It’s Official: Obama Voter Fraud Reason for “Reelection”

If anyone thinks they can find a Romney voter in those 21 precincts, I’ll pay for thier cab fare if they are successful.

Because those are not neighborhoods in which I’d drive.

SICK OF LIBS OPINED.....the sinister Obamatons stole the election--targeting the all-important 5 swing states (w/ Republican Governors in many of them---and Repub Secy's of State who determine voter fraud)........

Mincing, grinning Romney never looked more stupid than when he conceded---he remained duped and sap-happy til the end......like McDumbo/McCain.

=========================================================

It's now crystal clear why Obama seemingly "screwed-up" at the crucial first prez debate---giving Romney a huge opening (or so it seemed). O's debate screwup was no accident----he said he was "being polite" to Romney---b/c he knew the crooked election was in the bag for him.

Ohaha and his cunning, sinister crew knew then that O would win...... no matter what Romney did or said. B/c the WH orders had already gone out----their massive voter fraud operation was already in place.

======================================

I recall an odd incident as the campaign got underway----Axelrod took CBS News on a tour of what was being billed as O's campaign war room. But to my eyes---it was completely staged----there were people sitting at computers and at desks---but nothing was going on. I now believe O had literally no campaign operation b/c they had the whole thing fixed from the get go. Oh sure---they went through the motions--but it was all faked.

O says he had the "first" billion dollar campaign---so did he report to the FEC where he spent all that money? ANSWERING MY OWN QUESTION---as if his FEC reports (if any) will be scrutinized. Not likely.

===================================================

REFERENCE Pre-election mark o'malley excerpt: "Every campaign, of course, believes it’s going to win. Obama’s team, however, conveys such a visceral sense of self-confidence that even protestations to the contrary take on air of comically profane absurdity......"

NOW THIS IS EERY---B/C AXEL ADMITS HE KNEW WHO WAS GOING TO WIN---O'MALLEY: Axelrod’s way of saying that he thinks the election is already over. . . “The (Romney camp has) this fantasy that the debates will come and the dam will break like it did in 1980,” Axelrod said. “I think they are delusional.” Clearly the sinister Axelrod knew the outcome even before the debates began. Axelrod: “The (Romney camp) didn’t give people anything to grab on to, and they allowed us to define him before he could define himself,” Axelrod says of Romney.

SAY WHAT? Early on, O's campaign spent an astounding $300 million to tarnish Bain/Romney-----with little or no effect. Romney kept climbing in the polls----virtually every poll had Romney ahead.

Make no mistake---massive voter fraud took place---the Ohaha connivers were confident of victory b/c they were micromanaging the fraud from Day One.

=======================================================

We've seen some pretty shady characters in the political game---but no campaign has produced the likes of the Chi/Mob con artists running Ohaha's sleazy game.

David Axelrod has shown himself to be The Most Sinister Character ever to surface in politics. Axel, Valerie whatsherface, Rahm Emanuel, m/m Ohaha---are the kingpins of crooked Chi/politics---they are very practiced at fixing elections. They know all the sleazy tricks.

Ha! He and Carter could sit around and blame Bush.

Mincing, grinning Romney never looked more stupid than when he conceded---he remained duped and sap-happy til the end......like McDumbo/McCain.

Problem is that the Romney campaign and the RNC should have been forewarned about fraud from what happened in 2008, and should have had a reasonable "boots on the ground" strategy, especially in the swing states, to counteract it before the voting took place. Seems as if they were blindsided by the Chicago mob and, as one MSM report described, "shellshocked" when the results came in several points off what just about all reliable polling predicted. (You can't poll the fraud and cheating factor.)

It's now crystal clear why Obama seemingly "screwed-up" at the crucial first prez debate---giving Romney a huge opening (or so it seemed). O's debate screwup was no accident----he said he was "being polite" to Romney---b/c he knew the crooked election was in the bag for him.

Even if Zero thought he knew it was in the bag for him, he had no incentive to deliberately look bad at the first debate with such a large audience watching. But if you are saying that his poor performance was due to cockiness, you may have a point there.

