DEAN CHAMBERS, The creator of the so-called "Unskewed" Polling site
Posted on 11/21/2012 7:32:56 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The creator of the so-called "Unskewed" Polling site is now unskewing the actual votes.
Last week, Dean Chambers — who admitted he was wrong about the polls shortly after the election — launched BarackOFraudo.com, which attempts to expose "how they stole the election."
Its premise centers on the admittedly eye-popping fact that Republican Mitt Romney received sometimes as little as zero votes in certain precincts in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Chambers also alleges that there are "questions" with how votes were counted in Florida and Virginia.
You see where this is going — without those four states, President Barack Obama has only 250 electoral votes. With those four states, Romney wins the election.
Chambers stops short of saying this is an example of outright voter fraud. But he insists he is trying to simply raise the questions based on what he considers "reputable reports."
"The challenge, of course, in dealing with any voter fraud issues is that the people that do this are good at covering their tracks," Chambers told Business Insider on Tuesday. "In many instances, the evidence that is available is very circumstantial. But there are lopsided votes in a number of areas that suggest ballots could be stuffed."
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
might?
Whether it is or isn’t, it will never be investigated or challenged by anyone who could do anything about it.
Every time a FReeper willingly lowers themselves into the chill, dead darkness of 9/11 "trutherism," or cognitively flatulent Election Day conspiracy theories, or chimpanzee puckerings on how infant innoculations cause autism, or any one of a dozen other gibbering dead ends: the enduring intellectual legacy of Hamilton and Webster, Reagan and Buckley, takes another direct hit, midships.
I certainly don't mind if any of Silver's former (or, Lord help us all, current) fannish cargo cult ultimately decide to cast him as Part and Parcel of the Great and Awful Anti-Mittens Campaign Swindle -- he is, IMHO, a peculiarly bumbling and inelegant confidence trickster; thus deserving of conservatives' scorn, and little else -- but: they are going to have to deal with his own highly public record of hugely inappropriate burblings (such as the example posted, directly above), somewhere along the way.
This guy is an idiot. The entire notion that one could “unskew” polls was laughable. That so many conservatives bought into it was just sad.
Thank you. Seriously. I was genuinely beginning to despair whether the adult population of this site had all gone full-bore, weapons-grade batsqueak insane. You've reassured me that this isn't so. ;)
I’m sorry, but you are wrong.
Romney was an innocent who was blindsided and dismayed to find that his solid win was turned to a loss.
I have been there, done that, and have the T-shirt.
This is not a suspicion, I have EVIDENCE:
My short booklet on vote fraud and how to fight it:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1991953/posts
Report on 2010 election and new fraud methods:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2621405/posts
More vote fraud methods:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2378786/posts
... and to which major news organizations and/or legal enforcement agencies have you sent this hard, irrefutable "evidence," specifically...?
Who is going to be tried in a court of law, thanks to this evidence? Which reporter(s) will be scooping up a coveted Pulitzer Prize, for blowing the lid off the biggest political cover-up of the past two hundred years? Which named malefactors -- linked, again, to hard and unyielding evidence -- will be facing jail time, as a direct result?
9/11 truthers are always claiming to have uncovered fresh, damning "evidence" in support of their conspiracy theories, as well... but: no one ever actually sees the inside of a prison cell, regardless.
Lop off some demonstrably guilty bastard's head with it. That, I'll gladly accept as proof positive.
So what? No one has the courage to do anything about it.
We all knew that. The livers of the lie, the liberal leftists and the liberal dems made sure all the ts were crossed. If you oppose the election you are a racist/bigot. The black white president was sure to win no matter what. But, sometimes you get what you wish for so for the next 4 years we will see if this president is still the peoples choice.
“... and to which major news organizations and/or legal enforcement agencies have you sent this hard, irrefutable “evidence,” specifically...? “
Are you SERIOUS?? We could have video proof of voter fraud and the “major news organizations” and even legal enforcement agencies (Hello? Holder?!!) would laugh in our face.
The reality is that even if voter fraud occurred (my local newspaper headline today announced that voters had cast ballots twice) nothing will be done about it. We’re living in a third world country where the media and enforcement agencies are so corrupt/biased that the rule of law doesn’t have a chance.
I’ve never seen a lying liver before. Interesting.
Infinitely more intelligent (and pertinent) question: are you?
You're seriously advancing the claim that there's no one (for instance) at FOX who'd appreciate being able to break the single most gargantuan political story in all of U.S. history? No one at the National Review -- which only endorsed Mittens (TWICE!!!), after all -- would voluntarily afford such mammoth revelations a sympathetic ear? RUSH LIMBAUGH and/or DRUDGE wouldn't willingly sell off significant portions of their respective immortal souls to be the ones to forevermore tar Herr Zero in each and every grade school history book written over the following millennium -- ?!?
I mean... seriously? THAT'S your absolute best -- what you're really, truly going with?
Take another shot at it. ;)
Thank you. Seriously. I was genuinely beginning to despair whether the adult population of this site had all gone full-bore, weapons-grade batsqueak insane. You've reassured me that this isn't so. ;)
I need to nuance this. (I'm indulging in "verbing" here.) Dollars to doughnuts, I agree with you and many others on 99 percent of everything, and will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with you as the SHTF. So take this fraternally.
