Posts tagged results

Ron Paul Won Minnesota & Washington State!

0

“Ron Paul Won Minnesota & Washington State!” Rachel Maddow (THIS IS HOW WE DO IT BABY!)

YouTube Preview Image
####

[CIM]

The time is NOW to take back our personal liberties and freedoms!
Ron Paul 2012: Restore America Now

http://www.ronpaul2012.com

Please visit Ron Paul’s official campaign site by following the link below and donate today!

BREAKING: ELECTION FRAUD?

0

BREAKING: ELECTION FRAUD? Why Did ABC-TV Post Illinois GOP Primary Results 24 Hours Early?!

YouTube Preview Image

How the hell does SGTreport have election results for a Republican primary in Illinois which has yet to take place? We have long argued that the fix is in but this… um… leaves us speechless.

Posted tonight — MONDAY, March 19th — on the web site of Chicago ABC News Affiliate WLS-TV are the following election results, clearly labeled as “Illinois Races, Federal Offices”. If we have this wrong, please let us know why this information exists in ANY form. Or, if we are indeed living in a banana republic, copy that. You now have our blessing to move out of the country.

[CIM Comment]

Our last hope, so don’t be a “party” tool!

Now more than every we need the Champion of the Constitution!

Please visit Ron Paul’s official campaign site by following the link below and donate today!

 

Ron Paul Tells Reporters He Is Suspicious About Results Of GOP Caucuses

0

Source: http://www.infowars.com

By Steve Watson

Congressman says he has “theories” that foul play may be involved

Congressman says he has “theories” that foul play may be involvedIn a conversation with reporters in Missouri this weekend, GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul said that he and his supporters were suspicious about the outcomes of several caucuses because the crowds and volumes of support have been much bigger for him than for any other candidate.

“Quite frankly I don’t think the other candidates get crowds like this, and we get them constantly” Paul said, after he had spoken to yet another crowd of over 2500 supporters in Missouri.

“You would get the perception that we would be getting a lot more votes.” He added.

“Sometimes we get thousands of people like this and we’ll take them to the polling booth, yet we won’t win the caucus.” Paul said, adding “A lot of our supporters are very suspicious about it.”

When informed that Santorum had won the Kansas caucuses, Paul admitted that he had not seen the numbers on it at that point but again reiterated his point, stating:

“That reminds me of a picture I just looked at. I had four thousand people and he had a hundred and fifty. So who knows.”

The picture, below, shows a huge turn out at a Kansas town hall meeting for Paul this weekend, compared to virtually nobody showing at Santorum’s event.

The Congressman admitted he could not elaborate on his suspicions but commented “It’s just instinct and hearsay stories, verbal stories that you hear and the kind of things that we heard about up in Maine.”

“They said we can’t have a recount because they just write these numbers down on pieces of paper and then throw them away afterwards. So it’s that kind of stuff that makes you suspicious.” Paul urged.

As we previously reported, evidence of possible vote fraud has been uncovered in Maine, where several towns and counties that Ron Paul won were omitted from the final state count for no identifiable reason.

Watch the video:

YouTube Preview Image

 

Ron Paul gets first win in Virgin Islands

0

Ron Paul gets first win in Virgin Islands but all news agencies report Romney

By

Lori Stacey's photo

DC Conservative Examiner

Here are the official numbers coming from the Virgin Islands GOP website:

Ron Paul                   29%   112

Mitt Romney             26%   101

Rick Santorum           6%      23

Newt Gingrich           5%      18

“Uncommitted”???   34%    130

Ron Paul had his first win but you would never know it by watching the "news". Credits: Alex Wong, Getty Images. Scene from Virginia

These are the official results from the Virgin Islands GOP, yet AP and therefore most major mainstream news organizations that receive information from them are reporting that somehow Mitt Romney has just won the contest in the Virgin Islands.  Here is an example of headlines at USA Today publishing AP’s account of the “facts” which hit the net just 15 minutes ago and well after the real results have been available for the world to see.

Many of us have been reporting on the blatant election fraud and corruption that has reached an all-time high this primary season but this situation has got to take the cake.  It is beyond my wildest dreams. This night has become the absolute “shock and awe” of mainstream media corruption being hoist upon the American people.

It has been disgusting enough that so many caucuses have been wrought with blatant fraud but when the GOP finally “allows” Ron Paul to actually get the numbers to have a win, the mainstream media all lie and report that Mitt Romney won?  What in the world is going on here?

Is there anyone in the mainstream press that can read results and figure out that 112 votes is greater than 101 votes?  I never thought in this time in our history that any amount of corruption could possibly shock me by now, but this one just caused my jaw to hit the floor.

