November 29, 2012
— Ace I keep seeing questions about this in the comments. Let me address the question, rather than simply ignoring it.
After the election, there were claims that one Philly precinct hit 116% voter turnout, and that other precincts hit 90% or above.
Taking the last claim first: That seems to have been based on a misreading. An article I read said that 99% of the votes in some Philly precincts went to Obama-- but I saw it reported in blogs that the precincts had 99% turnout.
Which isn't what the article said. It said that of the votes counted -- with turnout level unspecified -- Obama got 99% or even 100%.
That sounds suspicious but it's not. We're talking about black inner-city neighborhoods. Blacks, generally, voted for Obama at, what, the 95% level? And bear in mind most of the black Romney votes aren't going to be located in Philadelphia's inner city-- they're going to be in suburbs, around military bases, and in very rich suburbs where rappers live (and vote Republican).
It's not the least bit suspicious that poor blacks in the inner city would vote 99% or 100% for Obama, when all blacks -- including middle class, rich, and military blacks (who are more Republican-leaning, relatively speaking) -- vote for Obama at a 95% level. 100% in the inner city in Philadelphia is pretty much what I expect.
What would you expect?
So this part of the claim comes from a mistaken reading of vote count for turnout, or an unwarranted suspicion about it being unlikely that an almost-all black neighborhood in Philly would vote 99% or 100% for Obama.
The other part of the claim-- about the 116% turnout in one precinct -- was due to a mistake, which has been explained.
Two divisions in Southwest Philadelphia's 40th Ward were both assigned to the same polling location, the Paschallville Library on Woodland Avenue. When poll workers were setting up operations for the day, they mistakenly traded the voting machines preprogrammed for each division.One recorded turnout of 116 percent, with 245 votes from a division with only 211 registered voters, while the other recorded 166 votes among 472 registered voters, or 35 percent.
Combining votes from the two divisions, 411 votes were cast for president among 683 registered voters, a turnout rate of 60 percent - virtually the same as turnout citywide.
Republican City Commissioner Al Schmidt said poll workers at the library realized on Election Day that they had switched machines and notified election officials of the error.
Citywide, only three divisions reported turnouts above 80 percent - one each in West Philadelphia (85.7 percent), Roxborough (80.7 percent), and East Falls (80.4 percent). The Roxborough division was won by Romney.
So, the 116% turnout claim comes from two different precincts swapping their name-tags so that the smaller precinct reported way too high turnout (116%) while the bigger precinct reported way too low turnout (35%). Swap them back around and, presumably, turnout levels are more plausible.
Obviously there is voter fraud and of course Democrats are chiefly responsible for it. And yes, this is a perpetual problem in need of redress and reform. I don't mean to suggest it's not. Voter integrity is crucially important.
But as for the specific charge that the election was "stolen" by large-scale voter fraud -- this meme seems to have originated in the first 24 hours and seems to have been based on mistaken earlier reports and simple misreading of articles. But I guess because no one on the right ever says "I don't believe that, and here's why" it continues to percolate up as a viable claim.
But unless there's more to this than I haven't seen, this just seems to be an I Heard It On The Internet thing. Vaporware.
On the Motivations for Raising Rabble: I'm often curious about the reasons that claims without evidence are put forward. I figure it's a spectrum of rationales:
1. People who really believe it, who heard it, and just believe it.
2. People who don't so much believe it as think it might be true, but proving it to be true would require resources and a fairly serious amount of digging, the sort of digging that only a well-staffed media company or think tank could undertake. So the idea is to propagate the idea on blogs, which in will turn get people chattering about the idea, and this in turn will induce the actual investigation into the claim, which might not bear fruit, but then again it might.
The trouble, from my perspective, of this Type Two Rabble-Rousing is that for me to engage in this chatter-creating process would require me to start pretending I know this is true and it must be investigated by AEI or Fox!!!, and obviously I don't know it's true, and in fact rather think it's not. So it would require me to do an awful lot of lying in hopes of getting a major investigation started... even though I actually don't expect that investigation would wind up bearing fruit.
That's a lot of lying do for a It Just Might Be True! lark. More than I've got in me.
Don't get me wrong-- I like lying. I just don't want to commit to a long-term lie that takes so much damn work.
3. The third reason people might inject these claims into the internet bloodstream is purely cynical -- they don't believe the claims are true, but believe it would be politically useful if other people believed them to be true, so this is just a straight-up huckster move.
While I have sympathy for reasons 1 and 2, I don't have sympathy for this one. People who think this way strongly overestimate their own intelligence. They seem to think that while they themselves can see through some huckster hackery, other people are dumb and therefore can't, and see themselves sort of as puppetmasters.
I don't like this sort of person. Anyone who believes he's smart enough to engineer a Big Lie that works is most likely pretty dumb. Obviously, no one ever admits to being this sort of person, but sometimes I think that people really are trying to sell me on a Big (Dumb) Lie that they know is false, but which they think can Really Make a Difference if we all Just Push It Hard Enough.
This is why I hate all the astroturfing. Like for a specific candidate. It's not just that I disagree with the tactic of faking up a Wave of Irresistible Enthusiasm. I really hate the misplaced I'm So Smart I Can Fool Millions With My Clever Shenanigans mode of thought.
I certainly understand Reason One (I believe it) and Reason Two (I don't necessarily believe it, but we'll never know for sure unless we can get some serious research into this matter, so let's brave-face it and pretend we know for sure such research will wind up in Pulitzer Prizes).
On this last point, though, reporters are fantastically lazy individuals and are never going to just throw hundreds of man-hours into a speculative claim even if a dozen big blogs swear that maybe it's true.
Posted by: Ace at
01:33 PM
| Comments (241)
Post contains 1218 words, total size 7 kb.
Posted by: navycopjoe at November 29, 2012 01:37 PM (05mFQ)
Posted by: Dr Spank at November 29, 2012 01:37 PM (b+jI9)
What pisses me off and not at you is the known unknowns like the Somalis voting in Columbus and Cincy in Ohio.
The margin of Fraud is not supposed to be a built in treat of the system, and frankly I think if the Philly elections get to be a treat for us every four years it's time for us to start kicking democrats out of GOP hard districts.
Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.
GOP wards need to refuse to report results while Cleveland is counting as well.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 01:38 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: AndrewsDad at November 29, 2012 01:38 PM (C2//T)
Posted by: Wooga at November 29, 2012 01:39 PM (hs37x)
Posted by: K at November 29, 2012 01:39 PM (fZ644)
Posted by: soothsayer at November 29, 2012 01:39 PM (jUytm)
What would you expect?"
===============
Honestly, I would still expect at least one or two iconoclastic votes for Mitt Romney.
Now, that said, absent anything concrete I'm not inclined to run with the "OMG TEH ELECTION WAS TEH STOLENZ!!1 LOL!!" either, but I still think it's beyond asinine for Red State to make this the New Reason for Banning People.
Posted by: Kensington at November 29, 2012 01:39 PM (znT2j)
Posted by: Wooga at November 29, 2012 01:40 PM (hs37x)
Until we get Voter ID required...everywhere...then, all voting results are suspect.
Even those UN Inspectors were gobsmacked that we didn't require Voter ID everywhere.
Posted by: wheatie at November 29, 2012 01:40 PM (CM59X)
Posted by: beach at November 29, 2012 01:41 PM (LpQbZ)
How about giving him a post about his concerns and we can see if there is any substance to them.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2012 01:41 PM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Yip at November 29, 2012 01:41 PM (/jHWN)
I don't think my hash has changed in three years.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at November 29, 2012 01:41 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: eureka! LiFBer at November 29, 2012 01:42 PM (HPRku)
I was intrigued by all of the areas that have super-high turnout (outlier % of pre-registered voters). I still think it's a good idea to have volunteers outside of trouble areas (see Chicago) and count/video voters going in the door vs how many votes are reported at the end of the day.
