Posted on 12/12/2012 8:32:34 AM PST by Perseverando
Exclusive: Molotov Mitchell says 'the computers are taking over!'
Molotov Mitchell is president of the award-winning Illuminati Pictures. His specialty is entertainment communications, particularly reaching the "under 40" demographic.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Given that Romney didn’t lift a finger to challenge possible voting problems in stark contrast to Bush43 and Gore taking problems with Florida’s vote count to the Supreme Court in 2000 election, I still question if Progressive RINO GOP possibly nominated Romney to lose the race like McCain was arguably nominated to lose race.
I still remember 0bama guard dogs ORilly and Hanitee after election, ORilly briefly commenting that there were no problems with voting, Hanitee commenting that 0bama’s citizenship was no longer an issue.
Finally, don’t overlook that the only reason that presidential elections are important to voters is because media hype, including from Fx News, ignores Founder’s division of federal and state government powers, federal government powers mostly wrongy usurped state powers.
Thanks. I just did a quick cut and paste. I didn’t run spell check either.
Probably lost all credibility. Freepers will think I’ve intentionally tried to deceive them by failing to delete the duplicates.
If you have time, could you list the duplicates for me?
Did you know that “Freepers” comes up as a spell check error in the posting preview pane? Amazing!
See post #42.
Oh, I’m sorry. I forgot to list my source for the commentators - http://www.wnd.com/commentators/
Oh, never mind. It’s at WND so it’s not a reliable source.
Thanks for the great collection of links. I have copied and saved for reference.
The only thing I did not notice was one about Scytl, a company in Spain run by citizens of the world. They have been sselected to count votes for 500+ voting districts and the DoD.
http://www.scytl.com/customers/
Good grief, alleged conservatives here seem to be more difficult to lead to some information than a bunch of feral cats.
It’s WND so it must be BS (Saul Alinsky response)
It’s a video and I want someone to write it down for me (Saul Alinsky response)
It’s too long. (If that video is too long then how is 4 more YEARS of this POS in the WH going to be?) PATHETIC
I don’t want to give WND a hit. PATHETIC
What the video did not address was the computer programmer in Florida testifying before congress how he as paid to create a subroutine (his testimony was not about his election) which would shift votes to the desired candidate then after voting time expired the program would erase itself. What he described, he was paid to create, is actually very easy to put into program code even the erasing part. It is all very easy.
I treat anything on the web as suspect and am willing to search further to see if what was stated can be verified. Most of what was presented in that video is known to be correct. I think the NBPP point has not been proven so that in my mind is suspect.
What an interesting discussion this article has become. I would not be surprised is this doesn’t make it to the major left wing blogs, news sites and maybe even LSDNBC tonight. Maybe we’ll all get mentioned on the Al Sharpton show, or whatever it’s called.
The statists must be hysterical about now on how divided we can get over just the “purity” of the website hosting an article. We can’t even get to the original article.
Who needs trolls? Not us conservatives, libertarians, whatever.
We ignore the article because:
1. It’s video without a transcript
2. We don’t like the hosting website
3. “Illuminati” possibly sounds flaky/conspiratorial, whatever.
4. Patriot08’s “HUGE” and extensive listing at post #9 is essentially ignored.
5. Don’t want to give world nut daily a hit.
6. Writing is a lost art.
7. (WND)...they are as believable as Infowars
8. Just a conspiracy theory site and not a very good one (to be fair, I’m not sure there are any “good ones”)
9. Videos are done because they’re easier for the viewer.
10. You really don’t like that Pam Geller do you?
Patriot08,
I think I’m starting to get a sense of why we can’t win an election.
Somehow I’m reminded of an old “Three Stooges” gag in which the boys proclaimed: “One for all. All for one. Every man for himself.”
Yes, there is no other way that Romney could have lost. He was such a great candidate.
But where will we find another like him in 2016?
How about NYC Mayor Bloomberg?
Bump
WorldNetDaily used to be widely referred to as "WorldNutDaily" on this site.
Then they started saying a lot of things that a bunch of people here liked and wished to be true, such as their widespread claims that Obama's birth certificate is a forgery. And so forth.
Gret references, marking for later.
The fact is, we lost. And we will never regain the Presidency by directing our energies to combat largely non-existent and mostly irrelevant "widespread vote fraud."
Now I'm not saying there we no examples of vote fraud in the election. But it wasn't the major reason why we lost.
We lost because more Americans in the critical states voted for the smooth-talking liberal, than voted for the guy we were supporting. We lost because our big, hugely population cities are more full of blue voters than red voters. And we also lost because an incumbent is darn hard to beat, even when he's not the object of misplaced hero worship.
We'll have a better shot at it in 4 years. IF we field the right candidate. Historically, Americans usually give the Presidency to one party for 8 years, then get tired of them and throw them out in a search for some greener pastures.
Nothing to see here. Move along! Oh, and from now on, don't forget to OBEY!
