Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did Obama Cheat? How to Answer the Question
American Thinker ^ | Nov 17, 2012 | Paul Murphy

Posted on 11/17/2012 11:40:15 AM PST by patriot08

November 17, 2012 Did Obama Cheat? How to Answer the Question By Paul Murphy

There are 15 states with photo ID requirements for voting. Mr. Obama lost in all of them. In places with the weakest controls, specifically counties in Florida, Ohio, Colorado, and Pennsylvania, he generally drew turnouts in the 90% or greater range and won by better than 95% of the vote. Losers tend to look for external explanations, and a lot of conservatives looking at numbers like those from Florida's St. Lucie County (where Mr. Obama got 247,713 votes from only 175,554 registered voters) are starting to question the legitimacy of the electoral results as reported. That's not good news for democracy, because the system works only if we trust it -- and having a majority in the GOP write off a minority who think the results were rigged serves nobody. Not even Democrats. So what we need is an independent means of testing the electoral result. The traditional way of doing this is, of course, to assume legitimacy, then gather anecdotal evidence of vote-cheating, promote that to sworn testimony through.... (Read Full Article)

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/did_obama_cheat_how_to_answer_the_question_comments.html#disqus_thread#ixzz2CVgxTUWw

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Conspiracy
KEYWORDS: obama; voterfraud; yes; yesobamacheated

1 posted on 11/17/2012 11:40:22 AM PST by patriot08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: patriot08
...Florida's St. Lucie County (where Mr. Obama got 247,713 votes from only 175,554 registered voters)

You would think that a fact like this would draw the interest of your average red-blooded all-America journalist.

2 posted on 11/17/2012 11:44:44 AM PST by fhayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

Of COURSE he cheated. But the sad part of the problem is,other than Allen West, and some Tea Party patriots, the Republicans are passing it off as a “ hispanic problem, lack of interest in Evangelical Christians, etc etc....

The election 2012 was STOLEN!!! Absolutely without a doubt.
Shame on our CONGRESS for not establishing a National VOTER ID law!


3 posted on 11/17/2012 11:46:07 AM PST by pollywog ("O Thou who changest not, abide with me.".......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patriot08
Obama got 247,713 votes from only 175,554 registered voters

What's more disturbing is that in '08 McRino pimped him saying we didn't have to be afraid of an Obama presidency and didn't press for equal vetting, and in '12 Romney isn't pursuing BLATANT voter fraud. We haven't had a two party system for at least the middle of W's reign.

4 posted on 11/17/2012 11:47:59 AM PST by bgill (We've passed the point of no return. Welcome to Al Amerika.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fhayek

“You would think that a fact like this would draw the interest of your average red-blooded all-America journalist.”

Their cause is more important than their craft. The ends justify the means is the mantra of American journalists.

Of my sons group of friends - only one voted for Obama. That fellow? Shoplifts all the time and sees nothing wrong with it. We feel like that pretty much sums up Obama supporters - which includes the media.


5 posted on 11/17/2012 11:48:46 AM PST by carmody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fhayek
You would think that a fact like this would draw the interest of your average red-blooded all-America journalist.

Where does this fact come from?

According to Florida Division of Elections St. Lucie County only counted 123,750 votes, a turnout of 70 percent.

6 posted on 11/17/2012 11:51:37 AM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fhayek
..Florida's St. Lucie County (where Mr. Obama got 247,713 votes from only 175,554 registered voters)

So that was the voter registration number on Oct 9th? If so, an election can't get more stinky than this.

- - - - - - - - - -

"Voter Registration Book Closing DatesBack

You can apply to register to vote at any time. However, to vote in an election, you must be registered in the state by the book closing date, which is normally the 29th day before each election. The book closing dates for the 2012 election cycle are:

PPP Election............. January 3, 2012
Primary Election........ July 16, 2012
General Election........ October 9, 2012 "

http://election.dos.state.fl.us/voting/voting-info.shtml

7 posted on 11/17/2012 11:54:48 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pollywog

Rats won’t want voter ID unless we out-cheat them.

