Posted on 01/05/2012 6:12:47 PM PST by mnehring
2008 – Mike Huckabee (34%), Mitt Romney (25%), Fred Thompson (13%), John McCain (13%), Ron Paul (10%), Rudy Giuliani (4%), and Duncan Hunter (1%)
Very interesting, anyone care to bet that this was NOT just some innocent mistake?
The consequences will be none. The deal with Iowa is the headlines. The headline are lining bird cage by now.
It was a dead heat regardless, but Romney got maybe a little bump from the day after headlines. Or maybe no other candidate getting those headlines was a plus for Romney. Either way, that is done. Getting there first not accurately is what matters in the media.
Yep, Karl Rove will probably say that losing Iowa is good news for Mitt Romney.
Bill O’Reilly will say that by winning the evangelical vote in Iowa, it proves Santorum’s views are way out of the mainstream.
Really? I don't know anyone who thinks that. Santorum has a weak face/chin and he lost his senate seat in PA by 23%. He won't be the GOP candidate no matter how many people may wish for it.
Really? I don't know anyone who thinks that. Santorum has a weak face/chin and he lost his senate seat in PA by 23%. He won't be the GOP candidate no matter how many people may wish for it.
22-8.... 14 was the original number quoted by Romney’s people.
It would worth it for Romney not to be able to say he won IA and NH.
Santorum just said there was a 20 vote mistake fro him that was magically neutralized by a 21 vote mistake for Mitt. Disgusting.
When did he say that?
When did he say that?
Just now on Greta. Looks like the fix is still in.
What BS!!! I wonder how history would be different if all elections to date had actually been realized as voters truly intended. JFK would not have been President I suspect...
This crap makes me sick!
Fox News was calling Romney the “big winner.” O’Reilly was falling all over himself about Romney’s “huge win.” It would be sweet if they have to retract that. Of course, it would all be a minor story to them.
Hmmmmm....interesting.
The Iowa Caucus is a non-binding beauty contest. Delegates are actually awarded in a manner that is not rigidly determined by the popular vote. Nor are the delegates required to vote for any particular candidate.
Imagine if we had a secure voting system that precluded cheating? I imagine the socialists would not be anywhere near as powerful as they are today.
What people got to understand is that it’s a loose process. It’s not a primary run by the state govt. There are no official procedures other than the permanent precinct chair and secretary are in charge of the process in their precinct and the votes must be tallied.
Some counties use ballots, some don’t, just blank slips of paper. There’s no ballot custody, counting or observer codes. The numbers are called into the state, and this time there were test counties who inputted them by computer.
It’s basically a trust system. There are over 1700 precincts and anywhere from 1 to numerous meeting sites in each county. I would suspect that most people are honest but there’s also no mandated oversight either beyond the precinct chair. So unless a particular site and precinct uses good procedures mistakes could be made and someone could game the system.
With a six figure number votes it would take quite a bit of gaming across the state to do any significant boosting of a candidate, though with something this close obviously it could make a difference. Even so it would take blind luck to guess ahead of time both that your guy would have a shot at first place and the election be close.
The only way to do it is if you were one of the very last counties to report, and the person reporting was aware of the statewide count, and then deliberately reporting the wrong numbers, and no one else observed the discrepancy. It maybe could be done without raising flags but I don’t think one person could do it alone very easily.
The problems getting the last precinct in, where the ladies from the scene insisted it had been phoned in 5 hours earlier, yet the state didn't have them, as well as Rove stating two precincts in Story County (Ames) had had their numbers 'corrected' then giving Romney a net +14 votes, demonstrate the process wasn't perfect. Those experienced in elections all seem to say it NEVER is perfect, its just usually not close enough for the glitches to matter. I wouldn't be too hard on the state, nor go "conspiracy theory" on this unless further details suggest such.
And it would be an odd location for a "Mitt fix." Santorum officially won the county with 174 votes, with Perry beating Romney for second, 90 to 87. If you subtract 20 votes from his total Romney would have finished fifth in the county, also behind Paul and Gingrich. But an honest error there is plausible. The precinct under question cast 79 votes, 11 more than the next largest in that county, which was the only other precinct there to cast double digit Mitt votes (20). Once of the county's precincts actually cast zero votes, as did seven others in the state.
It would be nice if this were settled and turned out in Rick's favor prior to NH, or at least prior to SC as it has the potential to steal media attention from Romney's intended victory dance in NH as well as enhance Rick's chances for a respectable showing there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.