Posted on 02/03/2016 5:45:03 AM PST by xzins
1. Wikipedia says: "The Iowa Caucus[1] is an electoral event in which residents of the U.S. state of Iowa meet in precinct caucuses in all of Iowa's 1,681 precincts and elect delegates to the corresponding county conventions."
2. Ted Cruz's ground game was said to be massive and the explanation for his victory. He had workers at all precincts.
3. Ted Cruz apologized for his workers spreading misinformation about Ben Carson dropping out of the race. Carson says this misinformation affected vote totals.
4. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/cnsnewscom-staff/iowa-cruz-278-trump-244-rubio-229-carson-93-paul-45
Cruz had 51,416--or 27.7 percent--of the votes.
Trump was second with 45,245 or 24.3 percent of the votes.
Rubio was third with 42,863 or 23.1 percent of the votes.
Dr. Ben Carson was fourth with 17,321 or 9.3 percent of the votes.
5. If each precinct has a caucus and there are 1681 precincts, as stated by point #1, then one vote lost per precinct to the misinformation campaign totaled 1681 votes possibly added to Cruz's total.
6. Since Cruz's lead was only 6200 votes, that would mean only about 4 vote changes per precinct.
7. This calls into question the size of Cruz's victory, the size of Carson's loss, and the number of delegates apportioned.
8. Question: Should that be acknowledge by the Republican Party in a public news release?
The point is that Cruz acknowledged and apologized for his operatives’ actions.
If they impacted just 4 people per precinct, then they totally ruined the validity of this election.
Isn’t King also supposed to be an upstanding conservative Christian?
In the article, I wrote in #8 a question: Should the Republican Party acknowledge in a news release that this chicanery had the possibility of skewing the Iowa results?
What do you think?
Follow the $$$$$
Do you think King was bought off?
And Bluto apologized to the hippy whose guitar he just smashed.
Fwiw, Carson actually exceeded polling averages done the prior week. At least according to Real Clear Politics: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.html
LOL.
Well, I don’t know actually know that much about Congressman King, but I’ve always liked him.
I didn’t voice my opinion with regard to your Question #8 because I want to hear BOR’s investigation results. I will be highly disappointed if BOR doesn’t zero in on King’s selective retweet because it’s clearly obvious that it alone started the entire sorry incident.
At that point, the Republican Party should issue a statement and perhaps the Iowa Caucus.
The much heralded Des Moines Register would likely love to run an expose’ about the incident. Shenanigans within the Cruz campaign would please the longest serving governor who didn’t want Cruz to win.
Tell about another election that was more valid.
This is much ado about little.
An Iowan posted above, and commented that the nature of the caucus is that people mill about talk, share info, attempt to persuade. IOW, there wouldn’t be a large screen announcement that “Carson Drops Out”.
It would be persuasion by operatives that Cruz campaign was proud to announce that they had at EVERY caucus site.
We’ll NEVER know those conversations.
O’Reilly has run some decent investigations in the past, but I’m not sure how you could get at this in just a 24 hour period.
The Body of Christ was called upon to win Iowa for Cruz.
Surely, if Cruz said that Carson pulled out, it was The Body of Christ talking though him.
The Body of Christ wouldn’t lie, would it?
We are conservatives, chopperman.
Like me, you were concerned with the validity of many of Obama’s vote totals in his last election. We were concerned with the Chris McDaniel/Thad Cochran election.
So, that’s why this is an issue for any conservative.
The bottom line question is whether the Republican Party should acknowledge the questionable nature of the results.
Got it. Thanks BE.
I agree. If Cruz were simply a candidate who were running a campaign, that would be one thing. But since he made a point of saying he was running a Christian campaign, then he should, in addition to an apology, offer some form of restitution.
Since he cannot change what’s happened, he could return what has been taken from Ben Carson by acknowledging in a news release that the Republican Party should ask people to take into account the possibly skewed results in Iowa.
He apologized immediately.
Get over it. The numbers it affected were minimal.
You have no idea what was affected.
Carson thinks it was damaging.
But he still lied and had his folks lie. That is a sin.
“Thou shalt not bear false witness.”
Yep. And real repentance seeks a way to make a past wrong right.
Remember that Rubio and Cruz were highest for second choice, so if your first choice was Carson and you are told by someone you had no reason to disbelieve that Carson is planning to suspend his campaign you would most likely go for your second choice. And if I recall correctly, Cruz was highest among Carson’s supporters second choice. At the very least it makes the election outcome questionable. It doesn’t take much to dramatically change the result, a classic example was in 2000 when Fox “mistakenly” called Florida fo Gore an hour before polls closed.
Cruz issued an apology for not updating the local people with Carson’s correction. I don’t know when or how the Cruz campaign received Carson’s correction - don’t know when CNN ever had an on-air correction - but chances are good it would have been too late to reach anybody at the caucuses.
Cruz did NOT apologize for forwarding the information that CNN posted.
Carson’s campaign website lists no campaign events, anywhere. His NH employees had all just quit to join the Cruz campaign, not wanting their efforts to be wasted on a man who was not going to campaign for the primaries he said he’d have to win to stay in the race. The campaign had been suspended to deal with the death of one of his workers in IA and had never started back up. An IA caucus-goer here has said the people pretty much knew already that it was over for Carson.
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.