I have updated my tag-line.


8 posted on 11/17/2012 11:55:36 AM PST by Aria ( 2008 & 2012 weren't elections - both were a coup d'etat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

It is not possible for a democrat to win an election without cheating in One way or another.


9 posted on 11/17/2012 11:55:41 AM PST by BigCinBigD (...Was that okay?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

Steyn or Hanson pointed out that in a few Philadelphia precincts, Obama got 100% to Romney’s 0% of the votes cast.

Gee whiz, professor—props to The Cipher!
The Wayback time machine tells us that he did even better than Josef Stalin, Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler or Korea’s Kims in their overwhelming electoral victories ...
And the birds sing his praises in human voices over at Demokrat Undersewer.


10 posted on 11/17/2012 11:57:06 AM PST by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: All armed conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

Why have I not heard ANYTHING from John fund on ANY of the talk shows on the TV, radio or Internet?


11 posted on 11/17/2012 11:57:40 AM PST by Captainpaintball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

Why have I not heard ANYTHING from John fund on ANY of the talk shows on the TV, radio or Internet?


12 posted on 11/17/2012 11:57:46 AM PST by Captainpaintball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drew68

My understanding is that each voter gets 2 cards when they vote and the 141% claim is because they listed total voters and total cards. Someone ran without factoring in the 2 cards per voter. So if that is true then the actual 70% turnout makes sense.


13 posted on 11/17/2012 11:59:34 AM PST by Aria ( 2008 & 2012 weren't elections - both were a coup d'etat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Drew68

“Where does this fact come from?”

It was a two page ballot, with a lot of local issues. 125,000 + 125,000= 250,000 (approx). It’s a bogus number. Every voter had two ballot cards.


14 posted on 11/17/2012 11:59:34 AM PST by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fhayek

You would think that “facts” like that would make intelligent readers think twice about believing what they are reading.

The statement is false. It is clearly false. You’d have to be stupid to think a politician who just ran for office would ignore such an obvious indication of fraud.

There were two ballots per voter, and some idiot took the count of “ballots” and thought it was a count of voters, and then wrote a blog entry, and other blogs picked it up, and it became “common knowledge”.

The internet allows a stupid person to get national prominence before sanity kicks in.


15 posted on 11/17/2012 12:00:56 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fhayek

Why is this not contested by the GOP? It seems that until the electoral college votes on December 17 that we should be fight.

St. Lucie County (where Mr. Obama got 247,713 votes from only 175,554 registered voters)


16 posted on 11/17/2012 12:04:51 PM PST by ncfool (Obama's aMeriKa 2012 can we make it until 2016?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bgill

[ Romney isn’t pursuing BLATANT voter fraud ]

He took a DIVE.. I told you so... <<— complicit...


17 posted on 11/17/2012 12:12:12 PM PST by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

I appreciate the collective wisdom of FreeRepublic to set the record straight.


18 posted on 11/17/2012 12:13:29 PM PST by fhayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

The flop horse flopped just like the last article 2 ineligible candidate we ran.


19 posted on 11/17/2012 12:18:47 PM PST by rawcatslyentist ("Behold, I am against you, O arrogant one," Jeremiah 50:31)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Aria
My understanding is that each voter gets 2 cards when they vote and the 141% claim is because they listed total voters and total cards. Someone ran without factoring in the 2 cards per voter. So if that is true then the actual 70% turnout makes sense.

It does make sense, and then counting like this makes for an easy set-up for fraud because...

dividing by 2 to get the ‘actual voter count’ is a set-up for fraud since this is really a percentages of pages or “cards casted.”

Say 300 voters of 850 registered voter precinct voted, but 100 of them under-voted by voting on one page of a two page multi-form ballot, the cards casted would be 100 for this group.

