Drudge this pic! (Ron Paul's support 2008 vs 2012)

[Kregisen]

1. Voting turnout was lower in 2012 than in 2008

2. I dont know off-hand how many and who was still in the race in 2008, but perhaps a large portion of Paul's votes were protest votes against the top 1 or 2 candidates. 2008 votes does not necessarily mean Paul was their favorite. There's a reason why we get more votes when candidates drop out.

3. Early morning caucus means a lot of old people and few young people. This was evident in the polling statistics.


The people here claiming that someone somehow manipulated voting totals from 1,800 different precincts is stupid plain and simple. I don't care if you're a member of RPF or not but if you seriously think someone was able to change votes in that many precincts you're out of your mind and you make the rest of RPF look dumb. Were there suspicious things in the Nevada voting? Sure, but that is not on the same scale we're talking about here.

[Suzu]

You'd be better off sending that pic to Nate Silver than Drudge at this point...

Not sure who that is, but the pic did end up here:

http://shar.es/fxaYT

[Kregisen]

On top of that, other states we did very well in 2008 we are polling at less right now. Minnesota for example. In 2008 we got 16 or 18% and right now we're in last place with what, 12%?

So if you conspiracy theorists want to stay consistent you might as well say PPP is also in on the plan to ruin Paul and is lying about their polling.


It's simply a matter of how well we did in 2008. South Carolina has HUGE increases of support from the last 4 years because 4 years ago there was no organization and we got 3.5%. You cannot simply show the numbers without the percentages and say that because we quadrupled from 3.5% to 13% we should quadruple or even double from 15% to 30+% like some of you think.

[Paulistinian]

I blame the SuperBrochure.

[Travlyr]

On top of that, other states we did very well in 2008 we are polling at less right now. Minnesota for example. In 2008 we got 16 or 18% and right now we're in last place with what, 12%?

So if you conspiracy theorists want to stay consistent you might as well say PPP is also in on the plan to ruin Paul and is lying about their polling.


It's simply a matter of how well we did in 2008. South Carolina has HUGE increases of support from the last 4 years because 4 years ago there was no organization and we got 3.5%. You cannot simply show the numbers without the percentages and say that because we quadrupled from 3.5% to 13% we should quadruple or even double from 15% to 30+% like some of you think.

Honest question: Have you read "End The Fed" by Ron Paul?

[LibertyEagle]

It may have been posted elsewhere but I made a small change to make it better - the two Nevada figures in the one I changed were crammed together, so I separated them.

The caption? You tell me...

Attachment 1235

It came from Jack Hunter's article titled: THE IMPORTANCE OF VOTING

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/02/0...nce-of-voting/

I have no earthly idea why you would think drudging this would be a good idea.

[tfurrh]

The people here claiming that someone somehow manipulated voting totals from 1,800 different precincts is stupid plain and simple. I don't care if you're a member of RPF or not but if you seriously think someone was able to change votes in that many precincts you're out of your mind and you make the rest of RPF look dumb. Were there suspicious things in the Nevada voting? Sure, but that is not on the same scale we're talking about here.

RonPaulForums, I sincerely apologize for making all of your members appear dumb. I was mistaken in my previous comments, by thinking this was a GD FORUM. I'm glad Kregisan pointed out how utterly stupid of me that was.

[Lafayette]

Just basing it on the lowest increase over 2008 percent wise(which is Florida ), our turn out should have at least been slightly less than double in 2012 over 2008 for Nevada or roughly 12,000 votes going by the trend in the chart.

At best (South Carolina) should put us about 4.5 times the turn out from 2008 or roughly 27,000 votes in Nevada, again going by the trend in the chart, which would put us inline with what the campaign in Nevada had stated just days before the caucus.


Just a few things to think about.

[Nastynate]

On top of that, other states we did very well in 2008 we are polling at less right now. Minnesota for example. In 2008 we got 16 or 18% and right now we're in last place with what, 12%?

So if you conspiracy theorists want to stay consistent you might as well say PPP is also in on the plan to ruin Paul and is lying about their polling.


It's simply a matter of how well we did in 2008. South Carolina has HUGE increases of support from the last 4 years because 4 years ago there was no organization and we got 3.5%. You cannot simply show the numbers without the percentages and say that because we quadrupled from 3.5% to 13% we should quadruple or even double from 15% to 30+% like some of you think.

I don't think anyone expected to double or triple Nevada's 2008 numbers. Just the fact that there has been substantial gain in every state that some how Nevada is some sort of freak state.

If I wasn't mistaken either but didn't PPP have Ron Paul polling at 9% right before the Nevada caucus? They're real accurate aren't they.

[Romulus]

It came from Jack Hunter's article titled: THE IMPORTANCE OF VOTING

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/02/0...nce-of-voting/

I have no earthly idea why you would think drudging this would be a good idea.

I think Jack should have titled it, the Importance of Voting, Watching and Recording the Votes, and just left it at that.

[Kregisen]

Honest question: Have you read "End The Fed" by Ron Paul?

I haven't finished it yet, why?

I don't think anyone expected to double or triple Nevada's 2008 numbers. Just the fact that there has been substantial gain in every state that some how Nevada is some sort of freak state.

If I wasn't mistaken either but didn't PPP have Ron Paul polling at 9% right before the Nevada caucus? They're real accurate aren't they.

They polled us at 15% and we got 19%. We also got 15% in 2008, so we got about a 27% higher showing than 4 years ago.

[wongster41]

I rejected any 'voter fraud' claims

Even if the claim is from Ron Paul himself for the 2008 campaign????