I now believe O had literally no campaign operation b/c they had the whole thing fixed from the get go. Oh sure---they went through the motions--but it was all faked.

Of course, he had a campaign operation, but it was an unconventional one because the logistics of the fix had to be a top priority.

It’s not true. He won multiple states that require voter ID, including my state of Virginia.

He also won multiple states that require picture ID.

There are 4 states that require voter ID that he did not win.

As voter id laws tend to be enacted in states that have republican control, it’s not surprising that he would lose some states with voter ID laws.

You are on the right track! The multiple days of voting was made to order for the "Community Organizers"; it makes it much easier for a given number of such agitators, to herd the least informed, most easily controlled, voters to the polls. Every extra day available translates into that many more sheep, per agitator, per election. (Note, it also makes it far easier for some of the sheep to vote several times, under different identities, at different polling places.)

There is absolutely no rational reason why any intelligent person would want to dumb down the electorate; but we have been intimidated by the tactics of the Left--the name calling which greets anyone who wants to try to upgrade the quality of the suffrage.

We did not have any idea that universal suffrage was a positive virtue before the Jackson era. It was not seen as such the first 50 years of American independence. The whole issue needs to be thoroughly reevaluated; not just accepted because we are afraid to be called nasty names.

For more on the subject, Threat To Liberty--No Guarantee of Virtue.

William Flax

The author of the posted article from the Canadian Free Press that began this thread states in the first of her bullet points that Obama lost all four states that had voter ID laws: Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, and Tennessee. I believe I read somewhere, however, that two more states had voter ID and Obama lost both of them as well.

There are actually 30 states with some form of voter ID laws.

Here is a good link for information: Voter Id Laws By State

There are 4 states with what are called "strict photo id requirements". That is the 4 states mentioned in the article. Note, this is not all "voter id" states, just the 4 with "strict PHOTO id" requirements.

It is not surprising that Obama didn't win in these 4 states -- they are republican now, here is Romney's margin of victory in each state:

Indiana - 11% (280,000)
Kansas - 22% (250,000)
Tennessee - 20% (500,000)
Georgia - 8% (300,000)

There are 7 more states listed as having photo id requirements, and the site says there are a total of 17, so there are 6 that are not yet listed as photo id. The site has a description of "strict", which have to do with how non-id-voters are handled, and what types of photo id are allowed.

Of the 7 other states shown with true photo id laws, Obama won 4 of the 7.

Of the states with non-strict photo id laws for which the remedy is a strict non-photo id, there are 3 such states, virginia being one of those, and Obama won two of those three.

So, it is incorrect to say Obama didn't win any voter id state, or that he didn't win any photo id states. If you accept the definition of "strict photo id" as given on this web site, then it is correct to say Obama didn't win any of those 4 states, but also meaningless, as there would be no way for Obama to steal any of those 4 states, and they were never really in contention (Georgia was actually closer than I would have thought, but I imagine that's partly because nobody was really contesting it).

I am a strong proponent of voter ID rules, and would prefer photo id requirements. Our state also allowed a registration card, and mailed registration cards to everybody. I could see that being workable, although clearly you could steal someone's mail and use their card; I think once you are willing to commit a felony though, it would be just as easy to print up fake ids, if it was worth it to you to steal elections.

The problem I see is that, if you really are at a point where you can get hundreds of thousands of people to break the law, in dozens of states, NO acceptable form of voter identification will be possible, because the same people who are committing felonies will make sure to block anything, and the average voter won't want to be inconvenienced.

Every state needs for buying or selling a vote, or attempting to do so, to be 25 year to life felonies.

Absolutely.

There’s a reason that candidates aren’t filing complaints against voter fraud, and it isn’t because candidates are lazy unmotivated people. The idea that a candidate would give up is ludicrous.

Why don't these candidates press their STATE GOP organizations for better rules, i.e. early voting, primaries, etc. PRIOR to the elections? Even when these battleground states like Ohio are fully staffed with Republicans at the highest State levels, we still get insane rules! WHO agrees to these rules?