Don't give Soros an inch.
Posted by: Tonic Dog at November 29, 2012 01:42 PM (X/+QT)
/sigh. The voter fraud story does not make me as sad as the rise of the USSA.
Posted by: Shibumi a french model at November 29, 2012 01:42 PM (z63Tr)
Posted by: Yip at November 29, 2012 01:43 PM (/jHWN)
Posted by: soothsayer at November 29, 2012 01:43 PM (jUytm)
Posted by: AndrewsDad at November 29, 2012 01:43 PM (C2//T)
Neither do I think that the vote fraud was in very large percentages.
I will not regurgitate the myriads of reasons why Romney lost e have had enough of that already.
Posted by: Vic at November 29, 2012 01:43 PM (YdQQY)
Posted by: tcn at November 29, 2012 01:43 PM (VLG62)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 01:44 PM (3zQJl)
Posted by: beach at November 29, 2012 01:45 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: Yip at November 29, 2012 01:45 PM (/jHWN)
Posted by: eureka! LiFBer at November 29, 2012 01:45 PM (HPRku)
Actually, the election process as defined by the US AG's office encouraged voter fraud. Whether or not it was the reason we lost, we'll NEVER know for sure.
I'm inclined more toward the "free shit" element. Also, blatant covetiousness.
Posted by: Soona at November 29, 2012 01:45 PM (oy/E2)
Posted by: beach at November 29, 2012 01:46 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: ConservativeCrank at November 29, 2012 01:47 PM (LlEp9)
And this was in a less polarized age about 12 years ago. In white-bread, hippie Minneapolis.
Posted by: Tonic Dog at November 29, 2012 01:47 PM (X/+QT)
Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette, still a Hobbit at November 29, 2012 01:47 PM (NYki8)
The more reasonable position seems to be that they haven't perfected their methods of cheating yet (not that they wouldn't cheat or that they are not planning to cheat better in the future). Voter ID still makes sense, clearing voter roles still makes sense, voting weeks in advance still doesn't make sense, so there are many things to work on in the balloting arena.
It is just really hard to run against free stuff using logic and math, and that isn't going to change (unless and until there just isn't any stuff anywhere that is easy to take).
Posted by: Hrothgar - LIB or SMOD (for the Children) at November 29, 2012 01:47 PM (Cnqmv)
Obama will go down as one of the greatest prez's this country has ever had.
His name will be be right up there with FDR.
Well at least that is what your children and grandchildren will learn in school.
So it must me true because your daughter's 4th grade teacher Mrs. Leslie said so......
Posted by: Courtesy Flush at November 29, 2012 01:48 PM (8lB0x)
Read the story of Allen wests district and that monkey circus.
I stopped aggregating because noone seems to care. Not ace's fault, it's one of those things you believe or you don't.
Another problem is voter farming. But what can you do, there are whole sectors and towns and city districts where everyone is on the dime.
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 01:48 PM (3zQJl)
Posted by: jakeman at November 29, 2012 01:49 PM (96M6e)
Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette, still a Hobbit at November 29, 2012 05:47 PM (NYki
[b]FIFY
Posted by: Hrothgar - LIB or SMOD (for the Children) at November 29, 2012 01:49 PM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at November 29, 2012 01:49 PM (wDBIL)
A local radio host asked his callers to phone him if they voted in a precinct which reported no Romney votes. One guy called in, said his mom had voted "R" in one of the precincts that didn't report it.
Philadelphia fraud is in a class by itself. You're only just hearing about GOP poll watchers being kicked out the last few cycles, but it has been going on forever. Before electronic touchpad voting, they used to just throw out GOP votes in heavy donk precincts. Some of the GOP poll watchers who were kicked out on November 6 were told, THIS IS A DEMOCRAT CITY. (Just like the pre-teen who was harassed by her teacher she showed up at public school wearing a Romney T-shirt).
I WISH TO GOD ALMIGHTY that all the latte and limo libs in the Philly collar could be forced to live in the precincts that voted 100% for preazy, let them enjoy the true fruits of their allegiance to the donk regime.
Posted by: kallisto at November 29, 2012 01:50 PM (jm/9g)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat [/i] at November 29, 2012 01:50 PM (feFL6)
There's acorn fraud and union thug fraud. Both are under omerta so we can't do nothing. The same day vote and early vote is a problem, people bragged about doing this on the twitter (now deleted)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 01:50 PM (3zQJl)
Posted by: L, elle at November 29, 2012 01:51 PM (0PiQ4)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 01:52 PM (3zQJl)
I thought the "choir" sang the mockery theme very well and even artfully in many cases, but the "choir" had already heard the tune!
Posted by: Hrothgar - LIB or SMOD (for the Children) at November 29, 2012 01:52 PM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Mr_Write at November 29, 2012 01:52 PM (CLkAH)
More than 1% of people think Elvis is Alive... much more than 1% of people think they have been abducted by Aliens, or seen Angels....
99% or 100% votes only happen in Banana Republics...
And that totaly discounts anyone who may have listened to the Black Pastors who pre election, came out against Obama...
Posted by: Romeo13 at November 29, 2012 01:52 PM (lZBBB)
Posted by: beach at November 29, 2012 01:53 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at November 29, 2012 05:50 PM (feFL6)
__
How easy would it be to flip the top of the ticket one way while the rest of the ballot stood pat? Because in every collar county except yours, preaze won but the GOP congressman was returned to office. And preaze won Bucks by a very slim margin, (thank you Gary Johnson voters).
Posted by: kallisto at November 29, 2012 01:53 PM (jm/9g)
Posted by: ConservativeCrank at November 29, 2012 01:54 PM (LlEp9)
When?
They're not going to cry wolf over fraud allegations based on an easily debunked Internet rumor, no. But that whole Voter ID thing? They're pushing it for a reason.
Remember Acorn? It wasn't the Dems behind the push to defund them.
Problem is, people keep shouting about vote percentages in Philidelphia being proof of fraud, for example. Only later do we find out that the Dem candidate got 90%+ in previous elections too. It weakens, not strengthens, our arguments about voter fraud to make false allegations.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at November 29, 2012 01:55 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at November 29, 2012 05:50 PM (feFL6)
---------------------------------------------------
When we no longer trust even the most basic right of a democratic republic (the vote), then it's over. I agree.
Posted by: Soona at November 29, 2012 01:55 PM (oy/E2)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 01:55 PM (3zQJl)
Oh...I pity the teacher that tries that on my kid. I'm getting second hand rage on that one.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at November 29, 2012 01:56 PM (0q2P7)
He said that the machines had so many safeguards on them that it would be impossible for a local official to do it and almost impossible for someone who knew programing to do it.
Posted by: Vic at November 29, 2012 01:56 PM (YdQQY)
Posted by: DaveA at November 29, 2012 01:56 PM (Xefrb)
Posted by: Andrew Breitbart at November 29, 2012 01:57 PM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 01:59 PM (LCRYB)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 05:48 PM (3zQJl)
I felt physically ill when a severely mentally challenged man was going around telling everyone at church that he voted for Obama. This is the guy who introduces himself every time he sees someone because clearly someone told him that's what you do and he doesn't understand that they meant only the first time (or can't remember meeting the same people from week to week). The reason I felt sick was because someone obviously told him how "good" it would be for him to vote for O, and with Ocare in place he will likely pay for that vote with his life.
Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette, still a Hobbit at November 29, 2012 01:59 PM (NYki8)
Posted by: L, elle at November 29, 2012 02:00 PM (0PiQ4)
Posted by: Hollowpoint at November 29, 2012 05:55 PM (SY2Kh)
From what the Philly residents are saying, the reason the candidates had 90%+ in the past is because thay were cheating then too.
Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette, still a Hobbit at November 29, 2012 02:01 PM (NYki8)
Why not buy it and donate it, see if you can't help them get more fans?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at November 29, 2012 02:01 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: JDP at November 29, 2012 05:57 PM (60GaT)
__
yes, just went back and checked, 1.2% is a slim margin. Although the .9 percent that Johnson drew would not have put Mitt over the top.
Now in my cursed county, preaze enjoyed a comfortable 22 point victory. Yet the GOP congressman won by 17.
Bipolar.
Posted by: kallisto at November 29, 2012 02:01 PM (jm/9g)
Auditable paper ballots, Voter ID, dyed fingers, get the Mil Vote in, prosecute or invalidate obvious fraud, etc.
Posted by: DaveA at November 29, 2012 02:02 PM (Xefrb)
Posted by: Soona at November 29, 2012 05:55 PM (oy/E2)
I've been saying the same thing. Assurence that there is (at least mostly) equal protection under the law, and that a citizen's vote will count is what protects a Republic like ours. When the people feel voiceless is when the rioting *really* starts.
Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette, still a Hobbit at November 29, 2012 02:03 PM (NYki8)
With their life experience I guess one could argue for or against this propensity they seem to have. Of course when it comes to white voters no benefit of the doubt is allowed. If they vote against a black person, racism is assumed.
Posted by: Ken Royall at November 29, 2012 02:03 PM (x0g8a)
Is he a skilled programmer or software expert?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2012 02:03 PM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Dan Collins at November 29, 2012 02:03 PM (Rag47)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 02:03 PM (LCRYB)
Ace:
Let me criticize this one statement from your post:
"I think that people really are trying to sell me on a Big (Dumb) Lie that they know is false, but which they think can Really Make a Difference if we all Just Push It Hard Enough."
Whether it's a lie, or a message, or a push for a political candidate, REPETITION matters. Nolte on Breitbart was just commenting on this. Rs fucking suck at talking points and being prepared to counter D/Lefty talking points. It is fucking pathetic. We need a clear message to continuously and REPEATEDLY hammer home.
It does work. As does groundswell support for AHEM certain candidates. I refuse to allow the establishment to pick out or least narrow the field of qualified candidates. Romney was our very best option this time.
Romneycare vs. Obamacare. Fucking awesome.
Posted by: Prescient11 at November 29, 2012 02:04 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat at November 29, 2012 05:50 PM (feFL6)
Ditto--I know some wizard coders that could make a voting machine whistle Dixie if need be, so I do not (and will never) trust any closed source factory tested software.
I think the best answer I have seen is optical scanners. There is a paper trail for recounts (which seem an impossibility for electronic machines), and the software is pretty straight forward.
Posted by: Hrothgar - LIB or SMOD (for the Children) at November 29, 2012 02:04 PM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: E Pluribus Unum at November 29, 2012 02:04 PM (u9m7h)
Posted by: L, elle at November 29, 2012 02:05 PM (0PiQ4)
Philly using tradition to show that "we never vote GOP" is sort of self-making prophecy chief.
I agree with your main thrust and I think the "provable fraud" is not much more than normal maybe .5%......
the targeted fraud is what bothers me....look they invited the UN to observe for fuck's sakes b/c I think they felt they had lost....the donks are not gonna invite them back the UN was not exactly glowing with praise for the system we have and I'd be a lot happier if we enforced Iraqi standards here.
We lost because Ogabe's media buddies acted as a force multiplier for his stupid lies and stupid people bought the Emm. Goldstein ads....
we're fucked....this is part of the syptomology not "THE" cause.
Education deterioration and a lack of civics caused this, and it is my fault along with other GOP who quit the education track because of the communists in the NEA.
I'm sorry I let the right down.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 02:05 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at November 29, 2012 02:05 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 02:05 PM (LCRYB)
Posted by: WalrusRex at November 29, 2012 02:06 PM (Hx5uv)
People in my circle of friends and family tend to call me about these type of things on a fairly regular basis, sounding like the little black kids questioning Detective Murtock in Lethal Weapon -- "Is that twue? Is that twue?" They call me because they know I am intensely interested in current events, and many of the internet rumors that reach them are exactly that, rumors and myths.
I debunk the worst of them while saying that there is no need for wildass conspiracy theories, when there's plenty of real life, blow your mind shit happening that IS true.
I do see quite a bit of hysteria expressed here in the comments, though much of it is at least in a questioning mode. Is that twue? Is Ulsterman right? Is Alex Jones right? Is WND right?
Short answer, NO.
Posted by: GnuBreed at November 29, 2012 02:06 PM (ccXZP)
And one more comment:
I tend to agree with you on voter fraud. However, one guy in NC said he voted 5 times, ADMITTED TO IT, and he was excited to vote on election day.
All this early voting bs and paper/mail in voting is very dangerous. The Milwaukee PD special division found that there were 5k more ballots than voters who voted in 2004. I believe it is a systemic and serious issue.
But there's an easy way to address it. One is national voter ID, i.e., some official state picture ID is required. Period. End of story. and if these fucking states don't implement it, then they don't get their fucking medicaid or road money or whatever.
But the other key here is having the parties police it themselves. So the other half of this is on them, and they do a woeful woeful woeful job of it.
Posted by: Prescient11 at November 29, 2012 02:06 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 29, 2012 02:07 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Schrödinger's cat [/i] at November 29, 2012 02:07 PM (feFL6)
Yup.
The UK would probably have killed me at birth under the new "normal" since my pancreas needed blood transfusions to get jump started.
"Brave new world"
I hate it.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 02:07 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 06:03 PM (LCRYB)
The point was that people with experience are saying that a lot of those past votes involved at least a certain level of fraud as well, making the historical record of those precincts less than stellar evidence for lack of fraud now.
Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette, still a Hobbit at November 29, 2012 02:08 PM (NYki8)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 02:08 PM (LCRYB)
I can't say whether that speculation has merit or not. But we're talking about districts with single digit numbers of Republicans (if that).
If Republican votes were indeed tossed, there likely would've only been a few of them:
http://tinyurl.com/cee68bc
Eighteen Republicans reportedly live in the nearby 15th Division, according to city registration records. The 15th has the distinction of pitching two straight Republican shutouts - zero votes for McCain in 2008, zero for Romney on Tuesday. Oh, and 13 other city divisions did the same thing in 2008 and 2012.
Three of the 15th's registered Republicans were listed as living in the same apartment, but the tenant there said he had never heard of them. The addresses of several others could not be found.
On West Albert Street, Duke Dunston says he knows he's a registered Republican, but he's never voted for one.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at November 29, 2012 02:09 PM (SY2Kh)
I studied Chicago in High School and came away understanding the margin is between 1 and 3 percent in hard donk areas.
The worst is when they vote the rolls for people who didn't vote.
I am pretty sure my dead grandparents all voted for Obama.
I won't look.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 02:09 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 02:09 PM (3zQJl)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2012 06:03 PM (GsoHv)
I gather that the programing for those machines is hardcoded at the factory. All they do is enter the candidates names and verify the machines are working properly. He also said that the internals not only store the votes electronically but they also print a paper record.
Posted by: Vic at November 29, 2012 02:09 PM (YdQQY)
So...who's fault will it be tomorrow?
I've heard that it's Romney's fault. ...with various reaons offered.
It's incompetent campaign staffs.
It's corrupt consultants.
...It's the RINO's fault - for numerous and various reasons.
...It's the SoCons fault - for various and numerous reasons.
...variations on a theme... of conservatives/politicians/Republicans lacking ideological purity.
...It's the MSM's fault.
...It's bad 'mechanics.'
...It's bad messaging. (personally, I think voters well understood the [SoCon] message and quite rightly didn't want to have anything to do with it.)
...It's the public school's fault (essentially for not teaching our kids what we believe as conservatives.)
...It's...
Who're we blaming it on tomorrow?