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh4DmZY5YYk - skip to 6:00 to hear RP talking about Vote Fraud

[Suzu]

It came from Jack Hunter's article titled: THE IMPORTANCE OF VOTING

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/02/0...nce-of-voting/

I have no earthly idea why you would think drudging this would be a good idea.

I sent the pic to Jack Hunter. At the time I made the OP, his article didn't exist.

And forgive me, I have no earthly idea why you would think not sharing this would be a good idea. It ought to be plain as the nose on your face that for RP's numbers not to have increased in NV of all places is simply impossible and clear empirical evidence of massive election fraud.

[Kregisen]

RonPaulForums, I sincerely apologize for making all of your members appear dumb. I was mistaken in my previous comments, by thinking this was a GD FORUM. I'm glad Kregisan pointed out how utterly stupid of me that was.

I never said anything about you but if you publicly said on here that someone changed the vote totals from most or all of the 1,800 precincts, then good luck in life.

[LibertyEagle]

I sent the pic to Jack Hunter. At the time I made the OP, his article didn't exist.

And forgive me, I have no earthly idea why you would think not sharing this would be a good idea. It ought to be plain as the nose on your face that for RP's numbers not to have increased in NV of all places is simply impossible and clear empirical evidence of massive election fraud.

It is evidence that a whole lot of our people did not show up.

[tfurrh]

I never said anything about you but if you publicly said on here that someone changed the vote totals from most or all of the 1,800 precincts, then good luck in life.

Yes that's exactly what I said...you can find it 32 posts back:

someone changed the vote totals from most or all of the 1,800 precincts!

I'm going to start braiding my noose now, because life from here out will be impaired by my stupidity.

[Suzu]

This is how the image I put in the OP looked before I made the change to the figures in the right-most column. Compare that part of the image to the one in the OP. I added space between the two figures - which are crammed together in this version of the pic.

[specsaregood]

It is evidence that a whole lot of our people did not show up.

For other candidates as well. Romney got over 6000 less votes this time, but about the same percentage.
Turn out was down about 1/3, yet Paul still turned out the same # of people. this should be spun into a positive, not a negative.

[Liberty4life]

Told you guys diebold was stealing elections, the repubs dont care about winning potus

[RonPaulGangsta]

People are delusional idiots if they don't think Ron has been cheated in every state, especially Nevada and Iowa.

[unknown]

WOW. Super WOW.

[nayjevin]

Is it because precincts were dropped?

All candidates might have low numbers in NV if entire precincts were dropped because of discrepancies.

[Publicani]

According to the data, the ratio for four states is: 2.20, 3.11, 4.85, 1.87 and in Nevada 1.01. So Nevada's ratio is 1.49 standard deviations (=1.34) from the mean (=3.01) of the four states. I think the difference is huge, but statistically it is not significant.

[pacelli]

I sent the pic to Jack Hunter. At the time I made the OP, his article didn't exist.

And forgive me, I have no earthly idea why you would think not sharing this would be a good idea. It ought to be plain as the nose on your face that for RP's numbers not to have increased in NV of all places is simply impossible and clear empirical evidence of massive election fraud.

Too bad Hunter's article doesn't involved addressing the issue of massive election fraud and instead focuses solely on VOTING.

Congratulations-- it will probably show up on drudge.

[Suzu]

Told you guys diebold was stealing elections, the repubs dont care about winning potus

Just for the record: Diebold no longer exists, it's now Elections Systems & Software, Inc. (ES&S) But this is a moot point anyway in this case because no machines were used in Nevada.

I'm not sure on your third statement. I think they do care, but maybe they're either too dumb or too obstinate to realize that RP is their only real chance this time.

[Mark37snj]

// Already posted.

[Liberty1789]

You have a much, much better chart to publish, guys: break down Nevada in 3 regions. Instead of +1% in votes, according to CNN poll, you get:

Clark region +26%
Rural region +22%
Washoe region-29%

That chart is massively more telling!

And now you pause and think: what happened?

Let Hunter know

[Mark37snj]

You have a much, much better chart to publish, guys: break down Nevada in 3 regions. Instead of +1% in votes, according to CNN poll, you get:

Clark region +26%
Rural region +22%
Washoe region-29%

That chart is massively more telling!

And now you pause and think: what happened?

Let Hunter know

WOW, I mean just WOW.

A few posters last nite were saying that Clark was the distraction and the real funny business was going on in Washoe.

Since this was a caucus and they have the actual ballots still, can we sue to get a look at them?

[Publicani]

Can somebody give me the link to the total number of Republican voters in each of the five states in 2008 and 2012?

[specsaregood]

Can somebody give me the link to the total number of Republican voters in each of the five states in 2008 and 2012?

here:

2012 NV Caucus Results (UPDATED TO REFLECT OFFICIAL COUNT, ONLY MINOR CHANGES)
http://www.nevadagop.org/nvgop-caucu...lts-certified/ (as of 3am CT Feb 6 -DON'T BLAME ME IF IT CHANGES!)
Romney === 16,486 (50.01%)
Gingrich == 6,956 (21.10%)
Paul ====== 6,175 (18.73%)
Santorum == 3,277 ( 9.94%)
No Vote === == 69 ( 0.21%)
Total turnout: 32,963
Implied delgates: Romney = 14, Gingrich = 6, Paul = 5, Santorum = 3.

Romney down 6160 votes from 2008, Paul up 91 votes since 2008.

Compare to 2008 results:
Romney === 22,646 (51.10%)
Paul ====== 6,084 (13.73%)
McCain ==== 5,650 (12.75%)
Huckabee == 3,616 ( 8.16%)
Thompson == 3,519 ( 7.94%)
Giuliani == 1,910 ( 4.31%)
Hunter ====== 890 ( 2.01%)