Quote:This was for #43 (I believe) in Des Moines, IA held at Roosevelt High School. It was broadcast live on C-SPAN2.
Final delegate count was Clinton 5, Sanders 4. It was very close. Here is the breakdown:
FIRST VOTE:
215 Sanders
210 Clinton
26 O'Malley
8 Undecided
459 TOTAL
After this, the groups realign and another count was conducted.
Sanders's group leads performed a FULL recount of all the supporters in
his group. The Clinton team only added the new supporters gained to her
original number from the first round of voting. I did not see another
recount of the Clinton supporters taking place. It would have been very
hard to miss that activity.
SECOND ROUND:
232 Clinton
224 Sanders
456 Total
It was assumed by the chair, Drew Gentsch, that the voter difference
was due to a few people that left the building before the second round
began. The question is whether there were really 456 total people
present for the second round of voting. That was not clear, as Clinton's
team did not perform a recount of ALL of the Hillary supporters during
the second round of voting. We don't know how many Hillary supporters
were in the room. Some of them may have also left the building between
rounds.
The Clinton precinct chair, Liz Buck, lied about whether she
recounted all of the Clinton supporters during the second count. At
9:44pm ET she stated to the Chair that she only counted the newly gained
supporters and added that to her first-round count to arrive at the new
232 total. A minute later, after the second round votes were being
discussed openly, with Hillary then taking a 5-4 delegate lead, the
Sanders supporters directly asked Liz if she recounted ALL of the
Clinton supporters during the second round. Liz Buck answered yes to
that question at 9:45pm ET stating that she DID count them all. It's all
on tape. The Sanders supports were unsuccessful at getting a recount conducted, even though several of them protested vigorously.
Those supporters knew exactly what happened, but instead of the Chair
asking Liz to perform a count of all Clinton supports, he said that the
results had to be protested formally, leading to a majority vote, that
the Sanders supporters lost. It should be noted that, before the recount
vote was conducted, the Chair told the crowd that the results of the
recount would not have an effect on the outcome.
Quote:Clinton voter fraud in the Polk Country Iowa Caucus. At first, the vote count was 215 Sanders, 210 Hillary, 26 Omalley, 8 undecided. Sanders was leading. Since Omalley's 26 votes was less than 15% of the total, those votes had to go to Sanders or Hillary. Most of them said they were going to Sanders. But after the switches were made, it was 224 sanders and 232 Hillary. Hillary gained 22, but Sanders only gained 9. How is this possible? On live TV the Omalley group said that the majority of them were going to the Sander's group. Even if it ended up splitting 50/50, Sanders would still be leading. There is no way that 71% of the Omalley supporters decided to switch to Clinton, especially since most of them said they were going to switch to Sanders. This is outright fraud - and the Chair person tried to cover it up by saying that a recount would not have swayed the delegate total - pretty much securing a "no" vote for the recount. This was a lie. The truth is that a few less votes would have caused Hillary to lose one Delegate. Many in the room believed him, but he was wrong. That absolutely swayed the vote to do a recount
Quote:The Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)16%
campaign is claiming that Hillary Clinton is “infiltrating” Monday’s Iowa caucus with paid out-of-state workers in a last-ditch effort to mobilize pro-Clinton voters.
Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said that the Clinton campaign is “infiltrating the caucuses with out-of-state paid staffers,” according to Yahoo News.
Weaver cited a letter that a Sanders supporter in Hawarden, Iowa, received from the Clinton campaign that named a man named Morgan Luther as the Clinton precinct captain, even though Luther is not a resident of the state of Iowa.
“Coming from Sioux City into the Hawarden caucus and trying to influence the voters in the Hawarden caucus, I don’t know what the rules are, but it certainly is irregular,” the man who received the letter told Yahoo News.
Using out-of-state precinct captains is not against the rules.
Clinton is running neck-in-neck in Iowa with Sanders, who has pulled to within the margin of error in both the Iowa State University/WHO-HD poll and also the final Des Moines Register poll.
Sanders held a concert Saturday night in the college town of Iowa City with the band ‘Vampire Weekend.’ Bill Clinton was in Iowa City Sunday at a smaller event.
02-02-2016 06:03 AM
The following 1 user Likes Enigma's post:1 user Likes Enigma's post Samseau
spokepoker
International Playboy
Posts: 3,228
Joined: Apr 2014
Reputation: 24
RE: Clinton Voter Fraud in Polk County, Iowa Caucus
The 6 coin tosses for Shillery was simply outrageous. Pure corruption. The odds of winning 6 coin tosses is 1 out of 64. Fucking bullshit! In Mass, you can sign up as an independent and vote in both Republican and Democratic primaries. I will be voting for Sanders and Trump. Hillary is pure evil.
That said, VVVV, I heard you said you put down thousands on Sanders taking the General, but why didn't you just take the safer bet and put it all on the primary? Sanders winning the primary should have been your goal, the general is simply too volatile to make a major bet on.
Contributor at Return of Kings. I got banned from twatter, which is run by little bitches and weaklings. You can follow me on Gab.
Be sure to check out the easiest mining program around, FreedomXMR.
RE: Clinton Voter Fraud in Polk County, Iowa Caucus
(02-02-2016 08:39 AM)Samseau Wrote: The 6 coin tosses for Shillery was simply outrageous. Pure corruption. The odds of winning 6 coin tosses is 1 out of 64. Fucking bullshit! In Mass, you can sign up as an independent and vote in both Republican and Democratic primaries. I will be voting for Sanders and Trump. Hillary is pure evil.
That said, VVVV, I heard you said you put down thousands on Sanders taking the General, but why didn't you just take the safer bet and put it all on the primary? Sanders winning the primary should have been your goal, the general is simply too volatile to make a major bet on.
