uVhhIlPk0


Then we had this radio host in Ron Paul's corner despite all the naysayers and ner'do wells dismissing these reports:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgbq7TRL6aM&feature=relmfu



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3Cx_rnZ4Rs&feature=relmfu


Oh no, there wasn't any fraud. :rolleyes:

[tttppp]

It's not about Ron. It's about opposing tyranny and it's tools. It's about an extremely shoddy and shady election process. We need full visibility and electronic voting machines that obfuscate everything.

I'm not necessarily against voting machines. Using paper ballots and scanners provide a paper trail AND a mechanical count that verifies that humans have counted correctly.

In Riverside they manually check 1% of the precincts. That's probably not enough and I don't like the way they do the 1%. I'd like to see 5% AND an assurance that at least one high county precinct is checked manually. I did get them to agree to count one large precinct this year, but it only had 283 votes.

It's also important that the chain of custody of the paper ballots is secure, but that's also the case if everything is manual.

There is no reason not to do transparent audits of all the elections. And Ron Paul has done nothing about the shady election process, which is why I said its hard to support him at this point. If he's not going to call out the establishment on these fake elections and demand auditing elections, you really can't blame the establishment for Ron losing. You can only blame Ron for not taking these elections seriously.

[WhistlinDave]

There is no reason not to do transparent audits of all the elections. And Ron Paul has done nothing about the shady election process, which is why I said its hard to support him at this point. If he's not going to call out the establishment on these fake elections and demand auditing elections, you really can't blame the establishment for Ron losing. You can only blame Ron for not taking these elections seriously.

I don't think you can blame Ron for not coming out and making noise, considering how the MSM have been painting him as crazy from the beginning, and all the skirmishes at all the caucuses and conventions have, for the most part, been distorted and spun in the media so as to make it look like Ron Paul supporters are crazy and out of control and the ones who caused all the "shenanigans" and "chaos."

Secondly you are assuming Ron is even aware of everything that has happened everywhere. He may not be, and/or what little information he has might have been filtered before getting to him for his own protection, for the reason stated above. (Remember how he asked everyone to "be respectful" in Tampa after he heard about Romney's son getting booed? He heard a GOP-spun version of that event, I'm sure.)

If you were Ron Paul right now, and you did have information about how much cheating has gone on, and knowing how the MSM will spin it if you say something, would you put your neck on the line and come out right now on a mission to clean it all up? If it was me, personally I'd probably wait until after Tampa. Especially knowing someone else has already gotten a Federal lawsuit filed that will address all the cheating. Sometimes you have to pick your battles, and sometimes picking the wrong ones (or the right ones at the wrong time) can just give your enemies more ammunition for them to paint you as a loon.

Now if we could just get the MSM to start covering the lawsuit. Of course they probably won't, because it's hard to spin the complaint the way they would want to spin it, and evidence exists to back up all the claims of election fraud in the suit.

[tttppp]

I don't think you can blame Ron for not coming out and making noise, considering how the MSM have been painting him as crazy from the beginning, and all the skirmishes at all the caucuses and conventions have, for the most part, been distorted and spun in the media so as to make it look like Ron Paul supporters are crazy and out of control and the ones who caused all the "shenanigans" and "chaos."

Secondly you are assuming Ron is even aware of everything that has happened everywhere. He may not be, and/or what little information he has might have been filtered before getting to him for his own protection, for the reason stated above. (Remember how he asked everyone to "be respectful" in Tampa after he heard about Romney's son getting booed? He heard a GOP-spun version of that event, I'm sure.)

If you were Ron Paul right now, and you did have information about how much cheating has gone on, and knowing how the MSM will spin it if you say something, would you put your neck on the line and come out right now on a mission to clean it all up? If it was me, personally I'd probably wait until after Tampa. Especially knowing someone else has already gotten a Federal lawsuit filed that will address all the cheating. Sometimes you have to pick your battles, and sometimes picking the wrong ones (or the right ones at the wrong time) can just give your enemies more ammunition for them to paint you as a loon.

Now if we could just get the MSM to start covering the lawsuit. Of course they probably won't, because it's hard to spin the complaint the way they would want to spin it, and evidence exists to back up all the claims of election fraud in the suit.

If Ron Paul had complained about the voting from the beginning, he wouldn't sound crazy. Additionally, if people found out that our democracy is a sham, there would be many pissed off people willing to support the only candidate willing to do something about it. All the stuff Ron Paul says is great, but none of it really matters if the elections are fixed.

[RonRules]

Secondly you are assuming Ron is even aware of everything that has happened everywhere.

Just in case Ron is not aware of what's going on, I charted his own district: See post #980
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?369316-The-case-for-the-occurence-of-algorithmic-vote-flipping/page98

Pass this along to Ron if you know how to contact him directly (bypassing Jesse Benton).

[WhistlinDave]

Just in case Ron is not aware of what's going on, I charted his own district: See post #980
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?369316-The-case-for-the-occurence-of-algorithmic-vote-flipping/page98

Pass this along to Ron if you know how to contact him directly (bypassing Jesse Benton).

I sure wish I did... Hopefully someone will read this who can. Wow, that's really amazing. There is no way Romney beat him by that kind of a spread in those precincts... I just don't buy it!!!!!!

[WhistlinDave]

Oh no, there wasn't any fraud. :rolleyes:

I'm just getting a chance to watch the videos you posted now... Whoa... Just watched the first one and that's ridiculous!!!! Could you make a seal that's any easier to peel right off? And talk about a guilty face, deer caught in the headlights on that guy (Secretary of State?)... Wow. I don't know why this should surprise me so much any more.

[RonRules]

I'm just getting a chance to watch the videos you posted now... Whoa... Just watched the first one and that's ridiculous!!!! Could you make a seal that's any easier to peel right off? And talk about a guilty face, deer caught in the headlights on that guy (Secretary of State?)... Wow. I don't know why this should surprise me so much any more.

Yes that's a good video, but find the one where Harri Hursti hacks the memory card. If you can't find it quickly, I'll find it for you.

It's referred as the "Hursti Hack".

BTW, Hacking Democracy mostly exposes the fact that elections CAN be hacked. I like to think that the work we're doing in the Vote Flipping Thread exposes that in 2012 (and some prior years), elections HAVE been hacked.

[devil21]

I remember when every thread that so much as mentioned vote fraud was sent to HT to die. Now this one is 10 pages and the flipper threads are huge and stay on GC. I sure wish some of those original threads had stayed in plain view.

[drummergirl]

I remember when every thread that so much as mentioned vote fraud was sent to HT to die. Now this one is 10 pages and the flipper threads are huge and stay on GC. I sure wish some of those original threads had stayed in plain view.

They are still there:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?363915

just no new posts in a very long time

[Professor8000]

Can you at least give me a link as to what thread or document you are talking about.

And who is "they"? Ron Paul supporters on the internet who want there to be proof of voting fraud? Or sociology/ political science PhDs who have done research on the topic? You can't fit data to your conclusion, you must collect as much data as possible first and then draw a conclusion. More people need to think like research scientists when it comes to issues such as these.

The scientific method requires you to form a hypothesis FIRST and THEN collect evidence and THEN draw a conclusion.