Posted on 11/08/2012 9:13:45 PM PST by Kevin in California
President Obama must have run a great campaign considering the tremendous numbers he put up in numerous big cities. Over in Philadelphia, he was lucky enough to get 90% percent turnout in some districts with over 99% of the vote.
It could be totally-canvassed easily. Who says those are all normal polling-place votes?
The media would just call them racist.
Indeed the excuses FOR them are more racist than any investigator would be.
Huh? There isn't a racist bone in my body. Why would you accuse me of something like that? I speak the truth about how ghetto dwellers vote. It is what it is. There is just no disputing it.
Show your scientific independent studies.
> I heard that Zero didn’t carry a single state that has
> voter I.D. laws.
Patently false.
NH has voter ID laws, and he carried it 52-48.
Between the early voting shenanigans and kicking out Republican poll watchers, I guess all they have to do is fill in ballots for anyone they missed.
If the latter, someone may raise the issue of voter fraud, at least on Fox News.
Yeah that's right, Longbow.
And the same people that told you that,
Maybe you should ask 99.7% Rush Limbaugh that question since he has been saying it for the last year. Where have you been???
The truth is the polls were right.
Was the prediction of vote fraud right too???
The stories of better-than-100% turnout are legion, if not in this election, in others.
It’s treated as a joke, like the cemetery vote in Chicago.
“Did somebody hack the machines?”
Well, I don’t think PBS would broadcast it if it had that capacity. This was sophisticated technology that was explained as get out the vote equipment. It collected so much information about voters, it was unbelieveable plus it created almost a friendship between the volunteers and the voters. The volunteers knew everything about the voter, even special needs, so the voters in the neighborhoods trusted the campaign workers from Obama’s camp. There was never a doubt who they would all vote for. The apparatus had been in place since Obama’s first election....4 years. Romney couldn’t get any technology on the ground with volunteers until he won the nomination. A few months at most. As far as fixing the machines? They forcibly removed our court appointed poll watchers. Even though a judge ordered them back, anything could have happened in a short time they were gone.
The way I read it was 100% turnout in some of the districts.
I’m sorry Hi-Tech, I guess I am lost. Scientific studies, independent studies of what?
Democrats had, in many states nearly a month with early voting, plenty of time to empty the ghettos for their candidate. Black people vote overwhelmingly Democrat, that is the case in nearly every major urban area in the nation. This isn’t some kind of secret, there is no proof necessary. Simply go to any urban are and look at the turnout. Black people vote Democratic. Black people vote even more Democratic when the candidate is a black Democrat. I am really not sure what you are asking for.
Black Democrats in places like Philadelphia, Cleveland, Detroit, simply empty the ghetto’s building by building and turn those people out to the polls. It isn’t even necessary to tell them how to vote. They know already. They vote Democrat. If the candidate is black, all the more reason to vote Democrat.
“I’m sorry petitfour, but you can’t prove fraud. If you could, this would be a national story on at least the Fox News network.”
YES in this case one CAN prove fraud because if people in those counties DID vote for Romney, they can prove that this was fraud. If the numbers were 89% then it might be hard to prove but in every county where results show 100%, voters should speak up who voted for Romney.
Much of the cheating is probably not provable, like illegals voting, like people voting more than once...but that is because we don’t have voter id. Sigh!
You very well know of what, you disingenuous troll.
Keep in mind that we don’t know what that 100% even refers to...how many of those voters are even legal, even exist, or have just one registration?
I guess we just let it go, you know, in the spirit of comity.
Sounds like a Chavez victory.
I think they were supposed to be able to check the machines before voting began to make sure no votes had already been recorded.
I live in a very affluent, and white if it must be said, area of west suburban Chicago. At my polling place the ballots were predominately optical scan sheets. There were a dozen or so “booths” or stands, for filling these out, and a single electronic station, which was being hawked by the election officials to little avail.
These optical sheets are, in fact, “paper ballots”, and anyone in control of a polling place which has them could stuff the ballot box with them to their heart’s content with impunity. The only mark on the ballots is an initial in the corner, so no problem there. An audit would have to match the ballot count with the voting records, but these are just more pieces of paper, ostensibly signed by the voter. At my poll they had my signature on the sheet, which was compared visually by several ( aged ) officials with the fresh signature, which is in fact rather distinctive. I’d love to look through some of the Philly records, if they do it the same way. A rather imaginary exercise, I imagine.
Remember all that garbage about how it didn't matter how long the GOP primary went on? Yeah.... It did matter. Our nominee needed as much time as possible to try to come up to par with what the Obama campaign had going. Sadly, he didn't have it. I wouldn't mind if our primary had real candidates. Instead we had idiots like Cain and, as it turns out, Newt (who I once supported after Perry dropped), who had utterly no chance to win a national election.
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.