Posted on 12/05/2012 4:25:13 AM PST by Kaslin
Thank you, patriot08.
Thanks for the ping!
There is plenty of evidence of various types of fraud and cheating that seemed to have been carefully targeted to 'Rat infested cities and counties in swing states. (see http://nachumlist.com/obamafraud.htm) It certainly seems strange that reputable pollsters had Romney with a slim lead nationally in the popular vote, and slightly ahead or even in all the battleground states on the day before the election. So how do you explain the discrepency between these final poll results and the alleged results of the election? Why did these pollsters fail to measure accurately what supposedly occurred in the election? There may have been some other factors that played a role, but the most logical explanation is 'rat fraud and cheating. Simply put, the polls are designed to forecast the outcome based on a model which assigns one and only one vote to each eligible and likely voter. No pollster can handle and forecast alteration in the numbers induced by the fraud and cheating!
Why were the professionals managing Romney's campaign "shellshocked" on election night? Because their internal pollsters, assuming a fair election, had pretty much assured them that they were likely to win. In other words, they were blindsided in such a way that 'Rat fraud and cheating would be by far the most logical way to account for the discrepencies! (Yes, the Romney people lacked the guts to say out loud that such was the case, but read between the lines.)
I haven’t verified these numbers, but in a report from The Ulsterman Report, one of the posters said the following:
“I was never a math wizard, but managed to master addition and subtraction pretty well in grade school, and I’m really confused. On election day 2012 the U.S. Had a total of 90,682,968 registered voters. However, the total votes cast were 126,985,809. I don’t know about you, but I find that very confusing. That’s 36,302,841 more votes cast than there were regIstered voters. Same thing in 2008 except that the difference was about 35,000,000. So what is the logical conclusion? Rigged machines, fraudulent voters, dead voters? Funny thing, same guy won both elections. So, whatcha think?”
http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/12/05/insider-vs-insider-stolen-stolen-stolen/
That would be strange, except that Obama was ahead in polling all the battleground states he won, except for Florida.
The national lead is a hard thing to measure exactly; the best polls still had a margin of error that was greater than the actual election results -- in other words, the election outcome fell well within the polling margin.
I'm familiar with the various lists; most of the items in them are general comments not verifiable, or anecdotal stories with no physical evidence. There are some specific claims. Those claims turn out to be false, or misunderstanding of the facts.
For example, the list says the Allen West district had a vote of 141% of the registered voters -- that was false, someone misread an election report and thought the count of ballots was the count of voters. The report clearly stated a turnout of 71%, and ballots of 141% because there were two ballots per voter.
Another example; it claims there was a county in Ohio where Obama got 108% of the registered votes. That would be a clear sign of fraud. But it was entirely false. First, the "108%" number was the number of REGISTERED voters compared to the number of eligible citizens based on the census. That's because Ohio is lousy at clearing the registration rolls. The county included a college, and college students register, and then don't unregister when they graduate.
Second, the actual VOTE was 57% of the total registered vote. That number is below Ohio average, by about 8% -- precisely what you'd expect if the registration was inflated by 8%. So there were NO MORE VOTES than you would expect.
THIRD, Obama didn't get 108%, or even 57% -- he only got half the total vote, or about 28%.
Another claim was that a precinct in Richmond gave Obama all but one vote, and that was somehow "unprecedented". But a search of the voting records for that precinct (easy to do here in virginia) shows that this precinct always votes almost exclusively democrat. McCain got 3 votes. McDonnell in his crushing victory in 2012 got 6 votes.
Another claim was that multiple precincts in Ohio went almost exclusively for Obama. True, but again, misleading -- an almost identical number of precincts went overwhelmingly for Obama in 2008. Maybe they did the same fraud both elections.
But that points out another problem -- that complaint is just inference. We can't "fathom" that there would be a place in the middle of a decaying city where the only people living there would vote democrat. Frankly, I'm surprised republicans get as many votes as they do in those public housing units and slums. But by all means we should do some investigating, ask people to anonymously come forward if they voted for Romney.
But seriously -- we have yet to see a signed affidavit from ANY of those "59 philadelphia precincts that went 100% for Obama" by ANY republican who voted for Romney. What is more likely -- that there actually are 59 places in Philly where nobody votes republican, or that there are at least 59 people brave enough to vote republican, but then too scared to identify themselves in order to prove fraud?
Then there is the complete anecdotal stories of "busloads of voters" coming from Illinois to register and vote in Wisconsin. Well, Wisconsin is controlled by republicans. So if nothing else, they certainly could check the addresses given.
But worse -- Obama won by 200,000 votes. So to actually change the outcome of the election this way, the democrats had to drive 7000 buses full of people, and have them all register and vote fraudulently. Do I believe that there were some people who did this? Sure -- I don't have proof, but why wouldn't someone do it? But 200,000? or 20,000? No evidence exists for this level of cheating.
There's the claims that voting machines "changed votes". But every report of that is that the machines "SHOWED" a different selection. And every report says the voters saw it, and got their votes correct. I'm not a fan of the electronic machines, but they tell you multiple times who you voted for, so errors are caught. The machines get out of alignment -- there's a youtube showing a machine giving Romney the Obama selection. No evidence exists that any machines were deliberately miscalibrated, or that any significant number of vote mis-registration was MISSED by the voters.