Re:Oh.. and “top ten ‘facts’ ‘proving’ the election was rigged.”
The fact is, we lost. And we will never regain the Presidency by directing our energies to combat largely non-existent and mostly irrelevant “widespread vote fraud.”
It’s just the Constitution. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Just laziness on his part, I say. If you have something important to say, write it down. If not, entertain us with a video.
If there was an article, we could check if any of their "facts" are "true". Probably aren't though.
He lost me at ‘Molotov’. Remember the outrage about a n Indian store named after a German war criminal. Well, that criminal had nothing on the number of victims of Comrade Molotov.
Yes. This is the same america which now says they don't want their entitlements cut, think it is great to get all the tax money from rich people, and are now giving Obama approval ratings above 50%.
>Polls indicated that Romney was going to win the election.
No, Polls showed that Obama was going to win the election with over 300 electoral votes. about the only state the polls got wrong was Florida, and it was still within the margin of the polling errors. Smart people who analyzed the polls all predicted an Obama win, and Intrade had him as a lock to win.
The economy is close to Great Depression era conditions, and unemployment is almost as high as when Obama entered office.
The economy is nowhere near great depression conditions, unemployment is close to where it was when Obama took office, but it isn't moving in the wrong direction, and sadly the people who are unemployed are mostly locked democrat voters, especially with all the government handouts.
Presidents rarely win reelection when the economy is in the tank.
Oddly, that isn't true; and economic models run in October actually gave Obama a slight edge. Bad economies can sink a president, IF you can get the blame to sit with the president. When the blame instead is put on the republican party, as it was in this election, the bad economy HELPED Obama.
Mitt knew it too, when he was met by several thousand in that parking garage cheering him when he arrived unannounced at that airport,
Do you even READ what you spam? How did several thousand people show up in a parking garage, if his appearance was unannounced? Clearly people KNEW he was going to be there -- unless you think there are thousands of people who just stand around in parking lots, just in case someone important shows up.
So how did Romney lose a race that numerous reputable polls and pundits predicted would be an easy win, based on historical patterns?
A statement with multiple false assertions. No reputable polls showed an easy win, or even a win, for Romney. Romney never led in any polling-based "electoral college" prediction, except for the ones run by people who reworked the poll numbers more to their liking. A few discredited pundits claimed it would be an easy win, but that is why you shouldn't listen to former democrat shills who like to lick toes. The historical patterns slightly favored Obama once we hit October.
Almost every major Conservative website has put out an article charging voter fraud- Breitbart, American Thinker, Atlas Shrugs, WND, The Blaze, Front Page Magazine, Fox News, The Daily Caller, Town Hall, Human Events, Canada Free Press...
Surprise -- there was voter fraud. There is voter fraud in every election. You will always find someone who tries to cheat. The question is, can you find 4 million cheaters. Can you find 100,000 cheaters in one state. It has NEVER been found before.
We must act NOW. Start with the election. If we let the Rats get away with this massive voter fraud, we're no better than a bananna republic.
So, what are you doing to fix this massive voter fraud. I hope something more useful than posting this same tired comment to multiple articles on free republic. Any people here who are swayed to conspiracy are already on board, and the rest of us are trying to actually solve the problems that lead to election failures, a job made harder by people pretending all is well and we just have to stop cheaters.
We must keep digging and pounding him every day, in every way we can- phony birth certificate, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, his hidden life, records....
Who is this "we"? Can you point to a single original-source piece of information you have provided to prove your claim of election fraud, or about Obama's birth certificate, or about Benghazi, fast and furious, or anything?
All you are doing is repeating what you read. And you aren't researching what you repeat, you are blindly accepting it, even when repeatedly shown how what you read is a lie. That's not being conservative, that is being a mind-numbed robot. The power of the conservative message is that, when people dig into the facts, it is conservative principles that win out.
We are not the party of blindly repeating whatever bizarre conspiracy theories we read on the internet. We are the party of sound reasoning, of clear thought. We question everything, we ask for evidence, we sift the facts, we reach logical conclusions.
I don’t trust the reporting at the Washington Post, but they still have commentators on their opinion page that are worthwhile.
For me, it’s not “WND” that raises flags, its the name of the writer, for example “Joseph Farah”, or “Pat Buchanan”.
I just dislike trying to have a thread discussion about a video. Everybody disagrees on what is said, you can’t quote anything, and in most cases people can’t watch the videos, either because of blockers or because they don’t have the time.
I’d much rather take 2 minutes reading an article, than have to waste 10 minutes listening to someone slow-read it.
Surprise — there was voter fraud. There is voter fraud in every election. You will always find someone who tries to cheat. The question is, can you find 4 million cheaters. Can you find 100,000 cheaters in one state. It has NEVER been found before.
******************
There were three states where Obama won by less than 5%. They were FL, OH and VA. FL was the closest and the only one less than 100,000 vote differential, about 73,000. If you could have changed the three Obama would still have one.
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.