Exactly. It doesn't matter how much you hate socialism. It comes in a distant lesser evil to the establishment corruption.
RE: Clinton Voter Fraud in Polk County, Iowa Caucus
(02-02-2016 08:39 AM)Samseau Wrote: The 6 coin tosses for Shillery was simply outrageous. Pure corruption. The odds of winning 6 coin tosses is 1 out of 64. Fucking bullshit! In Mass, you can sign up as an independent and vote in both Republican and Democratic primaries. I will be voting for Sanders and Trump. Hillary is pure evil.
That said, VVVV, I heard you said you put down thousands on Sanders taking the General, but why didn't you just take the safer bet and put it all on the primary? Sanders winning the primary should have been your goal, the general is simply too volatile to make a major bet on.
Because I had a feeling, an intuition that he would win it all.
And the prospect of getting 8 to 1 and ending up with 40K makes it interesting enough for me to pay attention and feel some excitement, like betting on anything else really.
It's sort of like this - if I was going to bet on the World Cup, I would rather back a dark horse like the USA or Ecuador, rather than an almost sure thing like Argentina or Germany.
You get a shot of adrenaline when your long shot does well, and feel ecstatic if they win. Whereas with a more conservative bet, it's same old same old.
"Me llaman el desaparecido
Que cuando llega ya se ha ido Volando vengo, volando voy
Deprisa deprisa a rumbo perdido"
02-02-2016 10:25 AM
Samseau
Innovative Casanova
Posts: 14,308
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 287
(02-02-2016 08:39 AM)Samseau Wrote: The 6 coin tosses for Shillery was simply outrageous. Pure corruption. The odds of winning 6 coin tosses is 1 out of 64. Fucking bullshit! In Mass, you can sign up as an independent and vote in both Republican and Democratic primaries. I will be voting for Sanders and Trump. Hillary is pure evil.
That said, VVVV, I heard you said you put down thousands on Sanders taking the General, but why didn't you just take the safer bet and put it all on the primary? Sanders winning the primary should have been your goal, the general is simply too volatile to make a major bet on.
Because I had a feeling, an intuition that he would win it all.
And the prospect of getting 8 to 1 and ending up with 40K makes it interesting enough for me to pay attention and feel some excitement, like betting on anything else really.
It's sort of like this - if I was going to bet on the World Cup, I would rather back a dark horse like the USA or Ecuador, rather than an almost sure thing like Argentina or Germany.
You get a shot of adrenaline when your long shot does well, and feel ecstatic if they win. Whereas with a more conservative bet, it's same old same old.
Well, I hope your gambling addiction doesn't ruin you man. That is one dangerous vice you've got there. It's safer to fuck feminists.
Contributor at Return of Kings. I got banned from twatter, which is run by little bitches and weaklings. You can follow me on Gab.
Be sure to check out the easiest mining program around, FreedomXMR.
(02-02-2016 08:39 AM)Samseau Wrote: The 6 coin tosses for Shillery was simply outrageous. Pure corruption. The odds of winning 6 coin tosses is 1 out of 64. Fucking bullshit! In Mass, you can sign up as an independent and vote in both Republican and Democratic primaries. I will be voting for Sanders and Trump. Hillary is pure evil.
That said, VVVV, I heard you said you put down thousands on Sanders taking the General, but why didn't you just take the safer bet and put it all on the primary? Sanders winning the primary should have been your goal, the general is simply too volatile to make a major bet on.
Because I had a feeling, an intuition that he would win it all.
And the prospect of getting 8 to 1 and ending up with 40K makes it interesting enough for me to pay attention and feel some excitement, like betting on anything else really.
It's sort of like this - if I was going to bet on the World Cup, I would rather back a dark horse like the USA or Ecuador, rather than an almost sure thing like Argentina or Germany.
You get a shot of adrenaline when your long shot does well, and feel ecstatic if they win. Whereas with a more conservative bet, it's same old same old.
Well, I hope your gambling addiction doesn't ruin you man. That is one dangerous vice you've got there. It's safer to fuck feminists.
I keep things reasonable. Unlike with alcohol and drugs, I have self control when it comes to gambling. People are different. There are those with zero control over gambling, but who can have 3 or 4 beers and leave it at that. I'm the opposite.
My current addictions are manageable for me- exercise, gambling, adrenaline activities (skydiving, rock climbing, etc) and pussy.
As long as I'm sober (20 months and counting) I'll be fine.
"Me llaman el desaparecido
Que cuando llega ya se ha ido Volando vengo, volando voy
Deprisa deprisa a rumbo perdido"
RE: Clinton Voter Fraud in Polk County, Iowa Caucus
(02-02-2016 07:32 PM)BlueOcean Wrote: I agree that Hillary winning 6/6 coin tosses is highly suspect. The odds are 1/64.
It seems to me that the process is somehow rigged.
Oh, it isn't somehow rigged, it is rife with corruption. If we see Marco Rubio winning states and making a good showing and getting a lot of delegates despite being a distant 3rd or 4th or 5th in the polls, we will definitely know the fix is in.
My prediction on the Democrat side: we will see someone getting sued because of all of the corruption and ballot stuffing that Hillary does.
RE: Clinton Voter Fraud in Polk County, Iowa Caucus
^ Apparently something very similar happened during the 1980 Iowa caucuses as well. Reagan had the most votes, but Bush was announced the winner because they messed up the count and didn't feel like recounting. Or at least that's what I read in an article earlier.
Also, it just dawned on me the ridiculousness of having a majority vote for a recount, when the winners of the original vote were already a majority. Why would they vote against themselves?
(This post was last modified: 02-03-2016 08:13 AM by Enigma.)
Home
RooshV.com
Search (Via Forum)
Member List
![[-]](images/collapse.gif)
The following 3 users Like Enigma's post:
