[UPDATED 1/4/12, 10:30am]
The music has stopped, and the long game of musical chairs — otherwise known as the 2011 Republican Iowa Caucuses — has finally ended. Mostly.
Twitterer Steve King may have put it best when he said on Tuesday as the results we’re coming in: “By tomorrow morning Santorum will be on the lips of every American.” And it’s true. If you don’t believe him, just Google it.
With 100% of the results now reported, Mitt Romney is said to have defeated Rick Santorum, a late comer, but one who finally surged from behind, by just 8 votes. 8 votes.
With his “victory,” however, Romney seems to have failed to even reach his own 2008 Iowa numbers. Then, when he came in second, he had 30,021 votes. Last night — a full four years and who-knows-how-many millions of dollars later — Romney’s total was almost identical, at 30,015. He fell by a total of 6 votes from four years ago. 6 votes.
While we’ve been told — largely by Fox “News” and the Republican candidates — how invigorated the Republican electorate is and how they’re chomping at the bit to defeat President Barack Obama, the turnout on Tuesday night doesn’t seem to suggest as much. Turnout was approximately 122,000 voters — just about 3,000 more than in 2008. The lackluster turnout and the lack of a decisive winner resulted in commentary on Fox last night which resembled a funeral procession, as opposed to their usually (overly) upbeat coverage.
In the meantime, Santorum reportedly “spent only $120,000 on direct mail and advertising in Iowa versus over $4.5 million by outside groups backing Romney alone.” Former RNC Deputy Research Director Matt Moon reports that, when SuperPAC money is included, Romney will have paid $140 per Iowa caucus vote, while Santorum got a steal at just $21 a pop. Without SuperPAC money included, reports Moon, Romney paid $49/vote in Iowa, Santorum spent just $0.73. Some businessman that Romney is.
But once again, with the reported results as close as they are, we’re reminded again that every single vote counts. Or at least it should. While every vote was cast on a hand-marked paper ballot at the GOP Iowa Caucuses (with Republicans requiring no Photo ID to vote), and those ballots supposedly counted publicly by hand at each caucus site where results were supposedly announced then and there before being phoned into Republican HQ, Bev Harris of BlackBoxVoting.org reports that at least one large caucus in Des Moines was unwilling to release their results to CNN before phoning them in to the GOP.
As we were watching reported results on Yahoo’s news site very late last night, the number of “reported” suddenly went backwards from 99.86% “REPORTING” back to 99.45%. It doesn’t look like numbers changed all that much in the bargain at the time. Santorum was still on top, but only by a handful of votes. Shortly afterwards the reported percentage became 100%, and Romney was announced the “winning” by just 8 votes.
[NOTE: Harris will be my guest on my KPFK/Pacifica Radio show today at 3:30p PT to discuss these matters, and concerns about next week’s “First-in-the-Nation” primary in NH. If you’re not in the Southern California area, you can listen live online right here. – BF]
We’re trying to learn more about the issues mentioned above, and a few other related concerns about the late-night announcement of final results at this wee hour of the morning. And its worth a reminder here that, as ever, problems at the “polls” (or caucuses in this case) or concerns about reported elections results don’t always emerge until days, weeks or sometimes even months later.
But for now, no matter who is ultimately determined to be the winner of the 2012 Iowa Republican Caucuses, Santorum’s “victory” in the Hawkeye State is no small thing. Just ask President Huckabee.
http://www.nolanchart.com/artic...ote-fraud.html
It’s all about foreign policy. Wasserman Schultz was in Iowa rallying the troops to vote for Santorum (and other purposes, of which Florida comes to mind) to offset the anti-war/anti bank votes of democrats and independents who would be inclined to vote for a candidate whose views seem to differ from the other candidates and was ahead in many other polls. I also would be inclined to believe that the GOP and DNC were working hand in hand to prevent a large margin of victory for that certain candidate, thus Rep. King’s prediction comes true. I don’t believe in divine intervention but man made intervention is highly probable in this case. The MIC, Wall Street and a certain foreign entity that keeps bleeding us of our youth, treasure and standing in this world will move heaven and earth to prevent what truly and urgently needs to be done. Both parties are equally guilty for the losses we have incurred over the last 20 or so years.
There should now be no further discussion:
ALL elections should be hand-marked and publicly counted. This proves it can be done. All of the Diebold/ES&S crap machines should be sent to Las Vegas for repurposing as gambling machines. And the crooks who sold this bill of goods (touch screen, no paper trail) should have to answer criminal charges.
Other reports have Romney winning by 8 votes. Wonder how the textbooks will handle it?
Uh, Brad…
“Santorum, a late comer, but one who finally surged from behind”
Just Google it?
Very clever.
“By tomorrow morning Santorum will be on the lips of every American.”
Just Google it!
Hmmmm, just got this sent to me??? http://www.economicpolicyjourna...-computer.html “Ahem, It Turns Out There Was a Computer “Glitch” in Iowa” Certainly makes me wonder….
TPM says Romney won by 8 votes.
Whoops! Cut to close up of Gilda Radner, “Never mind!”
Gotta do a bunch of radio in next several hours (See “Media Apperances” box in right sidebar for details if you’d like to listen along), but in regard to “Patti Cowgirl Holly” and others who have written with concerns about last night’s results, so far at least, I’ve been able to get logical, verifiable answers to most of them. Largely because of the transparent process employed by the GOP in Iowa last night!
I’ll try to work up a full post on those concerns (and the remaining unanswered ones) later tonight if I can.
I thought a fellow named Ron Paul came in a respectable third – yet no mention here. I guess there’s no interest on this site of ending the crooked Fed. With the other candidates it’s the usual charlatanism.
How could that be a problem? 🙂
Geez, Marzi. Do I have to mention Ron Paul’s name in every single article I write at The BRAD BLOG?! In the last 3 or 4 articles I wrote on Iowa, I think he was the only candidate I mentioned by name.
Tough house!
lights out at DAVENPORT IOWA CAUCUS WHILE VOTES BEING COUNTED! http://youtu.be/I26LJJ4r960 http://www.facebook.com/groups/...group_activity
Thanks Brad for looking into this and EVERYTHING else you do!! It is very much appreciated =)
Brad, please do not resurrect Bev Harris. I had thought she had disappeared into Zombieland.
You are too nice of a guy, you don’t understand informationwarfare. She had been designated by the powers-that-be to be the electoral fraud “truthteller” — i.e., she would tell enough truth to be believed and then lie her brains out when it was strategically useful. However, you and 2 or 3 others derailed that plan. Thank goodness.
And now here she is, worming her way back into good graces. Ouch.
Mitch –
Ummm….Thanks?
And your evidence to support that incredibly serious claim is? I’ll be waiting…
I’m sorry but I can’t teach you to add 2 plus 2, to see the trees behind the leaves, to recognize oft repeated patterns in the disinfo wars, etc.
It is this same reasoning defect that leads you to accept the official government conspiracy theory on 9/11 (last I knew your position).
Mitch condescendingly said:
I see. So you have no evidence for your scurillous claim, then? Only the assertion that your super powers allow you to see great things that us mere mortals can’t. Got it. Very impressive, Captain Marvel!
Ah, yes. I see you are also keenly aware of my “accept[ance] of the official government conspiracy theory on 9/11”! Curses! I’m foiled again by your super powers! Keep up the dastardly good work and you shall soon save the world! From me! From Bev Harris! And from all the other evil-doers on whom your keen powers are sharply focused, even as we’re hell bent on destroying it!
Mitch,
Excuse me but what the fuck are you talking about? I happened to be up in New Hampshire a couple of post-elections ago and got to meet, hang out, and help Bev and Sally Castleman a bit. I was with them when they confronted(and videotaped a Mr. Gardner(I believe it was)on some chain of custody issues. She sure as hell seemed like the real deal to me. Not that she was a flawless human, but man was she, and mostly a bunch of other grandmothers it seemed to me, doing heroic work trying to rescue our democracy.
So, what exactly you got, Bub? Anything besides your own private tea leaves and a steaming plate of innuendo?
Brad, it’s all a cloth woven from a single thread. Naivete and arrogance is a very bad combination. That combo makes you very susceptible to manipulations.
I will no longer come here when I seek the truth on voting issues. Exit Brad the truth warrior, enter Brad the useful fool.
Mitch said:
Understood. But we’ll try not to hold that against you.
Good idea. We do journalism here when in comes to “truth in voting issues” and, as such, only report stuff for which their is actually independently verifiable evidence. Apparently your not-at-all arrogant and magical standards of “evidence” — in which no actual evidence is actually required– are somewhat, um, different than ours. Good luck with your “truth” seeking!