THere is one particulary "specific" anecdote, told by a supposed poll worker, who claimed he WATCHED the machines change people's votes. Later though he mentions that he was monitoring the voter address checks, and thought he saw voter check-offs disappear (which would ALLOW another person to claim the same name/address -- although he didn't say he saw THAT). Two problems with his story -- first, there is no place where a poll worker is ALLOWED to actually watch people cast votes, and second, if he was assigned to watch the check-in process, he wouldn't have had hours watching the voters vote.
There was the Maine GOP guy who claimed a bunch of blacks showed up to register and vote in a nearly all-white community. He had to withdraw his claim and apologize.
There was another "observation" of Somalians voting en masse. But no pictures, and no indication how they knew the people were Somali, or how they "knew" they weren't naturalized citizens who were legally voting. There are millions of naturalized citizens that still look foreign.
The problem is first, it's a lot more fun to scream "fraud", and second, it's a lot easier to string together two dozen unsourced, unverifiable accusations and make it sound like there is SO MUCH EVIDENCE that it must be true; it is very HARD to get people to give specifics, and then to research every specific. For example, it took me an hour to do the analysis of the Richmond precinct -- it only too 10 seconds for someone to scan the 2012 vote and see the precinct.
I'll say to you what I say to everybody. If you have a specific claim of fraud, please post it here, and I'll be glad to investigate it and tell you what I think. SO far, nobody who claims massive fraud has been willing to give me any such specific claims to checkout.
Last thing -- when did republicans suddenly start taking polling as gospel? I remember when we mocked the democrats for claiming Republicans must have stolen the election, because Kerry was winning the exit polls.
Of course not. The analysis has not been done, probably will not be done, will be jumped on as “partisan” if done and an inconvenient result is shown. So this is all speculation and wishful thinking. No sense getting hung up on it. Obama is in, will stay in barring Divine intervention of some sort, and what cannot be remedied must be endured.
.
No Conservative would stalk the ‘voter fraud’ posts and get so spastic trying to ‘prove’ that there was no fraud- when obviously there was. All the major Conservative sites have issued articles declaring voter fraud.
The same two pop up on all the ‘voter fraud threads’ and post lengthy tirades against any possibility of fraud.
Could it be they don’t want the truth out?
They are so obvious, and they’re making complete fools of themselves.
.
No, the other way around. I always see same old links to crap posted by people who never actually read and respond to each point in the "lengthy tirade. That "lengthy tirade" is just a list of facts. The rest of us are just too tired or busy to come on every thread and do that. Do you acknowledge there was not over 100% turnout anywhere? Do you acknowledge that Obama got 93% of the black vote according to exit polls and that the black ghetto vote is generally higher than that?
In short is there any single website with accurate information on the issue? A link to inaccurate claims (e.g. 140% in St Lucie or something like that) invalidates a website because that is very easy to verify. If the website writers don't bother verifying a trivially verifiable claim like that, then I would expect the rest of the information to be unverified as well. Do you have any valid websites to link to?
No Conservative would stalk the ‘voter fraud’ posts and get so SPASTIC trying to ‘prove’ that there was no fraud- when obviously there was. All the major Conservative sites have issued articles declaring voter fraud- Breitbart, American Thinker, Atlas Shrugs, WND, The Blaze, Front Page Magazine, Fox News, The Daily Caller, Town Hall, Human Events..
http://www.ObamaVoterFraud.com/
Human Events’, report pollwatcher EYEWITNESS to busload of Somalians at Ohio poll, spoke no English, told to vote Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=LbOtYQceBxI
Nachum’s List of Voter Fraud:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2960108/posts
Funny, you and another troll pop up on all the ‘voter fraud threads’ and post lengthy spastic tirades against any possibility of fraud.
Could it be you don’t want the truth out?
I don’t know about that.
The time for uniting is before an election.
Now is a time for careful appraisal. And a new party is possible.
Not saying it’s likely, or wanted, but now is the time to explore possibilities.
makes me wonder why they stalk the voter fraud threads and then tell us that no fraud took place or its not a problem move on.
Maybe they have more of an agenda than a conservative one IMHO.
You keep the good work upm, there are always folks around trying ti shut us up, hell look at the homosexual agenda and how conservatives for the most part never say boo about it now.
Your innuendo does not impress me in the least. Nobody talks about how Planned Parenthood spent our tax money to buy the election in Virginia except me. Hardly anyone mentions the foreign donations, nobody talks about the manipulation of gas prices so that they fell one month before the election. Instead you point to a bunch of low quality link aggregators without much quality research behind it. Show me your own research with links all the way to the raw data (some is available amidst the debris on the sites you link). I like quality, not crap.
I think you’ve pretty well outed yourself to your fellow FReepers. Why don’t you go back to Du where you fit in better.
I think the election was stolen by Karl Rove and the other party elitists who got a liberal nominated. Once Romney was chosen, Obama didn’t have to cheat or even try very hard.
It’s almost too depressing to discuss it. Since the election I have read and participated in threads on how we lost, but we have NO LEADERSHIP and no one will do anything, not even tell the truth about the Dems / media / admin.
It’s like we are in some kind of psychological trap. A political bizarro world. How will we ever emerge?
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.