In addition to the vote count, the website is also reporting that Ron Paul only won 1 delegate versus Romney supposedly winning 7.  Those numbers ironically prove the Paul campaign’s point about delegate counts normally being reported inaccurately.  This time the media does a complete 180 and doesn’t erroneously report the winner automatically winning the most delegates.  Why the sudden change of reporting?  There is only one plausible explanation.  If they reported that Ron Paul got the most delegates it might hit people that he actually won the contest.

It is sadly evident that even if it requires every single major news agency to look at the official results and then flat-out lie to the public about what they saw, our corrupt system will simply not allow Ron Paul to get credit for one single win even when enough votes are not stolen from him and the official numbers clearly show he won.

This is truly unbelievable!

[CIM Comment]

Now more than every we need the Champion of the Constitution!

Please visit Ron Paul’s official campaign site by following the link below and donate today!

How to Opt Out of Google’s New Privacy Policy

0

Source: www.pcmag.com

By Jill Duffy

How to Opt Out of Google’s New Privacy Policy (Sort Of)

Google’s policy update is unavoidable, but you can partially side-step its effects. Here’s how.

Google historyGoogle’s new privacy policy will take effect on March 1. It consolidates Google’s 70 or so privacy policies across its products – from Gmail to YouTube to Blogger – down to one, and will pull data from users logged in to Google.

But the change has a lot of people very concerned about the implications. One group, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, has already sued to stop Google from implementing the change, arguing that the company is in violation of a recent Federal Trade Commission settlement. The nation’s attorneys general, the European Commission, and another consumer group have also voiced their opposition.

What Google’s New Policy Means for You
A preview of the new Google policy, which Google has made available online, explains some of the information Google collects and will soon conflate. It includes “information you give us” (personal information that you have to provide in order to sign up for certain free services), information about how and when you use the services, which devices you use, your location, and more. A big part of the body of data is your Google.com search history.

Google’s stated purpose in bringing together the information it collects about you is to improve its services, but it also enables the company to deliver more personalized ads and personalized search results… which not everyone wants. Luckily, there is at least one way to avoid that.

How to Side-Step the Effects of Google’s Privacy Change
One way to get out of some of the effects of Google’s privacy change is to delete your Web search history. It’s an option that Google voluntarily provides.

Eva Galperin, an international activist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, wrote a step-by-step guide on “How to Remove Your Google Search History Before Google’s New Privacy Policy Takes Effect.” Her instructions are simple enough for anyone to follow. But understanding exactly what is happening when you delete your Google search history takes a little more explanation.

I spoke with Galperin by phone to better understand what it really means.

When you delete your search history from Google, it does not mean that the company stops collecting the data that you create. It still takes the information and stores it away, but it promises not to use it. If presented with a subpoena or warrant, Google would have to give that information to the appropriate parties, but there doesn’t seem to be any other reason the company hangs onto it. After 18 months, the data becomes “anonymized.”

I asked Galperin to define “anonymized,” and she said “It depends. They’ll take your name off and strip some bits off the IP address.” But, she added, “The extent to which [Google has] anonymized the data is unclear.” She also mentioned that some research suggests that it’s possible to de-anonymize data fairly easily “if you have a large enough corpus.” No one would dispute that Google certainly has a very large data set.

And what happens if you don’t delete it? “It’s unclear how long Google keeps [your information] if you don’t delete your Web history,” said Galperin. Leaving it alone also means that Google can give you those more personalized results it keeps promising, which Galperin notes isn’t necessarily “better” or what you want.

Personalized Results: Creepy?
Providing a more personalized experience on all of Google’s products is not something everyone wants, though some will certainly see the value. Some people, Galperin included, find it creepy.

“There are a lot of people who have started using Google’s products separately,” she noted. You might have one side of your personality that uses YouTube, while a very different personality uses Blogger, or Google Scholar, or any of the other services. Some users prefer to keep these slices of their lives separate.

“The questions consumers should be asking are, ‘Who has your data and how much do they have and with whom are they sharing it?’” Galperin said. That’s what’s at stake, typically, when you use an ostensibly “free” service such as Google or Facebook.

Galperin plans to write at least one more step-by-step guide on the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s website for helping users do what they can to bypass the effects of Google’s new privacy changes, such as deleting their history on YouTube.

Ron Paul announced winner of Washington County Maine Caucus 2012

0
YouTube Preview Image

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wM8sNtjgSnE

Announcement of Ron Paul’s Maine caucus straw poll victory in Washington County Maine 2/18/2012. Total at super caucus: Ron Paul 163, Romney 80, Santorum 57, Newt 4.

####

[CIM Comment]

Now more than every we need the Champion of the Constitution!

Please visit Ron Paul’s official campaign site by following the link below and donate today!