Everyone but ourselves, right?
Right?
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at November 29, 2012 02:09 PM (WwR1j)
Posted by: Dr Spank at November 29, 2012 02:10 PM (b+jI9)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 02:10 PM (LCRYB)
Yes -- I agree with Ace's post. I had to watch some precincts in West Charlotte NC that were clearly going to go 90% plus for Obama. I saw no evidence of fraud -- but I did see very, very high turnout from African Americans.
I would not be surprised if there was some fraud in places -- but I seriously doubt it would have made a material impact in this election.
Posted by: nc at November 29, 2012 02:10 PM (YvFZ3)
“The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
Posted by: kreitzer at November 29, 2012 02:10 PM (G8jZM)
Unless it Valerie Plame being outed of her super secret undercover position by Karl Rove.
Posted by: L, elle at November 29, 2012 02:10 PM (0PiQ4)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:10 PM (L7dvG)
Ace--It's not just Philly, there were apparently several precincts in Chicago that also voted 100% Obama. I have no doubt inner city black neighborhoods vote 98-99% Obama. Maybe even some precincts vote 100%. But just as a statistical matter you're talking about tens of thousands of votes. You can't get 99%-100% in several precincts. It's statistically impossible, if for no other reason than voter error. I don't believe it mattered to the outcome, Romney would've lost regardless. But there's apparently some hinky shit going on in these Dem-controlled neighborhoods.
Posted by: Bob at November 29, 2012 02:12 PM (s/Ukz)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 02:12 PM (3zQJl)
The good news about Obamacare is that a request for a DNR is NEVER refused!
The bad news is that you may get one even if you didn't ask for it!
Posted by: Hrothgar - LIB or SMOD (for the Children) at November 29, 2012 02:12 PM (Cnqmv)
It is not conspiracy mongering to see what they strive for. They cheat every cycle and have going back to the 1820s. It is as American as apple pie, and the media WAS trying to lay the smoke for TFG to invoke Nuclear War powers for a cat 1 hurricane.
It will happen in my lifetime whether SCOAMF gets to be the birthday boy or not.
The media runs the nation and I am desperately trying not to see them as an overt domestic foe.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 02:12 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 02:12 PM (LCRYB)
91 -- sven10077
Yes, I believe you, but its Chicago. The Democrats don't even need fraud there to win. They probably just do it out of habit.
Posted by: nc at November 29, 2012 02:13 PM (YvFZ3)
Posted by: BlackOrchid-StillMissingDagny at November 29, 2012 02:14 PM (J6kXj)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 06:03 PM (LCRYB)
__
ace, it's true that in the 17 precincts where GOP watchers were evicted (including a 70 year old African-American woman) - there was no chance Mitt would have won there. But it speaks to a larger issue that American citizens feel empowered to ignore the constitution to such an extent that parts of the city are effectively a banana republic.
What if there was some seed of respect for Romney just for the fact that he appeared at Kenny Gamble's charter school in W. Philly and was roundly criticized by the gutless mayor who showed up with a crowd to protest? Suppose a brutha went in to cast his vote on that basis and it was "disappeared". What incentive would he have in future to go against the grain? And encourage those in his personal network to do the same?
Posted by: kallisto at November 29, 2012 02:14 PM (jm/9g)
Are they touch-screen machines? If so, can the local officials calibrate the screens? That's where I see the potential for fraud, if it's possible to calibrate the touchscreens on a local level.
Posted by: NC Ref at November 29, 2012 02:14 PM (LY9VZ)
Posted by: Grant at November 29, 2012 02:14 PM (j1pE2)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 02:14 PM (3zQJl)
Yeah....I am praying Gore is right and you and I can go mine Antarctica for fun and profit.....
I've seen this movie before and I readabout it in China from 250AD-450 AD.....
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 02:14 PM (LRFds)
Blue states are evil.
Sorry Ace, I don't agree with you. There is ample evidence that there was cheating here in CT.
Just in the last election alone (2010) there was widespread cheating in the Bridgeport/New Haven area.
1) Polls were held open 2-3 hours late there.
2) The 911 system was used (against the law) urging voters to attend the now open late polls.
3) Poll watchers reported ballots being given out 2-3 at a time to single votors.
In the end, Malloy won the election losing every county in CT except for Hartford and Bridgeport/New Haven. The margin in Hartford was fairly thin... but in Bridgeport they gathered enough votes to overcome ALL the other countys in the state and just missed the number required to trigger and automatic recount.
The state GOP rolled over and did nothing. I called them up and bitched and told them they could go to hell, Foley was a punk who just rolled over and let us all get screwed. Not one more dime of my money.
Since then, Malloy stuff the biggest tax increase in history up our bums, increased the budget 2 BILLION over 2 years and now is shocked were 380 million bucks in the hole this year alone.
They cheat because they know the GOP will just roll over.
Posted by: gdonovan at November 29, 2012 02:14 PM (NshEp)
Posted by: BlackOrchid-StillMissingDagny at November 29, 2012 02:14 PM (J6kXj)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 06:05 PM (LCRYB)
Wait....you don't like fake names?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo's pseudonym at November 29, 2012 02:14 PM (GsoHv)
Posted by: ErikW on the damned phone at November 29, 2012 02:15 PM (XkQL7)
Ace or joeindc44:
Do we have final turnout %s for the Philly precincts. It is turnout numbers I would be concerned with as Ace points out, not that the ghettos don't like Romney.
Folks, these people don't show up for fucking court with a warrant out. So if turnout is above 80% that raises my eyebrows immediately.
But lower than that is not an obvious case of fraud, imo.
Posted by: Prescient11 at November 29, 2012 02:15 PM (tVTLU)
Everyone but ourselves, right?
Right?
Your Mom. Literally hundreds of potential voters were too preoccupied with her $2 beejers to vote.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at November 29, 2012 02:16 PM (SY2Kh)
While I have sympathy for reasons 1 and 2, I don't have sympathy for this one. People who think this way strongly overestimate their own intelligence. They seem to think that while they themselves can see through some huckster hackery, other people are dumb and therefore can't, and see themselves sort of as puppetmasters.
I don't like this sort of person. Anyone who believes he's smart enough to engineer a Big Lie that works is most likely pretty dumb. Obviously, no one ever admits to being this sort of person, but sometimes I think that people really are trying to sell me on a Big (Dumb) Lie that they know is false, but which they think can Really Make a Difference if we all Just Push It Hard Enough."
Geesh, Ace, weren't you paying attention to the Obama campaign? That was their whole strategy with Kill Mitt. The LIVs are dumb and can't see the puppetmasters. Obama is not dumb. Pushing alot of Big (Dumb) lies did work.
We're the dumb ones believing our big noble ideas would win the day.
Posted by: L, elle at November 29, 2012 02:16 PM (0PiQ4)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 02:16 PM (3zQJl)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 29, 2012 02:17 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 06:10 PM (LCRYB)
Because I'm curious but don't know where to look, did any precincts go 99-100% for Romney? Even close? I'd be more inclined to accept the legitimacy of the O precincts doing that if there's at least a little evidence that it goes both ways.
Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette, still a Hobbit at November 29, 2012 02:17 PM (NYki8)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 02:17 PM (LCRYB)
From the previousthread:
210 soothsayer,
Charlize Theron has two really big reasons I respect her craft.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 05:06 PM (LRFds)
290yeah but she never shows them
Posted by: soothsayer at November 29, 2012 05:06 PM (jUytm)
2 Days in the Valley, gentlemen.
Posted by: USS Diversity at November 29, 2012 02:18 PM (85EaA)
If there is a port into the controller (and there has to be to get the data), then my bet is that someone can screw with the results, or the actual votes as they occur.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo's pseudonym at November 29, 2012 02:18 PM (GsoHv)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 02:18 PM (3zQJl)
Posted by: Truman North at November 29, 2012 02:18 PM (/Xglv)
Who are these rich rappers who can vote?