The rest of the 200 voters filled out both pages for a total of 400 "votes" or really cards annotated as votes.

So that’s is 200 x 2 = 400 cards cast, and 100 x 1 = 100 cards cast here is a total of 500 or 58.8% of the 850 total registered voter for that precinct.

When 500 divide (cards cast) by 2 which equals 250 voters, which as we see doesn’t add up to the 300 voters who actually voted in this example.

If all 300 voters voted on both pages it would be a 600 card count and the card cast % would be 70.58%.

So is it 250 votes or it 300 voters? This counting method used by St Lucie County can be used to manipulate the total votes.

20 posted on 11/17/2012 12:22:08 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: patriot08
I'm getting tired of so many conservatives making conservatives look like idiots. We are supposed to be the intelligent group.

There are 15 states with photo ID requirements for voting.

This is correct. The states are: Idaho, South Dakota, Arizona, Kansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Hawaii, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Tennessee, Georgia, and Florida.

Mr. Obama lost in all of them.

President Obama won Hawaii, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida. So he won 5 of the 15.

The other 10 are conservative states where he was not expected to be competitive. Conservatives like voter ID photo ID laws, so it's not surprising that conservative states passed these laws, or that Obama lost them.

The writer got his facts wrong, and then used faulty logic to try to make a point unsupported by his facts.

In places with the weakest controls, specifically counties in Florida, Ohio, Colorado, and Pennsylvania, he generally drew turnouts in the 90% or greater range and won by better than 95% of the vote.

The only criteria the writer has for "weakest controls" is that he claims it, based on the outcome. The claim of 90% turnout was false, and debunked in several news stories. No claim for the 90% is ever accompanied by an actual link to voting results. Obama did win some precincts by 95% or better, but so did every democrat running in those precincts over the last 10 years, because there are in fact places where everybody is a liberal democrat.

Losers tend to look for external explanations,

Especially easily deceived losers who like to grasp at straws and live in a fantasy world.

and a lot of conservatives looking at numbers like those from Florida's St. Lucie County (where Mr. Obama got 247,713 votes from only 175,554 registered voters)

That claim is false, started by an idiot who saw a report on the number of ballots returned, and didn't know that there were two ballots per voter. Now lots of conservatives repeat this stupid claim because they can't be bothered to check the facts.

are starting to question the legitimacy of the electoral results as reported.

This is one of those "action sentences" used by writers who don't have anything useful to say, but want to suggest that other people have bought into their delusion.

Sad thing is, there are real issues, but they are being buried by the absurd global conspiracy arguments being made, which act only to make conservatives look stupid.

That's not good news for democracy,

That's not good for conservatives, when our own side makes us look like fools.

because the system works only if we trust it -- and having a majority in the GOP write off a minority who think the results were rigged serves nobody.

Not sure what the writer's point is here -- he starts out talking about trusting the system being important, and then faults people for not buying into rediculous conspiracy theories. Not even Democrats. So what we need is an independent means of testing the electoral result.

Something the writer has no clue about how to actually do. For example, you could take a precinct where you think the results are odd, and then look at the historical data for that precinct. I did this for several of the precincts mentioned in various blogs, and found that the results of this election match historical norms.

You can also compare results to polls, and in this case you find the polls match the election results, even unvarnished trivial looks like the RCP average, which shows that Obama was leading in 3 of the 4 swing states mentioned in this article. The traditional way of doing this is, of course, to assume legitimacy, then gather anecdotal evidence of vote-cheating, promote that to sworn testimony through.....

That's hardly the "traditional way" of testing the results. What that is is simply the traditional outcome of an election. We "assume" legitimacy because there's no value in assuming fraud. Do you go to the grocery store assuming that all the food has been poisoned, and then buy equipment to test all your food when you get home to be, sure it is safe? No, you assume that if there was poison you'd find out about it pretty quickly.

