SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Alastair McIntosh who wrote (34112)11/10/2012 10:06:45 PM
From: longnshort1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 85487
 
Hmm: Obama Received Over 98% in Dozens of VA Districts, Often in Odd (But Similar) Patterns

Posted by Aurelius at 3:07 PM
Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook

In looking at the voting data from Richmond, Virginia, an observer is struck by a few things. First is that Mitt Romney and Barack Obama were running neck-and-neck for the first several precincts. Even in heavily democratic precincts, Romney was still garnering around 25-30% of the vote.

Then, all of a sudden, all in order, starting with Precinct 213, Obama received: 90.30% of the vote, then 95.91%, then 89.62%, then 94.68%, then 97.49%, then 94.16%, then 95.09%. Before these Obama numbers began, Romney had gotten over 30% of the vote, and after they finished, Romney shot back up to 23%.

But this wasn't the only "blip" on the radar. Mr. Obama received over 99% of the vote in two precincts in Richmond, over 98% in another two, and over 97% in four. And they all came in peculiar fashion.


Voters in the same districts would go slightly towards Romney or slightly for Obama, then six or seven in a row would be plus-90% for Obama... then go back to slightly for one of the candidates, then again, another five or six in a row 90% for Obama.

The same odd pattern showed up in Norfolk, Virginia. Precincts would be relatively close, going to Obama or Romney. Then they'd explode towards Obama. For example, starting with Precinct 311, Obama received 68.97%, then exploded to 98.08% of the vote, then 98.21%, then 99.05%, then 97.86%, then 97.96%, then immediately dropped to 58.66%. And these heavily-Obama precincts were not all in the same city, but various cities through Virginia.

It's a good thing the vote in Virginia wasn't close, though, right?



To: Alastair McIntosh who wrote (34112)11/11/2012 11:20:19 AM
From: longnshort3 Recommendations  Respond to of 85487
 
TRR: Florida Vote Twist: More Ballots Than Voters
By James S. Robbins -
The Washington Times
November 10, 2012, 03:02PM
washingtontimes.com

Republican Congressman Allen West’s campaign is ready to “go to war” to get a recount in the Florida 18th Congressional District race. The latest twist to emerge from the ongoing vote count – in some precincts there are more ballots than voters.

Preliminary, unofficial vote totals were filed today in the neck and neck race between Mr. West and Democratic challenger Patrick Murphy. The Murphy campaign has already declared victory, but the numbers have not been officially certified and the count goes on. The West campaign believes that they are close to the .5% vote margin that will trigger an automatic recount under Florida election law.

The vote count has been marked by controversy. Poll watchers accuse local election officials of incompetence, intimidation and possible fraud. The latest twist is that in some precincts of St. Lucie County there appear to be dozens more ballots being counted than the number of voters. The West campaign is demanding St. Lucie County Supervisor of Elections Gertrude Walker release the voter poll books that show how many voters actually showed up on Election Day to validate the count. “What we are saying is, open your books!” a source close to the West campaign told The Washington Times.

The West team is “ready to go to war to get the recount,” according to Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, a volunteer lawyer for the West campaign speaking in an unofficial capacity. They are conducting a precinct-by-precinct statistical analysis of 18th district election results going back to 2006 to compare to the 2012 results. Evidence of dramatic shifts in voting patterns this year could provide a road map for follow-on investigations into possible vote irregularities.

Questions also persist regarding the military absentee ballots in Palm Beach County. Observers were banned without explanation from watching the ballots being opened. They were permitted to observe the counting process, however there was no way to know whether the absentee ballots that were produced were the same ones that were opened, or if all the ballots were produced. Lacking a transparent chain of custody of the military ballots it is impossible to validate that the votes cast by servicemen and women overseas are fairly and accurately being counted.

Local election officials have contributed to a climate of hostility and suspicion throughout the vote count process. “They have created reasonable suspicion to the point where we don’t feel comfortable,” Mr. Shapiro said. Election oversight is intended to maintain the integrity of the voting process. Ideally it would be a cooperative, transparent, bipartisan effort that seeks legitimate outcomes. But this vote count is far from ideal.

Meanwhile St. Lucie County Supervisor of Elections Gertrude Walker has gone to ground. No one is answering the phones at her office. She will not answer her cell phone and her voice-mail is full. She has hired an attorney, who has also been incommunicado. If there is another side to the story it has yet to be told.

UPDATE: An hour after this report was posted the St. Lucie County Canvassing Board agreed to an entire early-voting recount starting Sunday at 7 a.m. Most of the election-day problems with the vote count were among the early votes, including possible duplicate vote counts or over-counting. This recount will involve approximately 30,000 ballots.



To: Alastair McIntosh who wrote (34112)11/11/2012 1:50:08 PM
From: longnshort1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 85487
 
Election Fraud in Philadelphia

[yt]b4sZVOuGKtU#![/yt]



To: Alastair McIntosh who wrote (34112)11/11/2012 2:03:51 PM
From: longnshort3 Recommendations  Respond to of 85487
 
Obama Likely Won Re-Election Through Election Fraud

Rachel Alexander Nov 11, 2012
townhall.com

There were many factors that hurt Mitt Romney and favored Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential election. The Democrats portrayed Romney in the worst light possible; as a wealthy, out of touch millionaire who wanted to return women to the 1800's. The left wing media predictably did everything it could to perpetuate that false caricature. Obama's race was an advantage; voters of all persuasions, particularly minorities, still cannot get over the allure of the first black president. The 47% of Americans on welfare were predisposed to vote for the food stamp president over Romney, wanting the free goodies to keep on giving, despite the long-term unsustainability.