The surviving Beastie Boys and...uh...Common?
He's seriously the only one I can think of who hasn't been at least *arrested* for a felony. And I'm not sure about him. I know he's claimed to be a hard-ass felon we should all be scared of, but he's known to "front," as the old folks say. He's a bitchy college girl at heart. So, not a Republican.
Ice Cube? I don't think he's ever done any actual non-publicity-related crimes. But he's also a "voting is bullshit" guy.
So, who?
Posted by: oblig. at November 29, 2012 02:18 PM (cePv8)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 02:18 PM (LCRYB)
Posted by: Hollowpoint at November 29, 2012 06:09 PM (SY2Kh)
___
Mr. Dunston knows better than to admit for publication that he ever voted Republican. A friend of mine in S. Philly told me the donk poll worker told him he was not allowed to vote Republican when she saw his registration.
Word gets out, and shit goes down.
Posted by: kallisto at November 29, 2012 02:19 PM (jm/9g)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:19 PM (L7dvG)
89 by the way, I don't think repetition works in a pull medium, as opposed to a push medium.
...
If I just sat here repeating the exact same slogans every day, you wouldn't come. The idea that OTHER people would come is therefore false. OTHER people are like you, and also would not come for the same ten goddamn slogans every day.
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 06:08 PM (LCRYB)
---------
Yeah, but repetition *does* work, Ace.
Look at how much repetition was involved in the 'SCOAMF' meme....in getting it to the status of being a 'meme'.
Look at how the Dems use repetition in getting their talking points out.
It's like they're a bunch of fucking parrots whenever they've got a new slogan...they repeat it over and over.
So as obnoxious as it may be...repetition works.
Posted by: wheatie at November 29, 2012 02:19 PM (CM59X)
Posted by: Ben at November 29, 2012 02:20 PM (xTHBC)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 29, 2012 02:20 PM (HDgX3)
Ace:
Then yes, as to astroturfing, that is total bs. agreed. Like the number of zero's twitter followers...
Posted by: Prescient11 at November 29, 2012 02:20 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 02:20 PM (LCRYB)
Incorrect.
Assuming that there is some error rate in voting (I wanted to vote Obama but I voted for Romney instead, and obviously the other way around), then the overall rate for Obama in Black precincts will skew away from 100%, because more errors will be made against Obama than for him.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo's pseudonym at November 29, 2012 02:21 PM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:21 PM (L7dvG)
Posted by: @PurpAv at November 29, 2012 02:22 PM (upmAr)
The Right can get laws enacted like Voter ID, but unless they break out the purple ink it won't matter. Rules don't matter to cheaters.The Dems can cheat of the front or the back end.
I mean, what about the GOP makes anyone think they can reverse the voter fraud issue? They won't even fight to stop the crushing debt. They're useless.
That's why I'm not interested.
Posted by: runninrebel at November 29, 2012 02:22 PM (J4gw3)
Posted by: Stuff some dude said... at November 29, 2012 02:22 PM (feFL6)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 06:16 PM (3zQJl)
___
Romney deserves much respect for showing up at the W. Philly school. How ironic - Richie Rich who can't connect with the Average Guy - is the only GOP presidential candidate to have ever ventured into the belly of the beast.
Posted by: kallisto at November 29, 2012 02:22 PM (jm/9g)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 29, 2012 02:23 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Vic at November 29, 2012 06:09 PM (YdQQY)
---------------------------------------------------
Perhaps what you say is true in your state or precinct. But what about other states and/or precincts?
Also picture ID and an inked finger. Most problems solved.
Early voting is another very large invitation to fraud. Same as the loose requirement for absentee ballots.
Posted by: Soona at November 29, 2012 02:24 PM (oy/E2)
Posted by: tasker at November 29, 2012 02:24 PM (r2PLg)
Posted by: Andy Reid 0 for 7 since 'bye' week at November 29, 2012 02:25 PM (feFL6)
Because I'm curious but don't know where to look, did any precincts go 99-100% for Romney? Even close? I'd be more inclined to accept the legitimacy of the O precincts doing that if there's at least a little evidence that it goes both ways.
___________________________________________________________
If Whites voted for Romney 95-5 like blacks voted for Obama 95-5 you'd have a point. But whites voted for Obama 60-40. No sub group as far as I know voted for Romney 95-5, so there will be no precinct made up 100% of that subgroup which will vote Romney 99.5%.
I'm guessing the closest you'll get is 75% Romney precincts in rural Utah or Idaho.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 29, 2012 02:25 PM (HDgX3)
Flatbush Joe:
Exactly. My focus is on turnout %. I absolutely refuse to believe any large inner city precinct will hit 80% turnout, let alone 90%.
That is where I want to focus the efforts on. I am not sure how Truman North saw these votes come in real time in OH, but in Philly, for example, that is where I would dig first.
Posted by: Prescient11 at November 29, 2012 02:25 PM (tVTLU)
You REALLY want to clean up the system?
Constitutional Amendment that each Congresional district votes for its OWN Electoral Vote... and whoever wins the State gets the Electoral votes for the Senator.
Makes each District a Mini Election... and means candidates will HAVE to run Nationaly... not just in swing States.
Then National ID Card tied to Voter Registration, Citizenship status, and Passport....
Then election Day becomes a National Holiday, with Polls open 24 Hours, and NO abscentee voting except for Military or Federal Gov Workers out of country.... Even those LIVING out of the country must come here to vote if they wish to use their voting Privelege. Your National ID (above) must be shown to vote, where it is scan'd into a National Database which shows you voted..... and if you vote TWICE? Felony charges.
That is how your ensure a CLEAN election, with modern technology.... even if they stuff the ballot boxes in a few districts, it will only matter for those FEW electoral votes... and not swing a whole state...
Posted by: Romeo13 at November 29, 2012 02:25 PM (lZBBB)
Posted by: tasker at November 29, 2012 02:25 PM (r2PLg)
If you think people can do something they only do once a year at a 99% or better rate you're kidding yourself.
Posted by: DaveA at November 29, 2012 02:25 PM (Xefrb)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 02:26 PM (3zQJl)
Posted by: ErikW on the damned phone at November 29, 2012 02:26 PM (XkQL7)
_______________
I guess you just called the Democrat elite "dumb."
Posted by: Baldy at November 29, 2012 02:26 PM (opS9C)
Posted by: yerro at November 29, 2012 02:26 PM (CO/ju)
Posted by: tasker at November 29, 2012 02:26 PM (r2PLg)
Posted by: Jon (not the troll) at November 29, 2012 02:27 PM (TRZqq)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:27 PM (L7dvG)
The point is, these districts contain almost no Republicans. It shouldn't be surprising that Republicans get almost no votes in them.
I'm not trying to discount voter fraud- it happens and needs to be stopped. We're not going to make a convincing case for addressing it if we keep trotting out false allegations based on conjecture though.
Again- shouting about Obama getting 99% of the vote in a district populated by 99.9% black Democrats as being evidence of fraud hurts our argument. Doing so only makes it less likely that legitimate allegations of fraud will be taken seriously and investigated.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at November 29, 2012 02:28 PM (SY2Kh)
and every new replacement american, fresh off the boat, is marched to voter registration booth
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 02:28 PM (3zQJl)
Posted by: Dolley Payne Todd Madison at November 29, 2012 02:28 PM (KI7Dk)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 29, 2012 02:28 PM (ZPrif)
Because I'm curious but don't know where to look, did any precincts go 99-100% for Romney? Even close? I'd be more inclined to accept the legitimacy of the O precincts doing that if there's at least a little evidence that it goes both ways.
Posted by: Polliwog
Unlikely, simply because their was no demographic that Romney won at a 96% level like Obama did with Blacks..
Heck, the exit polls said even the Mormons were only voting for Mitt at a 78% rate.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at November 29, 2012 02:28 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:29 PM (L7dvG)
The way that gimmick works is you voted "wrong" on a bullshit downticket race and need a new ballot...
...which they dutifully hand you...
...but don't confiscate your spoiled ballot and destroy it...
...and you feed both ballots into the precinct's counting machine.
Voila, a vote is manufactured out of thin air. The only one that will catch this is someone who manually tally's up the sign-in sheet and compares it against the mechanical counter's count of total ballots.
Posted by: @PurpAv at November 29, 2012 02:29 PM (upmAr)
For god's sakes, if you accept that blacks generally vote 92% for Democrats, where is all this suspicion coming from that with a black candidate for president -- given that some blacks actually think he's JESUS CHRIST ALMIGHTY -- you won't have some precincts hitting 99.5%?
No. To hit 99.5%, 199 out of 200 would have both wanted to vote Obama and managed to master the physics behind understanding how to and actually pulling the proper lever.
Like someone said earlier, how often do you type in a password incorrectly? Is it more or less than 1 out of 200 times? There is zero chance that 199 out of 200 voters both wanted to vote Obama and did not make a mistake in the booth.
And like I said, I believe there is almost zero chance that voter fraud cost Romney the election.
Posted by: AndrewsDad at November 29, 2012 02:30 PM (C2//T)
As the left told us, polls are perfect. So if the polls said 0.9% and Obama won by 4%, doesn't that say something about either polls or fraud?
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 29, 2012 02:30 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: tasker at November 29, 2012 02:31 PM (r2PLg)
138 >>>So as obnoxious as it may be...repetition works.
only when people can't change the channel.
Posted by: ace at November 29, 2012 06:20 PM (LCRYB)
------
Or...if it's on every channel.
Which is how the Dems do it.
But if something is outrageous enough, it get's out there.
That seems to be the ticket.
Something that is controversial, and catchy, gets repeated even by the Dem-controlled media.
For example...."Don't touch my Junk"....this got repeated a lot.
Posted by: wheatie at November 29, 2012 02:31 PM (CM59X)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at November 29, 2012 02:31 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: NC Ref at November 29, 2012 06:14 PM (LY9VZ)
Yes our machines are touchscreen. I don't know what they have. All he said was that there were interlocks and safeguards that prevented tampering. He said a LOT of them.
Posted by: Vic at November 29, 2012 02:31 PM (YdQQY)
The No. 1 issue Obama had in his favor this year was not his policies. It was that a majority of voters agreed with the statement: Obama "cares for people like me." "People like me" is a racial issue in 21st Century America.
Chronic mass immigration plus forced integration and assimilation (and affirmative action, set-asides, quotas and so on) are making that dominant "people like me" issue cut more in favor of liberals all the time, by changing the electorate to one that identifies more with the non-White (and miseducated anti-White) coalition known as the Democratic Party.
The right has to take on this machine or it will continue to be steamrolled; America will go the way of California.
Does anyone think that Democrats can't win in California without massive vote fraud?
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 29, 2012 02:32 PM (6AmAc)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 29, 2012 06:25 PM (HDgX3)
That was my suspicion actually, which leads to another point. Why is that? Have we really become just as segregated as before? Or is it that nothing's really changed and now the segreagation's more obvious as *all* now vote for the same party? I'm honestly asking since at under 40 and growing up in CO I really don't know. Most of the black people I grew up around were *actual* African-Americans who were studying at CSU and that's not the same thing at all.
Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette, still a Hobbit at November 29, 2012 02:33 PM (NYki8)
Posted by: tasker at November 29, 2012 02:34 PM (r2PLg)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:34 PM (L7dvG)
I don't disbelieve there was incidential fraud in certian places. But even if there was, I just have a hard time believing it made a difference in this election.
I totally making these numbers up, but lets say you had a precinct with 2,000 votes. Lets further assume that without fraud the precinct would have gone 90% Obama (1800 votes). Lets assume with fraud it went 98% Obama (1,960 votes). Yes, thats 160 votes. Multiply that by a few precincts it would have a made difference in Florida in 2000.
But in Florida in 2012, Obama won by 60,000 votes; in Virginia, he won by 150,000 votes and Ohio it was more than 100,000 votes. There would have had to have been systematic widespride fraud to get those kind of vote spreads. There is no evidence that there was that level of fraud.
Posted by: nc at November 29, 2012 02:34 PM (YvFZ3)
But the other key here is having the parties police it themselves
The Democrats police fraud for tips. The Republicans = RACIST!
Posted by: DaveA at November 29, 2012 02:35 PM (Xefrb)
Posted by: Truman North at November 29, 2012 02:35 PM (/Xglv)
Yeah that's where I am...I mean the 1-3% in donk towns is by rote and baked in the cake...I figure he grabbed maybe ~.5% extra in the "must stay blues" but folks our turnout sucked and we could have overcame it.
People are retards.
A majority does not want federal healthcare, Obama won and reid held.
A majority think that spending is the problem not undertaxation, Obama won Reid held.
Fuck 'em you sat at home you voted for what's coming.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 02:35 PM (LRFds)
That was my suspicion actually, which leads to another point. Why is that? Have we really become just as segregated as before? Or is it that nothing's really changed and now the segreagation's more obvious as *all* now vote for the same party? I'm honestly asking since at under 40 and growing up in CO I really don't know. Most of the black people I grew up around were *actual* African-Americans who were studying at CSU and that's not the same thing at all.
_____________________________________________________________
Blacks have been voting at least 90% for Democrats since the 70s. Going from 90-10 to 95-5 isn't really that big of a jump.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at November 29, 2012 02:36 PM (HDgX3)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:37 PM (L7dvG)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 02:37 PM (3zQJl)
In MS, 90% of whites voted for Romney. It was the same % in 2008 for McCain.
Are whites cheating in MS? How can these numbers be? Because white voters in MS do vote, regularly, and are overwhelmingly Republican and conservative. That's why no ads were run here.
Posted by: GnuBreed at November 29, 2012 02:38 PM (ccXZP)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 05:52 PM (3zQJl)
And get kicked out? Yeah, that worked really well in '12...
Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 29, 2012 02:38 PM (KL49F)
I don't doubt there's real Democrat fraud, but it really is at the extreme margins, much less than 1%, and mainly in places that weren't really in contention like Michigan, PA, Illinois, etc.
I still think the GOP should insist on Voter ID, it's almost always a political winner anyway and makes Democrats look like cheaters and I think it deflates a lot of potential fraud.
I still don't understand though WHERE the Bush 2004 voters went. I know in my area, Romney enthusiasm was far and away beyond what I saw for Bush's reelection campaign. Had those voters showed up, it would have been an epic knockout of Obama.
Posted by: McAdams at November 29, 2012 02:38 PM (sxk7T)
I'd like to believe you but I watched Cuyahoga sit out long enough to generate as many votes as needed.
Hell add in the systemic TRUE voter exclusion of the US forces afield.....
no add that and the "spigot cities" as braged on by Axelrod and there you have it..."could it have been done?" yeah maybe but unprovable and I freely acknowledge that.
This was probably the last election with a majority of native born Americans anyway......
move on dot org...
40 million guys named Juan and all the Jihadi Jims Ogabe can excuse in to our lovely ship.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 02:39 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: joeindc44 at November 29, 2012 02:39 PM (3zQJl)
I might sound more intelligent if I could spell.
Posted by: nc at November 29, 2012 02:39 PM (YvFZ3)
Exactly. My focus is on turnout %. I absolutely refuse to believe any large inner city precinct will hit 80% turnout, let alone 90%.
Posted by: Prescient11
Why? A precinct averages about 1100 voters, in a wide rage of less than 500 to more than 2700 voters. That's a reasonable number to flog for votes.
Also, with walk-up registration, you should have a 1:1 corrispondance on those new voters. With provisional ballots, you could even potentially get more than the pre-election registration 100%.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at November 29, 2012 02:39 PM (kdS6q)
Mostly on the mark IMHO.
The Fraud was largely baked in and if there was "new" or "over and above the call of duty" fraud it was likely sub 1%
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 02:40 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: tasker at November 29, 2012 02:40 PM (r2PLg)
The right has to take on this machine or it will continue to be steamrolled; America will go the way of California.
-------------------------------------------------
You better protect your loins. American HAS gone the way of California.
Posted by: Soona at November 29, 2012 02:40 PM (oy/E2)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:40 PM (L7dvG)
147 ...Also picture ID and an inked finger. Most problems solved.
Early voting is another very large invitation to fraud. Same as the loose requirement for absentee ballots.
Posted by: Soona at November 29, 2012 06:24 PM (oy/E2)
------
Yeah, when voting is going on for nearly a month...all kinds of fraud can happen.
And then we have a state like Oregon, which is all-votes-by-mail.
What could go wrong there. /
We need a standardized voting method for Presidential Elections.
I don't care how a state conducts their local elections.
But the Presidential Election affects us all.
Posted by: wheatie at November 29, 2012 02:41 PM (CM59X)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:43 PM (L7dvG)
Posted by: Polliwog the 'Ette, still a Hobbit at November 29, 2012 02:43 PM (NYki8)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:44 PM (L7dvG)
Posted by: Inspector Asshole at November 29, 2012 02:44 PM (IOSGZ)
Posted by: NC Ref at November 29, 2012 02:44 PM (r4GeY)
191
Â@
Obama won 51% of the popular vote and Romney won 47.5% of the popular vote. This was by no means a blow-out, but its also not really a superclose election. If this were Kennedy/Nixon 1960 or Bush/Gore 2000 -- yes, I could believe fraud made a difference. But in 51/47.5 race -- no, I just don't buy it.
Â@
That having been said, I am all in favor of voter ID laws and taking steps to stop fraud.
Posted by: nc at November 29, 2012 02:44 PM (YvFZ3)
if black voter fraud in Philly was so overwhelmingly important to TFG's win there?
___
I don't know if anyone is making the case that voter fraud in the Philly precincts tipped it to preaze...if my posts have given that impression it was not my intention.
I am venting due to having lived the ordeal of being the focus of national attention on presidential election days due to the outright blatant corruption of the Philly donk machine. Some of the scenarios I mentioned do point to GOP voter suppression tactics (by intimidation) and that is why I do not support the Banana Republic of Philadelphia with my consumer dollars.
TFG won PA by 5.4 points, well over the Philly fraud threshold.
Posted by: kallisto at November 29, 2012 02:45 PM (jm/9g)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at November 29, 2012 02:46 PM (L7dvG)
Posted by: Huusker at November 29, 2012 02:47 PM (PaKLC)
Hell I'm in the position of quitting punching at all.
Up down left right none of it matters.
We're not a serious nation and if I had a magical get out of jail free card and could wish people to the cornfield like in the Twilight Zone episode I'd ask people to explain the bill of rights and the founding to me and the moral case for the income tax.
I'm betting I'd leave less than 40 million people not in the cornfield.
Posted by: sven10077 at November 29, 2012 02:48 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Trimegistus at November 29, 2012 02:50 PM (XqWb3)
Where you have a Black population you're going to have a Black political culture. Where you have a Mexican / Mestizo population, you're going to have that political culture. Everybody including the Irish has historically had their own way of doing things.
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 29, 2012 02:52 PM (6AmAc)
And the PA GOP of course says nothing because, above all, we don't want to upset anyone. We must appear rational and good-natured, it's worked so well for us, you see. Because of course, even though the Dems have gone far beyond the pale in every area unimaginable, they would NEVER stoop to destroy the integrity of our elections, right? Just remember, it's us crazy folk who put up a fuss and embarrass the reasonable Republicans who know so much better and have worked with the Dems to govern us so well.
So I won't vote. And I certainly won't embarrass anyone.
Posted by: jeannebodine at November 29, 2012 02:52 PM (48+2q)
Laughing really hard at 'reporters are fantastically lazy individuals" Reminds me of my college roomate journo major.
In order to graduate he had to finish a paper and turn it by a certain date. He was a miserable procrastinator and missed the deadline. A week later he dropped the paper off at his professor's "NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR"S HOUSE" then called his professor a few days later and asked if he had received the paper that he had dropped off in his mailbox. Wanted to make sure he had the right house, and described the neighbors house.
I shit you not.
Posted by: simpleton at November 29, 2012 02:52 PM (za3QZ)
Posted by: Inspector Asshole at November 29, 2012 02:55 PM (IOSGZ)
_______
Thank you. that makes sense. I forgot the context.
Posted by: Baldy at November 29, 2012 02:57 PM (opS9C)
Posted by: ErikW on the damned phone at November 29, 2012 02:57 PM (XkQL7)
Posted by: ketos at November 29, 2012 03:03 PM (VK4bK)
There were over 70,000 "irregularities" in the voting on Nov. 6. That's not an accident.
Even in the inner city, it is so statistically improbable that there would be not even one vote for Romney in these precincts that it defies imagination.
Face it, Ace, there was vote fraud - massive vote fraud - taking place on election day, whether you wish to accept it or not. Barack Obama is NOT the legitimate President of the United States.
I think we're seeing Reason #3 in place - "I don't want to talk about the possibility of vote fraud because the punditocracy has already declared that 'unreasonable' and off-limits, so if I want to keep my cocktail party cred, then I better not mention it."
Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at November 29, 2012 03:09 PM (U+vgB)
Posted by: Truman North at November 29, 2012 03:11 PM (I2LwF)
@ 148 - "What the hell are the odds of that?"
Hey, the smart mil-blog guy says it's unreasonable and "punching down" to ask questions like that, so there ya go.
Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at November 29, 2012 03:13 PM (U+vgB)
Posted by: Truman North at November 29, 2012 03:17 PM (I2LwF)
Posted by: Tracy Coyle at November 29, 2012 03:22 PM (DGr/g)
SAME fucking people would not volunteer for a committee to investigate..fuck all you conspiracy mongers and the jackasses you rode in on.
Posted by: Jeanne the Obscure at November 29, 2012 03:33 PM (7SEMT)
Posted by: Alans at November 29, 2012 03:34 PM (V2OI+)
And if those electronic fraud-o-matic machines that flip votes flipped them both ways, some GOP votes would have stuck.
Even the other Hussain (Saddam) didn't claim 100% of the vote.
Posted by: Smarty at November 29, 2012 03:37 PM (a6pWJ)
Posted by: SamIam at November 29, 2012 04:22 PM (S09w5)
O's at 49% approval today. Leading up to the election he was rarely above 50%. And yet we're to believe he won? LOL.
Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 29, 2012 04:22 PM (KL49F)
Posted by: Aslan's Girl at November 29, 2012 04:24 PM (KL49F)
Vote fraud was the KEY COMPONENT of Obama's victory. First, he had about 10 million less votes than 2008. Inner-city Black people are dutiful and will vote for Obama? Really? Given that illegitimacy is over 90% in the Urban Core, and 48% of Detroit adults are illiterate, I would argue that this population is highly reflective of low rates of dutifulness and civic participation.
Second, Obama's victories were of ALL the swing states. Almost all of which were polled for Romney by a few percentage points days before the election. What's the probability Obama would take ALL of them?
Third, Republican voters were down low, down from 2008 levels, when all indications in polling, and on the ground rallies, showed massive increases in participation.
You want me to believe that somehow magically Republicans turned in massive waves for the 2010 CONGRESSIONAL elections but turned off because they could not vote against Obama (whom they HATE HATE HATE) by pulling the lever for the Mormon White guy.
