Mirrored
FAIR USE NOTICE: These pages/video may contain copyrighted (© ) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of ecological, POLITICAL, HUMAN RIGHTS, economic, DEMOCRACY, scientific, MORAL, ETHICAL, and SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior general interest in receiving similar information for research and educational.
lol soft caucus....
Cybertronic72388 4 weeks ago
What's funny is they had no problem giving Santorum his delegates from IA yet they don't give those soft counts to Ron. This is complete and absolute tyranny!
brown55061 4 weeks ago
totally unreal! RON PAUL 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cnjkerr 1 month ago
from what i read before.....in spite of all the confusion and miscount in Iowa....they split the delegates between Santorum and Romney 12 apiece....leaving RP with nada!.....but truth be told.....Iowa popular vote really doesnt make any difference since the delegates can vote different than the popular vote....
RYNO4880 1 month ago
i agree with you my friend 100% B.S disinfo and the games /cons/& scams continue
grumpyjamaican 1 month ago
@dreamcore (my comment is about the Iowa caucus, of course)
dreamcore 1 month ago
There is a method to the WSJ projection. They combine the precincts and counties into congressional districts, and then look at how each did in each of those individually. If a candidate doesn't "win" any CDs outright, they don't project any delegates for him. But yes, as you note, it's just a BS projection, we don't know what happens there until June, and it shouldn't be in the delegate count.
dreamcore 1 month ago
Great Vid.
jcperezngaby 1 month ago
Misdirection at it's best. Thanks and sharing.
tmotofga 1 month ago