The system works, because unlike the fantasy world occupied by the conspiracists who give conservatives a bad name, in the real world people who run for office actually want to win more than anything, having invested their lives in the process, and therefore are highly motivated to examine the election outcome and find evidence that they were cheated.

A perfect example of this is Allen West, who isn't the exception, but the norm. He saw things that looked wrong, and he pushed for a recount. We don't know how that will turn out.

I've never known a politician who would walk away from a fraudulent result without a fight. People who would do so would never get into politics in the first place.

21 posted on 11/17/2012 12:23:08 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

The one party system probably started long before W but I failed to notice it until W’s second term he suddenly changed and seemed to have a severe case of the body snatchers. Now we know he and daddy are just as lib as the Clintons.


22 posted on 11/17/2012 12:27:16 PM PST by bgill (We've passed the point of no return. Welcome to Al Amerika.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

BTW, I’m sure there was voter fraud, and I wouldn’t be surprised if somewhere it was enough to throw an election.

Unfortunately, I also am sure that we’ll never know about it, in no small part because of the vast conspiracy theory meme being thrown around.

Nobody can actually look for real fraud, because there is too much disinformation; people are grasping at straws, and missing the substance.


23 posted on 11/17/2012 12:29:55 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

<>(where Mr. Obama got 247,713 votes from only 175,554 registered voters)<>

That is pure bs. Any lame brain at American Thinker with a computer could check and find out that Obama got 66,246 votes in St Lucie.

When are “conservatives” going to quit with this blatant lie.

http://www.slcelections.com/Pdf%20Docs/2012%20General/GEMS%20SOVC%20REPORT.pdf

Now what is true and worth noting is that the Democrat Supervisor of Elections Dirty Gerty Walker got 76,000 votes — 10,000 more than Obama — while her Republican opponent got 41,000 — 15,000 less than Romney. How is that even remotely possible???

That should raise eyebrows.


24 posted on 11/17/2012 1:02:10 PM PST by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patriot08
Did Obunga cheat?

Is the bear Catholic? Does the Pope....

/R Crumb

25 posted on 11/17/2012 1:34:56 PM PST by doorgunner69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ncfool; Captainpaintball
Why haven't we heard anything from John Fund, talk radio, etc?

Why is this not contested by the GOP?

This may explain it...

Why the GOP won't challenge voter fraud.

Includes interview snip with True the Vote spokesperson.

26 posted on 11/17/2012 1:41:27 PM PST by Jane Long ("Miss me yet?" - Mitt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

http://enight.dos.state.fl.us/CountyReportingStatus/


27 posted on 11/17/2012 2:03:15 PM PST by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: bgill

Whole Bush family are one worlders...


28 posted on 11/17/2012 2:25:08 PM PST by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: bgill; rawcatslyentist; Whosoever

Running the inventor of Romney-care against the inventor of Obama-care..
WHAT COULD GO WRONG?..


29 posted on 11/17/2012 2:28:09 PM PST by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

When these counties are announced, IF SOMEONE VOTED for Romney, LET HIM or HER COME FORWARD and announce that his/her WAS NOT COUNTED!!

Where are these people???????


30 posted on 11/17/2012 3:14:13 PM PST by noah (noah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

We no longer have a democracy, with our Pravda main stream media and crooked election system.


31 posted on 11/17/2012 4:14:30 PM PST by The_Media_never_lie (Actually, they lie when it suits them! The crooked MS media must be defeated any way it can be done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe

There haven’t been any article 2 eligible candidates from either party for the last 2 elections. No, just a coincidence, back to the salt mines serf.


32 posted on 11/17/2012 4:26:18 PM PST by rawcatslyentist ("Behold, I am against you, O arrogant one," Jeremiah 50:31)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

You need to stop posting such fact-driven and common sense responses on these threads. You’ll put a real crimp in people’s delusion of having been “stabbed in the back.”