The Five Biggest Failures From President Obama’s Stimulus Law

0

Source: http://www.usnews.com

By Reince Priebus

Reince Priebus is chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Three years later, the law isn’t producing the results it was supposed to

Some milestones are worth celebrating. Others, we’d much rather forget. Today, sadly, is the latter. On this day in 2009, President Barack Obama signed the stimulus bill into law.

Three years and $825 billion later, the results are clear. Instead of producing an economic recovery, the stimulus produced only broken promises and massive debt. The stimulus failed—and by the president’s own standards at that.

[Check out political cartoons about President Obama.]

In early 2009, the incoming administration offered detailed predictions of exactly what the stimulus would accomplish. Those predictions, especially the five boldest, have proven to be terribly wrong. So on this anniversary, in lieu of gifts, let us offer the president a little accountability.

First, Obama’s economic advisers promised the stimulus would keep the unemployment rate below 8 percent. In 2012, the unemployment rate was supposed to fall below 6 percent. The prediction was not meant to be taken lightly. In a January 2009 radio address, Obama announced he was releasing a report based on “rigorous analysis” that charted unemployment through 2013 so “the American people can see exactly what this plan will mean for their families.”

Today, 12.8 million Americans are unemployed, 8.2 million cannot find enough work, and 1.1 million have given up looking for work altogether. Unemployment still remains above 8 percent, the supposed maximum rate, and certainly above 6 percent. For 36 straight months, unemployment has been higher than what the president promised. That’s more than a rounding error; that is a failure of leadership.

[See editorial cartoons about the economy.]

Second, Obama promised the stimulus would not only have a large impact but also an immediate impact. Said the president-elect, “I’m confident … our 21st century investments will create jobs immediately,” adding, “We’ve got shovel-ready projects all across the country.”

Those jobs never materialized, and it was not for lack of workers—or shovels. As President Obama remarked in June 2011, “Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected.” He chuckled through the mea culpa, but it’s no laughing matter. Obama failed to deliver—and at great cost to taxpayers

[Check out political cartoons about the budget and deficit.]

(more…)

How Ron Paul is secretly taking over the GOP

0

Source: http://www.rawstory.com

By Grace Wyler

Ron Paul is secretly taking over the GOP photo

By now, it is clear that the Maine caucuses were a complete mess.

Evidence is mounting that Mitt Romney’s 194-vote victory over Ron Paul was prematurely announced, if not totally wrong. Washington County canceled their caucus on Saturday on account of three inches of snow (hardly a blizzard by Maine standards), and other towns that scheduled their caucuses for this week have been left out of the vote count. Now, it looks like caucuses that did take place before Feb. 11 have also been left out of final tally. 

As the full extent of the chaos unfolds, sources close to the Paul campaign tell Business Insider that it is looking increasingly like Romney’s team might have a hand in denying Paul votes, noting that Romney has some admirably ruthless operatives on his side and a powerful incentive to avoid a fifth caucus loss this month.

According to the Paul campaign, the Maine Republican Party is severely under-reporting Paul’s results — and Romney isn’t getting the same treatment. For example, nearly all the towns in Waldo County — a Ron Paul stronghold – held their caucuses on Feb. 4, but the state GOP reported no results for those towns. In Waterville, a college town in Central Maine, results were reported but not included in the party vote count. Paul beat Romney 21-5 there, according to the Kennebec County GOP.

“It’s too common,” senior advisor Doug Wead told Business Insider. “If it was chaos, we would expect strong Romney counties to be unreported, and that’s not what’s happening.”

The Maine Republican Party won’t decide which votes it will count until the executive committee meets next month. But Wead points out that even if Mitt Romney holds on to his slim lead, it will be a Pyrrhic victory.

“He will have disenfranchised all of these people,” Wead said. “It could be a costly victory — it is a mistake.”

The (alleged) bias against Paul may also be the product of an organic opposition to the libertarian Congressman and his army of ardent fans. Paul volunteers tend to be young and relatively new to party politics, and their presence has many state GOP stalwarts feeling territorial.

“People feel threatened — they don’t want to see a bunch of kids who may have voted for Barack Obama take over,” Wead said. “They feel a sense of ownership over the party — but there has to be an accommodation.” 

But state party machinations are already starting to backfire. The Paul campaign believes it has won the majority of Maine’s delegates — and the perceived election fraud has galvanized Paul supporters to demand their votes be counted in the state’s straw poll ‘beauty contest.’

Caucus chaos has also proved to be fertile ground for Paul’s quiet takeover of the Republican Party. Since 2008, the campaign and Paul’s Campaign for Liberty PAC have made a concerted effort to get Paul sympathists involved in the political process. Now, tumult in state party organizations has allowed these supporters to rise up the ranks.

“We like strong party leadership when it comes from us,” Paul campaign chair Jesse Benton told Business Insider. “Our people work very hard to make sure that their voice is heard.”

