Posted on 11/08/2012 1:59:35 PM PST by CreviceTool
Ran across this on Quora: What is the minimum number of people who would have had to change their vote for Romney to have won?
Richard Tabassi, Renaissance Ape, Occasionally Witty Biped
Around 1/3 of a million in the right states. [1,2,3,4] EC 18:Ohio[1] Romney needed 103,520 people to win EC 29:Florida[2] Romney needed 50,869 people to win EC 13: Virginia[3] Romney Needed 111,985 people to win EC 6: Nevada[4] Romney Needed: 66,380 to win
Total: 332,754 to win Electoral College
There might be a combination that get him there in a shorter amount that I am not seeing yet, will update when I have time to crunch more numbers.
[1]Election results (huffingtonpost.com) Ohio [2]Election results (huffingtonpost.com) Florida [3]Election results (huffingtonpost.com) Virginia [4]Election results (huffingtonpost.com) Nevada
And if the dog hadn’t stopped to poop, he would have caught the rabbit.
RINO File.
Yeah, they think they would rather have obama.
That assumes you can SWITCH an obama to a Romney. Won't happen in most cases. So, you still have to have 300,000+ more Romney votes.
I calculate the following:
Fl 46,666 diff 29
Va 100,499 13
OH 107,421 18
NH 40,421 4/64 + 206=270
147.415 vote change from obama to Romney
Few enough votes that there is no doubt in my mind that fraud made the difference.
I think we just witnessed the democrat machine step beyond manufacturing dem votes to also destroying R votes. I know our absentee ballots didn’t make it in PA because I ended up being here and went to check at the polls, but there is much more to it than that.
My first “Oh Sh**” moment of the night was when they put up the early/absentee votes with the 1% precincts reporting under it. OH was listed as having a near 60:40 split. The difference was 18.5% I think which went against everything we had heard. I remembered that Rasmussen repeatedly said this was 40% of the vote and I really panicked. Then I calculated the actual # of votes as being about 20% of 2008s vote. This too made little sense b/c all the estimates were 30-40% but it at least made me think we had a better chance to catch up.
Then when I heard that Romney got less votes than McCain in OH and PA it really made me think that there might have been an effort to destroy the early votes from Republican areas. The reported party breakdown of early votes in OH according to Bloomberg: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-11-06/the-early-election-results-captured-by-democratic-microtargeters was 50D 36R 14I. The only way this turns into a near 59:40 breakdown is if the Indies went about 70:30 to O or many R’s voted for O which the polls don’t seem to bear out. The only other explanation I can think of is if only the early voting was shown and absentees were much more favorable but not listed ? The actual # reported on Bloomberg was 1,442,536 which was about 27% or so. Perhaps I can find the breakdown of absentee vs early votes somewhere, anyone have that info ?
In surrounding states like IN, KY, WV Romney did much better than McCain by percentage and generated more votes overall. Either the negative/mostly untrue ads suppressed our voters or someone suppressed their actual votes. I just can’t believe Romney/Ryan with 4 yrs of Obama turned out fewer R voters than McCain in these states.
Maybe a group of concerned citizens could be assembled to inspect the voting anomalies of every county within known swing states?
Okay, very good.
To some extent or another, you’re right.
Not every vote is a die-hard vote, but enough where it would be hard to get half.
It would take an extreme situation to do it.
You know, when I made that last post, I switched to thinking of the whole body of the vote. Instead we were simply addressing the difference in vote, a small percentage.
Flipping half those is not really impossible.
The electoral college system means you have to win votes in the swing states. You can pile up large majorities in the states you'd win anyway and it doesn't help you in the electoral college.
Absolutely, 100% correct, as Rush so often is. True to form, the media and other concern trolls are saying that the Republicans keep losing because they keep nominating far right guys like McCain and Romney. Yes, that’s the conventional wisdom that’s gathering out there.
Voter fraud. It’s big.
Only 332,754 Votes? A lesson for the future. If every FReeper had voted more than once we would of had it!
Please provide the documented evidence the lazy "evangelicals' listened to Rush. Maybe you have rushed to judgment?
And 18 more points would have secured a Jacksonville victory tonight.
>> Total: 332,754 to win Electoral College
>> 448,875 in Michigan.
Half of that if votes for Obama swung in Romney’s favor.
This was a very close election arguably with enough error/fraud to consider it an electoral tie.
Definitely concerned about Obama and Reid, but not as concerned about the confused voters that believe in Obama’s deceitful message and direction.
We need to reconstruct the GOP and fix the quality of information dispensed through conventional media.
The dems only care about the swing states that both parties need to win.
It really didn’t take a lot to take what they needed to win. They were confident it would be done.
We all can sit here and throw blame around, but the dems have it down to an art and we won’t win again unless it is addressed.
My best guess is that we will not win again.
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.