I really treasure the pungent imagery and elegant scansion of the expression "full-bore, weapons-grade, batsqueak insane." I also treasure reality. But some FReepers seem to operate on the premise that we're NOT at war. They seem to assume that 1) sitting on your backside and whining that "America is gone," or 2) furiously attacking a fellow right-winger who has a theory more impractical than your own, or 3) planning to hide out somewhere where Holder can't find you, are adult responses to the current situation. They're not. We are at war—the current admin and his agents are actively at war with us. We don't have the leisure to pretend otherwise. War is total, and will require irrational as well as rational resistance, and above all a bias toward action.
Someone has an imperfectly conceived or described theory of how the election was stolen? So what. Point out any flaws of methodology or thinking, by all means. But any noise or trouble—anything—that undermines the peace of mind or credibility of the current admin and his illegal regime helps. Case in point: Were the 9/11 Truthers and Not in Our Namers transparently crazy and stupid? You bet. Did they damage national unity and the effectiveness of our war against the Moslems when it really counted, in 2001-2002? Absolutely. We can't be blind to the value of random resistance from our own side that distracts the current admin and raises vague doubts among the people.
It's true that, unlike the DNC, we put ethical limits on the allies we can work with. But we can't afford to be like the RINOs, who lose because they are afraid to associate with people from the wrong ZIP code.
I don't know if Mao Tse-Tung (may he and his co-conspirators roast like chestnuts in hell) said it, but if he did, he was right: "Many tiny pebbles break the glass." Yes, we need some big rocks, too. But you never know which pebble will start the crack that blows it all open. Carry on!
Agreed, absolutely. Hence, #8 and #14, in this very thread. ;)
I'm being perfectly straightforward, as always. Can I be convinced that I'm in error, re: my increasingly concrete suspicion that -- after all the chest-puffing and arm-waving and hopping about like a bunch of hyper-caffeinated howler monkeys -- this whole "stolen election" business is nothing more substantial or actionable than a peculiarly virulent online pathogen, wafted from hysteric to well-meaning hysteric? Absolutely, and without question.
The burden of proof, however, certainly isn't on me, to (somehow) "prove" a negative. "Extraordinary claims," to quote a scientific truism, "require extraordinary evidence."
I've detailed the absolute barest minimum I'd be willing to accept, as "evidence" that Mitt Romney was (as baldly stated by the claimant) "an innocent who was blindsided" -- specifically, handing over said evidence to any one of several highly influential conservative-leaning news sources, and allow them to break said story... something anyone claiming to be in open sympathy with Mitt Romney should be absolutely overjoyed to be able to do, wouldn't you think?
This is both practicable and reasonable, by any sane and rational measure. I now patiently await the grand unveiling. ;)
Correct. I'm suggesting that you stop trying. It accomplishes nothing. Even if someone's theory is off, and he is reasonably sincere, he can help by raising doubts about Zippy's credibility. Anything negative is damaging. And however unwashed the theorist may be, he could surprise us and be right.
It's not enough to prove our case to each other with parsimonious perfection. We have to win the war with the DNCPUSA, who care nothing for logic.
You, I am guessing (re: line quoted, above) regard requiring even the merest, most minute morsel of evidence in support of an extraordinary claim -- my request, remember -- as being in search of "parsimonious perfection."
In the same fraternal spirit as the discussion was begun: we're simply going to have to disagree on any such definition as infinitely (and, IMHO, unreasonably) elastic as all of that, I'm afraid. ;)
Again: I wait patiently... although not (in all perfect candor) with any great expectations. Ah, well.
But the thing is, it doesn’t matter if he is the people’s choice or not any longer. Their choice is now not relevent.
It just so happens that they think they won here and are in agreement with the selection, but in time they will find out how he is not for them at all, and they will try to change their circumstance and find that they cannot.
This is why I laugh at those people who try to mock us for losing. Take that they say. Ok, fine, I’ll take it, but so will you, and what’s funny is that you did it to yourself and you are too stupid to even know it.
Those “voters” are but a means to an end, and once that end has been achieved, the means will no longer be needed, and they will be dealt with at that time. I hope I am alive to see that day.
Something I learned to great disappointment was that folks are on our side, fellow conservatives, are every bit as susceptible to falling for loopy conspiracy theories as our opponents on the left. Intelligence doesn't even really matter here and is not a decisive determining factor as to whether a person becomes a conspiracy theorists. I've known some extremely sharp people that believed in all sorts of zany conspiracies. I believe what happens is that human beings have a world view, and when an event(s) doesn't fit neatly into it some people begin blaming nefarious conspirators for altering what should have been.
Saying that. There is certainly nothing wrong with thinking out of the box. A good investigator may have all sorts of theories that don't pan out. Nothing wrong with speculating. The problem is when folks advance theories publicly that do not have reasonable evidence to back them up. Those same people then become emotionally invested in their argument and can become fanatical conspiracy theorists.
When elections are lost people blame voter fraud. The left does it, and the right does it too. Are there some instances of cheating? Sure, there always is some of that. But it just doesn't account for enough to have changed the overall election results. Blaming fraud will not help us one bit. We lost, people need to deal with it.
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.