[Political Junkie Too]

You're welcome. I tracked the election very closely in 2012, and put out weekly updates for FreeRepublic.

If you go to the CNN Election site for 2012, select a swing state and mouse over each county, you will see where the imbalances in the blue counties pop out.

When a swing state goes 51-47 for Obama, most of the counties are either 55-45 Romney, or 51-49 Romney, or 51-49 Obama, EXCEPT for one or two urban center counties that are 65-35 Obama or higher. It's in those few counties where the vote fraud swings a state.

Target the fraud to a handful of swing counties in swing states, and you tilt the election.

It's really true about the sports cliche that the game was closer than the score indicates. People can tout that Obama beat Romney by 4.7 million votes, or he won 51-47, but when you dig deeper into how Obama ran the table on all of the swing states, and you see that it came from just a few counties in those swing states, then you see the real story of what happened.

The race was won by about a million votes across about 5 states.

But what do I know? I'm just an ignorant FReeper.

-PJ

[Resettozero]

I had bookmarked that site a year or two ago but now feel I have something clearer in mind when I return to study it...hopefully bright and early tomorrow morning. Thanks again; you’ve spurred me on. (I love such facts.)

[tanknetter]

It's really true about the sports cliche that the game was closer than the score indicates. People can tout that Obama beat Romney by 4.7 million votes, or he won 51-47, but when you dig deeper into how Obama ran the table on all of the swing states, and you see that it came from just a few counties in those swing states, then you see the real story of what happened.

Sorry, meant to include the following in my previous email but got a little too enthusiastic in hitting post. :)

Obama's success in those states/counties/precincts can be attributed to his GOTV system (Narwhal). While I'm not dismissing the existence or impact of fraud, it's clear that Narwhal (in probable conjunction with the "Catalist" system) worked as advertised.

This allowed the Obama Campaign to be incredibly efficient in doing the "knock and drag" thing to get its voters to the polls. They knew where their voters were (urban areas) and pulled out all the stops in those areas to maximize turnout. Consider this: its MUCH easier for the average Democrat activist to get 20 or 30 or 40 voters from high-density urban areas to their polling station than it is for a Republican to do the same in the more dispersed suburbs, exurbs and rural areas (where Republicans and Conservatives tend to be located).

Both campaigns tried to pull out the stops in going as efficient as possible to turn out their voters. And they allocated resources where they thought it would do maximum good (which actually explains the low urban Romney turnout - Romney just didn't stage his GOTV personnel there because they saw it as low-ROI areas.)

But Romney, with a more dispersed voter base, had the harder task.

Then his system crashed.