[X-spurt]

Two things gave is a nobama reelection in 2012. First was 4 million “libertarian/conservative purists” sitting out a vote for a Mormon and second just enough dem vote fraud in key states to insure nobama reelection.

I did not like Mitt much either, but its demn impossible to argue that even at Mitt’s worst, he would not have been better than nobama.

[PA Engineer]

Two things gave is a nobama reelection in 2012. First was 4 million “libertarian/conservative purists” sitting out a vote for a Mormon and second just enough dem vote fraud in key states to insure nobama reelection.

I did not like Mitt much either, but its demn impossible to argue that even at Mitt’s worst, he would not have been better than nobama.

I agree with everything. Those that sat out gave the key election states the numbers they needed to rig the election. Pennsylvania was one of those states.

[Smokin' Joe]

First was 4 million “libertarian/conservative purists” sitting out a vote for a Mormon and second just enough dem vote fraud in key states to insure nobama reelection.

With electronic voting, vote fraud can work both ways. Some don't count, while others count more. it is conceivable that the percentages could be set to ensure the count came out as expected, regardless of the number of voters or how the votes were cast.

One of the few changes I would like to see made to the system is a vote for "none of the above". If the winner's count did not exceed the sum of the closest competitor plus the votes for 'none of the above', you have a do-over with new candidates.