Fourth, Republicans HELD THE HOUSE. Losses were minimal, about ten seats IIRC. Obama wins -- but Republicans hold the House? Please.
You are wrong because you miss the point.
No, even if the vote fraud were proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law, Obama would still be President. He's Black. There are different rules for him. That's both law and custom and the harvest of the Civil Rights movement and deification of Martin Luther King. There is no magic bullet to remove Obama -- only the long-shot of digging into the massive scandals of Fast and Furious and Benghazi gun-running to Al Qaeda and leaving the SEALS and Ambassador, Sean Smith to die. Even that is a long, long-shot.
The point is REPUBLICANS CANNOT WIN. EVER. BECAUSE DEMS CHEAT.
This is steroids in Baseball. Dems are roiding like crazy. They're not even hiding it. And Republicans will lose, lose, and LOSE! Every time. Unless they either force non-cheating by massive vote fraud catching (which is not realistic, since vote fraud by Blacks and other non-Whites is allowed and encouraged by the legal system and social attitudes period).
Or engage in it themselves. If no one is going to stop Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds and Sammy Sosa and Roger Clemens from roiding, EVER, then the solution is to out-roid the roiders.
Republicans ought to engage in systematic counter-fraud. The elections are as clean as Bill Clinton's man-parts. That won't ever change. The path to victory is tossing Dem ballots and creating your own.
Otherwise expect President Michelle Obama, followed by President Valerie Jarret, followed by President Kanye West, followed by President Jay-Z. Republicans could beat guys who followed the rules: Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, and John Kerry. They can't with guys who don't: Clinton and Obama.
Posted by: whiskeysplace at November 29, 2012 04:34 PM (4878o)
After reading out a scripted result regardless of the floor vote, and after countenancing various other anti-democratic moves at the Republican convention, John Boehner has no standing to make points like that.
Posted by: The Lightworker at November 29, 2012 04:34 PM (6AmAc)
obamavoterfraud.blogspot.com
(It looks like it hasn't been updated since the 8th, but it has -- he's just putting the new stuff at the bottom of that now-very-long post.)
And since I don't comment often enough to know how this works, the site is
obamavoterfraud with the dot-com ending on it.
All you people who say that fraud is 1% - 3%, or those who say there was fraud but it didn't cost us the election: where are you getting that information?
Posted by: pestilential at November 29, 2012 04:34 PM (3SW88)
Posted by: small town girl at November 29, 2012 04:39 PM (jpPSm)
I heard this in two places on the news.
Or cold blooded murder.
Posted by: Al Derecho at November 29, 2012 04:53 PM (frxVF)
Let. It. Burn.
Posted by: boulder hobo at November 29, 2012 05:11 PM (QTHTd)
Do the math, the election was stolen, again. Study the democrat machine it is not just gangster patronage and intimidation it is creating inner city ghettos to harvest votes by keeping the people dependant and ignorant of the greater world. It is not just fraud it is evil. They don't vote, the machine just writes their names in plus the names of the deceased and sports players. In Florida, they even use cartoon characters.
Democracy is a very repressive form of government the minority always gets screwed. It used to be Black folks now it is productive citizens. You knuckleheads need to read history. Voter fraud has truly ended the republic. I don't know about you but I look forward to my new poverty and serving my democrat masters.Posted by: den1313 at November 29, 2012 07:19 PM (yMk61)
Here in Iowa we filled out our ballots and then fed them into the machine. Got no hard-copy printout to certify what was actually recorded. The cold hard truth is we have no idea what happened to them after that.
Those anomalies at the polling places are nothing compared to what hackers could do. It isn't who votes. It's who counts the votes.
Posted by: creeper at November 30, 2012 04:11 AM (DCWLh)
Sorry about the long post. Short version is that Romney did not lose the election because of voter fraud. What fraud existed probably helped Obama more but was not decisive enough to sway the election such as Florida 2000.
The whole problem with election fraud is that it is devilishly hard to prove, many election administrators and poll workers make many mistakes, and we spend a lot less care with voter lists than we do with driver's licenses. Remember, never ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence.
Having spent roughly 4 years on a peer reviewed article on voter fraud, my co-author and I failed to find a single case of a dead voter rising to life to vote in the 2008 presidential election in a southern state with documented convictions in voter fraud.
We used multiple sources and when we had evidence of particular possibility of fraud, we then looked at the signed affidavit that our state requires each voter and poll worker to fill out. We had zero, zip, nada, evidence of a documented dead person voting in 2008 out of millions of voters (corroborated through the SS death index and the State's Dept. of Vital Statistics, as well as obituary searches).
Now, I personally believe that some common types of voter fraud exists--people who vote in two states, felons who are ineligible vote, non-citizens vote, vote buying, and gathering votes of incompetent voters (senile or mentally ill etc.). In all of these cases, we found convictions for these offenses in criminal courts throughout the states during our research phase. However, vote buying which occurs where walking around money is distributed to GOTV efforts is very hard to prove. Likewise, vote harvesting by those who go to group homes to register and collect absentee ballots are likewise difficult to prove because you must prove incompetence to prevent them from voting. Guardianship orders are not in typical databases to be searched and may not be in the jurisdiction where the vote harvesting occurs.
The easiest type of fraud to detect are people who vote in two states if a key index such as social security number is required for voter registration in both states. This can be done through database searches if the states gather enough personal information to match using database techniques. Occasionally, outright ballot box stuffing occurs but is usually easy to document as it uses absentee ballots that require documentation.
Last, but not least, I am contemplating a project to detect the incidence of non-citizens and felons voting using jury strike lists by using that sample to extrapolate to the population of the state. To serve on juries, you must be a citizen and usually not a felon who is on parole or probation (Maine allows inmates to vote) and states generally permit people in jail to vote who are not felons. Thus, anyone stating that they are ineligible to serve, under penalty of contempt, due to non-citizenship or being convicted of a felony should not be voting. Currently negotiating with the courts to gain county jury and non-eligible lists. As courts are not under FOIA type laws in this state, the negotiations are ticklish as this information is quasi-public.
Of the hard form of voter fraud, voter impersonation, ballot box stuffing, and intentionally voting in two states, is pretty rare. Of the softer forms of voter fraud, coaching incompetent voters, gathering votes from felons and illegal aliens, voters who get some money from their GOTV guy, these are more common.
Posted by: wg at November 30, 2012 04:52 AM (mXRhV)
Now maybe we shouldn't cry over spilt milk, but given the price of milk these days, some hue and cry is needed. Maybe a million discounted Obama votes might not balance 3 milllion Republican no-shows, but the actual popular vote was closer than expected, and could have swayed a count or two. Romney should have resorted to lawfare and refused concession until the votes were properly counted. What did he have to lose? Instead, he gave in and went home. I suppose those people who are blaming the consultant-types for the result can now extend their ire for telling Romney to "do the right thing" instead of standing up for his rights as a candidate, MSM tantrums be damned. (Who knows, a recount delay might have allowed those late-delivered military ballots to be added to the mix as well....)
By giving Obakand his cohorts a free pass on corruption, we allow them to run it again next time. Just because he couldn't really win the election on his own ideas doesn't mean he should have been allowed to buy the win. As much as we give Romney's campaign grief, he still managed to close the gap on Obaka and nearly win...except for the 99% turnout in Blue urban areas where overt favoritism was present and fraud went unchallenged.
Posted by: exdem13 at November 30, 2012 09:15 AM (1GunI)
Posted by: conexão T igual at December 01, 2012 10:35 PM (NSW03)
Posted by: Conexões circulares at December 01, 2012 10:36 PM (NSW03)
Posted by: Cotovelo de 180¡ã grau at December 01, 2012 10:37 PM (NSW03)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2362 seconds, 369 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: MotherGoos3 at November 29, 2012 01:36 PM (Km6fn)