Wait, never mind. Looking downthread I see nobody has bothered to try to refute your comments, just continued on with the conspiracy claims.

FWIW, I’m in Florida, and they asked to see my driver’s license and looked it up to see if I was registered before I was given a ballot.


33 posted on 11/17/2012 4:34:10 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist
There haven’t been any article 2 eligible candidates from either party for the last 2 elections.

On what basis are Romney, Ryan, Biden or Palin ineligible?

34 posted on 11/17/2012 4:36:02 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

The RNC and DNC made their Consent Decree 30 years ago, in 1982. The agreement in effect gives a carte blanche to the Democrat Party to commit vote fraud in every voting district across America that has, in the language of the Consent Decree, “a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations.”

http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/why-the-gop-will-not-do-anything-about-vote-fraud/


35 posted on 11/17/2012 6:01:25 PM PST by Mortrey (Impeach President Soros)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Romneys father was Mexican, McLame was born in a Panamanian hospital.


36 posted on 11/17/2012 6:34:29 PM PST by rawcatslyentist ("Behold, I am against you, O arrogant one," Jeremiah 50:31)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: patriot08

Did you put this political essay in chat?


37 posted on 11/17/2012 6:35:05 PM PST by neverdem ( Xin loi min oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mortrey

Preposterous. Not buying it.


38 posted on 11/17/2012 6:35:19 PM PST by patriot08 (Native Texan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist

Romney’s father was born in Mexico to two American citizens, making him by the laws of the time an American citizen, though arguably not a natural-born citizen. Romney himself was born in the USA to two American citizens, making him NBC by even the most stringent standards I’ve seen proposed.

You seem to be proposing that the parents of a presidential candidate must themselves be NBC, which I think carrying the argument a generation too far.

Are you proposing that the child of two American citizens serving overseas in the US military should be ineligible for the presidency because his parents served their country? Doesn’t that sound just a trifle harsh even to you?


39 posted on 11/17/2012 7:03:53 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

It just seems more than coincidence that the RNC aka DNCII chose these two to run against a clearly non American candidate.


40 posted on 11/17/2012 7:10:22 PM PST by rawcatslyentist ("Behold, I am against you, O arrogant one," Jeremiah 50:31)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

I ignored it for almost 2 weeks, hoping it would die down, but it has become metastasized.


41 posted on 11/17/2012 10:03:50 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: pollywog

Shame on our CONGRESS for not establishing a National VOTER ID law!


That bears repeating.


42 posted on 11/17/2012 10:15:41 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
You seem to be proposing that the parents of a presidential candidate must themselves be NBC, which I think carrying the argument a generation too far.

I'm curious... Is there any mechanism in place in any state to compel a presidential candidate to provide the citizenship status of his parents at the time of such candidate's birth?

Somehow, I doubt it.

43 posted on 11/17/2012 10:22:10 PM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Drew68

“Is there any mechanism in place in any state to compel a presidential candidate to provide the citizenship status of his parents at the time of such candidate’s birth?”

It should be automatic that whether or not a candidate for Pres. is a “natural born citizen” be determined by a duly certified commission. This would require a showing that the candidate’s parents were U. S. citizens at the time of his birth on U. S. territory.
Of course, all of this has been rendered moot in the special case of Kenyan (culturally, irrespective of place of birth) Muslim B. Hussein Obama.


44 posted on 11/17/2012 10:37:14 PM PST by Elsiejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Drew68
AFAIK, there is no mechanism in any state to compel a presidential candidate to provide proof of his own citizenship status.
45 posted on 11/18/2012 2:50:05 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
Shame on our CONGRESS for not establishing a National VOTER ID law!

Doing so would require a national ID registration system. Which gets the panties of a lot of people around here seriously bunched.

Also, the Constitution, except as amended, gives the power to set voting qualifications to the states. Federalism and all that.

46 posted on 11/18/2012 2:56:53 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson