If the dollar has little value, then donate a few.

Wednesday, January 04, 2012

A little hinkey

Last night as I watched the Iowa election results roll in I could see it was going to be a tight race that came down to the finish. Being a political dork I stayed up refreshing my Yahoo news until @ 3AM when ALL 100% of the precincts had reported. Possibly it was my blurry vision but the report I last saw showed the Iowa victor to be Rick Santorum by a little more then 100 votes with all 100% of polls in.

A great victory for Rick who ran a solid, ground pounding race in Iowa but probably will not be able to keep it up unless a huge surge of support follows it up. Still a big media boost for him and his campaign.

The funny thing is when I awoke this morning and went to see more results from the race (Again on Yahoo news), all the media stories (even ones posted less then an hour ago) had gone back to 99.55% of the polls reporting where Mitt Romney was winning by 8 votes and the reports declare Romney the winner. The report I saw with 100% of the precincts reported is nowhere to be found.

I am sorry but that is a little hinkey. Even if a voting issue had come up, the reports should not show or claim a winner in such a tight race unless it is absolutely final. A report that goes back in time and declares a different winner is like the home town paper reporting the home team won a basketball game that is separated by one point with 1 second on the clock and the other team about to shoots 3 free throws.

99.55% is not 100% and I don't see how you can have .45% of the precincts come in later and have absolutely no change in the vote totals for the top two vote getter's in the state.


  1. Close elections, like the one in Iowa, is further justification for a Voter ID law. Many races are close, and we do not want election outcomes determined by voter fraud.

  2. Standard fare for the GOP. Seen it before. Wrong guy about to win? Just pull the plug on the mic and cut off the lights. See Nevada GOP 2008 convention:


    John McCain finished a distant 3rd behind Romney and Paul but was declared the winner by GOP "leadership".

    Besides, the RNC has already stolen half the delegates of SC, Florida, AZ, NH and Michigan, so their votes only count half at best. The RNC takes half of their votes to give to the GOP chosen one (Romney). Your primary vote there means squat. Voter ID can't fix a stolen delegate.

    By the way, if you are willing to believe Santorum was ripped off in Iowa, do you also concede Paul or Gingrich or hometown girl Bachmann could have been ripped off? After all, Paul was leading the polls and Gingrich was third...

    The press telegraphed this Iowa result for the last month. Iowa has been declared "unimportant", "illegitimate", "too rural", etc. for this election cycle despite teaching us for years that the first primary is the most important for momentum. Then a couple days before the caucus, we are told by the "press" to get ready for a "surprise".

    Why do they know about a "surprise"? Is the "surprise" that they knew Santorum was going to "do well" but instead lied to us about polls all this time? Or was the fix in all along and we had to be mentally prepared to accept a normally "unelectable" single-digit poll performer winning? Was the correction at the end to let Mitt win the equivalent of cheating on a test, but not acing it so it wouldn't look too obvious?

    Why instead wasn't the "press" calling Santorum "unelectable" since he consistently polled in the single digits?

    It's all staged. Romney will win the GOP nomination - by any means necessary. There is subterfuge here, against Santorum, Paul or both. I am glad the GOP has finally manifested itself against someone in addition to Ron Paul so you can see it for what it is.

  3. Geez....I guess "nobody could see this coming"...


    Is this the "surprise" we were supposed to be waiting for or has the GOP got something else up its sleeve?

    Well hey, the "news" has been telling us for a month now that Iowa doesn't count, so this latest "surprise" just proves it right? Is it time to vote against Obama yet or does that come after the RNC tells Haslam to endorse Romney?


Here are the rules for comments. Know them. Live them.