The fruits of this labor are evident in Iowa, where Paul’s former state campaign co-chair A.J. Spiker was just elected as the new chairman of the Iowa Republican Party. Spiker replaces Matt Strawn, who stepped down over this year’s Iowa caucus dustup. In Nevada, the state chair has also resigned over caucus disaster, and several Ron Paul supporters are well-positioned to step up to fill the void. These new leaders not only expand Paul’s influence at the state level, but also help protect Paul and his hard-won delegates from state party machinations as the delegate-selection process moves to district and state conventions, and eventually the Republican National Convention this summer.

“We are always trying to bring people into the party,” Benton said. “I think that is a very positive thing for Republicans. Ron is the person who can build the Republican base, bring new blood into the party. That’s how you build the party.”

In Maine, the caucus disaster has made the state GOP prime for a Ron Paul takeover. And that means that Paul’s hard-won delegates will be protected as the delegate selection process continues.

“We are taking over the party,” Wead told BI. “That’s the important thing — and that is what we are doing in Maine.”

The 2012 GOP Primary: Unmasking the Vote Manipulation

0

Source: https://docs.google.com

The 2012 GOP Primary: Unmasking the Vote Manipulation

[CIM Comment]

This information is taken straight from the document linked at the top of this post, “The 2012 SC GOP Primary.docx” and I would encourage all to download this and analyze for yourself.  Also, there is no telling how long this will be available so I would (as I have) download this today!

No matter who is your canidate of choice, the choice should be yours and your vote should reflect your choice.

My personal choice is Ron Paul.  If you are of like mind and feel it is time we elect statesman, not another status quo politician, feel the need to return to the rule of law and adhearence to the Constitution, I would then hope you follow the link below and donate to the RonPaul2012 campaign.

Guess What? SC Primary Results in Question!

0

Source: http://www.dailypaul.com

Submitted by SC Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

I received an e-mail from our meet-up which I’m editing but for to include this statement:

I have some significant information that I need to share with all of you regarding vote fraud in the SCGOP Primary. I have met with SCGOP Chairman already and am meeting again next Wednesday in Columbia. You will want to hear what I have discovered.

I’ve have uploaded the SCGOP Primary Vote Analysis to Google Docs: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B_wWkfsJPShUMWQxMTc2NzgtM2M…

and would like commentary any of you analytical gurus might like to add here or additional insights. This is very important to us in South Carolina! Thanks!

****Analyst Adds Update****

Hey guys. I just want you all to know that I have graphed in detail all of the counties in NH, SC and Fla that have the precinct information available on the Election Commissions’ website. I have amassed a couple of hundred graphs probably. The most difficult part of this is getting this information into a form that is brief but easy to understand. Please appreciate this.

There are surely exceptions to the following observations, but here are some generalities:

1. In any county where Ron Paul has more votes than Mitt Romney using the low vote total precincts, you get a ridiculous- looking curve like the one in Anderson County. (Anderson, Greenville, Spartanburg, and Oconee Counties). Mitt ends up at a vote total that could have been Paul’s projected total and Paul crashes to the ground.

2. In the counties where Romney has more votes than Paul in the low vote total precincts, There is no ridiculous anomaly like the one in Anderson County.

3. In any race where Newt is ahead of Romney and Romney is anywhere close to Gingrich in vote total, Newt gets flipped by Romney (Richland, Charleston, and Beaufort Counties in SC) much like the maneuver in Anderson County where Mitt flips Paul. It appears to me that Newt actually won these counties as well as Polk and Duval Counties in Florida.

4. As I have laid out in my brief, fluctuations should occur in honest elections; however, these “flips” look to me like one candidate is suddenly losing his slope (established vote percentage) and another (Romney) is gaining at precisely the same percentage. My personal constitution screams to me “this phenomenon is not a normal occurrence!”

5. In almost all Counties, Mitt Romney gains hundreds- even more than a thousand- in the very largest precinct(s). Many instances this tail end gain appears to serve the purpose of draining Ron Paul just enough to be last place. (example: Charleston County SC). I’m not saying there isn’t an honest explanation, but I want to hear one… that makes sense. Maybe in every single county Romney supporters turned out in “droves” at the very largest precinct(s)?

6. Most graphs follow a disturbing trend: Mitt Romney’s vote percentage “line” looks more like a parabola curving upward and the other 3 candidates’ lines like a parabola curving in the negative. This might could be explained in some honest way, but it looks like algorithms in voting machines to me. I invite intelligent discussion.

7. Yes- demographics can play a part, of course. I am NOT a Demographics expert. I do like math though.

8. I will release a procedure that will show all of you math analysts how to do this on your own. You will see the same anomalies as I see.

Go to Top