In spite of those odds, polls indicated that Romney was going to win the election. The economy is close to Great Depression era conditions, and unemployment is almost as high as when Obama entered office. Economic conditions became so dire after Obama took office it prompted the rise of an entire new movement, the Tea Party. Presidents rarely win reelection when the economy is in the tank.

So how did Romney lose a race that numerous reputable polls and pundits predicted would be an easy win, based on historical patterns? The most realistic explanation is voter fraud in a few swing states. According to the Columbus Dispatch, one out of every five registered voters in Ohio is ineligible to vote. In at least two counties in Ohio, the number of registered voters exceeded the number of eligible adults who are of voting age. In northwestern Ohio's Wood County, there are 109 registered voters for every 100 people eligible to vote. An additional 31 of Ohio's 88 counties have voter registration rates over 90%, which most voting experts regard as suspicious. Obama miraculously won 100% of the vote in 21 districts in Cleveland, and received over 99% of the vote where GOP inspectors were illegally removed.

The inflated numbers can't just reflect voters who have moved, because the average voting registration level nationwide is only 70%. The vast majority of voters over the 70% level are not voting because they want to, they are voting because someone is getting them to cast a vote, one way or another. Those 31 counties are most likely the largest counties in Ohio, representing a majority of Ohio voters. This means the number of votes cast above the 70% typical voter registration level easily tops 100,000, the margin Obama won Ohio by.

Videographer James O'Keefe, known for his undercover videos exposing left wing fraud, caught a Virginia Democratic Congressman's son on video in October explaining how to commit voter fraud. Patrick Moran, the son of Rep. Jim Moran, told O'Keefe's videographer that in order to make a vote for someone else, you'd need two pieces of identification, such as a utility bill, explaining, "they can fake a utility bill with ease, you know?"
He went on to advise the videographer that he should also call the voter and pretend to be a polling company in order to make sure the voter isn't intending to vote. He said that Democrat attorneys would be located in the polling places to assist him if challenged casting one of these illegal votes.

In another video, O'Keefe's videographer tells a DNC staffer from Obama's Organizing for America that she intends to vote in both Texas and Florida. The staffer laughs and says, "It's cool." The staffer then prints out a voter registration form for the undercover videographer and advises her on what to do if she gets caught.

These are just the known instances of attempted voter fraud. How many instances occurred that were not discovered? Obama's Organizing for America looked up voters in swing states – many who would not have bothered voting otherwise – and got them to vote. How did they get them to vote? They may have given them rides to the polls, they may have offered to fill out and return their ballots for them, or they may have voted ballots for the ones who were not going to vote.

Many on the left believe there is nothing wrong with committing fraud in order to ensure Obama's reelection. It is a common tenet on the left that the ends justify the means. Saul Alinsky, the 1960's radical who inspired Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, taught community organizers like Obama that dishonesty is acceptable if it achieves your political goals. And when caught, Alinsky teaches radicals to deny the wrongdoing and change the topic to put their accusers on the defensive. One Obama supporter brazenly posted on Facebook that he was voting four times for Obama, asserting that the ends justify the means.

Aiding Obama's win was a devious suppression of the conservative vote. The conservative-leaning military vote has decreased drastically since 2010 due to the so-called Military Voter Protection Act that was enacted into law the year before. It has made it so difficult for overseas military personnel to obtain absentee ballots that in Virginia and Ohio there has been a 70% decrease in requests for ballots since 2008. In Virginia, almost 30,000 fewer overseas military voters requested ballots than in 2008. In Ohio, more than 20,000 fewer overseas military voters requested ballots. This is significant considering Obama won in both states by a little over 100,000 votes.

Voter fraud has been in the works for years. At least 52 employees of the left wing group ACORN have been convicted of voter registration fraud. ACORN itself was convicted of the crime of "compensation," paying its registration canvassers bonuses to exceed their quotas. In 2008, 36% of ACORN's voter registrations were invalidated. Left wing political pundit Chris Matthews admitted last year that pretending to call someone from a polling company, then voting their ballot for them, has been happening in big cities since the 1950's. He admitted he knows that kind of voter fraud takes place in Philadelphia.

Strong-arming people into voting who really have no desire to vote undermines our form of government. People do not choose to vote because they are uninformed about the issues and candidates, are lazy, cynical, or are content with the status quo. Voting someone else's ballot for them is cheating the system and essentially giving yourself two votes.

When people claim that Obama won because the economy was improving, or because Americans generally think he is doing a good job, it is not true. He won through dishonest methods and rhetoric. Many of the votes cast in the swing states were cajoled, some legally and perhaps even more illegally, into supporting him.



To: Alastair McIntosh who wrote (34112)11/12/2012 10:18:34 AM
From: longnshort1 Recommendation  Respond to of 85487
 

In 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, Mitt Romney got zero votes

Miriam Hill, Andrew Seidman, and John Duchneskie, Inquirer Staff Writers
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20121112_In_59_Philadelphia_voting_wards__Mitt_Romney_got_zero_votes.html