RON PAUL'S SUPPORT HAS INCREASED 8 TIMES IN THE PAST 3 MONTHS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

Think about it, if he continues to increase by that amount in the same amount of time he will win with over 100% of the vote.

We'd have Desh all over the boards talking about how he somehow infected paper ballots everywhere with a virus.
 
Watermark said:
1% TO 8%!!!!!1

I have to dedicate an official Cypress to this acheivment:

:cheer::hedb::party::hedb: :cheer:
Click to expand...


there were two October polls that had ron paul at 10% in New Hampshire, one that had him a 7%, and one that had him at 6% in October. I think there was one that had him at 1%

In short, I'm seeing fluctuations within the statistical Margin of Error. I'm not impressed.

:cool:
 
10% is one hell of a margin of error.

It probably has something to do with the "adjustments" they put in there to make the statistics more "accurate".
 
Watermark said:
10% is one hell of a margin of error.

It probably has something to do with the "adjustments" they put in there to make the statistics more "accurate".
Click to expand...


I think the MOEs in these polls are typically 4 or 5%. Which means that statistically, RP has hardly budged at all in these polls. Although there may well be a small, relatively insignificant, upward trend.


:)
 
You're just jealous. You had a chance of a dem president, but whenever political titan Ron Paul came in you knew your chances were squashed!

Now you and your ilk have resorted to rigging polls - and I'm tired of it!
 
Ron Paul registering 10% in rigged polls means he's getting 700% of the vote in real life. That's how many negative modifiers they have on the man.
 
Kathianne said:
Certainly if online. Dammit, Desh may have a point.
Click to expand...

Desh does have a point. We need to ensure that our election system is clean on fraud and accurate with a verifiable trail that is hard copy.
I think our election system is in need of cleaning up. Don't you ?
 
uscitizen said:
Desh does have a point. We need to ensure that our election system is clean on fraud and accurate with a verifiable trail that is hard copy.
I think our election system is in need of cleaning up. Don't you ?
Click to expand...

If a serious question, yes. Go back to paper ballots. With ID's.
 
Kathianne said:
If a serious question, yes. Go back to paper ballots. With ID's.
Click to expand...

Yes , a VERY serious question, isn't it ?

Why so much seemingly ineffective attempt at election reform ever since the Chad Caper or the Abrhamhof caper ?
Seems like we could have progressed much farther in 7 years.
 
Use optical scanner systems. They are easy to understand, have an easily counted paper trail without "chads", can't be designed with a "butterfly", and can give immediate and accurate results. Use IDs.
 
uscitizen said:
Desh does have a point. We need to ensure that our election system is clean on fraud and accurate with a verifiable trail that is hard copy.
I think our election system is in need of cleaning up. Don't you ?
Click to expand...

Too late.

There isn't enough time to put the necessary prevention in place before the elections. People really should have been listening when we were screaming about it. Too bad America didn't listen to Cynthia Mckinney.

Ever heard of a negative vote? Diebold has, and they programmed their software to count them. Why is that significant?

If candidate A has 2000 votes and I "add" 500 negative votes to that total, candidate A now has 1500 votes. What do I do with the 500 votes .. I add them to candidate B .. so if candidate B has 1700 votes and I add the 500 votes I took from A, candidate B now has 2200 votes and wins the election .. and if you can't examine my source code you won't know that coding is there. When you check the totals, 3700 total votes were cast, which would be correct, but candidate B should have lost.

You can test all you want but there are a variety of ways to trigger my code into operation that you can't find .. unless your name in Harri Hursti and you're a Finnish security expert. He proved that Diebold counted negative votes back in 2005.

Leon County Florida Hack
http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=798&Itemid=51

You can't put code that accepts negative votes in the software by mistake. This was a contrived plan to defraud Americans of their power to elect their leaders.

They'll be rolling out their updated version of vote fraud this season along with their tried and true method of doing it through electronic voting.

You'll be hearing of "caging" more .. after its too late.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top