Posted on 11/24/2012 4:06:02 PM PST by patriot08
Those arguing that President Obama’s victory in the election a few weeks back was due to fraud may have found a dubious ally in their quest to argue that Mitt Romney’s rightful victory was stolen from under his nose.
That ally is the much-mocked Dean Chambers, creator of the now arguably discredited website UnskewedPolls.com. Chambers, fresh off his last venture into arguing with numbers, has created the site barackofraudo.com, where he has posted this map, which he claims represents states that President Obama won by voter fraud:
something else ive been thinking is a by the color explanation:.
Missouri in 2008 went from red Bush to pink McCain in 08
then went red for Romney. IOW, they saw Obama and said no louder in 12. Soooo.. OH, PA, FL should have gone pinkish to redish NOT the opposite blue what so ever. and maybe some other ‘blue’ states too.
Thats not based on facts (because we are still arguing the facts btw), just logic..
I'm none too happy about it.
Yeah, there were illegals that voted for Obama, I'm sure. The Dems have a mini-machine here, it helped get Obama elected, it helped Obama beat Hillary, etc. They had a great get-out-the-vote drive--they were constantly knocking on my door. FOUR TIMES that I know of, not counting how many I may have missed when at work.
NOBODY from Romney knocked on my door. I did receive a Romney phone call, though.
No, Obama won Nevada folks. Mostly fair and square. It galls me to acknowledge it, because by the act of acknowledging it, I am admitting to myself that the takers now outnumber the makers.
Tax consumers do outnumber tax producers. My own "informal" polling of folks I'd meet ever day indicated as much.
We need to step back, assess where we are. I'm in a brutal debate with some friends who believe the Republicans need to rebrand in the wrong direction by becoming nothing more than "Democrat Lite"--much as the Tories became after losing to Labour. I'm adamantly against it.
I think we're all still in shock and performing the natural self-assessment.
Let's do the assessment, but we must be certain to get our facts right: and Obama did, in fact, prevail in Nevada. :(
That is a factual assertion that can be tested.
Let's check Ohio.
President: 5.291 million
Senate: 5.016 million (94.8%)
House (total): 4.483 million (84.7%)
Looking good. Except that there were two congressional districts where they reported zero votes. If you fill in with the average from the districts where they reported results, you get: 5.123 million (96.8%)
Now, a non-battleground state, Tennessee:
President: 2.406 million
Senate: 2.274 million (94.5%)
House: 2.259 million (93.8%)
So we see that, comparing senate elections, both a battleground and non-battleground state had identical vote drop-offs between the president and senate races, and nearly identical drop for house races, when adjusted for the bad Ohio data.
In fact, presidential votes often beat the downticket votes, because there are people who just show up to vote for President. It's hard to compare the other races, because they might not be competitive. If there is no democrat in a house race, the democrats just won't vote, which lowers the totals. there were multiple house races where one party or the other failed to field a candidate.
I checked multiple battleground and non-battleground states, and there is no noticeable difference in dropoff between the president and other races; it is not true that there were "extra" votes in battleground states, and "match up" voting in non-battleground states.
Really? How do you know that? Blacks nationally were known to have been much less enthusiastic (statistically) about Obama as compared to 2008. If reports from black precincts showed extraordinarily high numbers of blacks voting, you can bet that there were many who voted multiple times under the supervision of, and in some cases, with the inducement of little gifts from, the Obama campaign. (Early voting enables cheating with multiple voting by the same individual.) Plus, the number of votes from those precincts could have been inflated by electronic hacking of optical scanners and centralized vote tabulators.
And why shouldn't whites turn out in numbers to vote against Obama's policies? In fact, it was generally observed that crowds at polls in predominantly white areas around the country were larger than at any election in memory. (Yes, this is only anecdotal.)
Heavy voter turnout in non-0moslem loving areas was reported all day long in numerous place. Anecdotal it may be, but carries a lot of weigh.
Anyone interview Soros? nuff sed.
Exactly the kind of thinkng that has doomed us to suffering the consequences of stolen elections until the Presidency becomes the National Lenin/Stalin/Hitler/Che'/Idi Amin, etc. Seat of Absolute Power.
Not here in Virginia. Every Obama group was more enthusiastic than 2008 except the white urbanites and suburbanites who voted from him in 2008, but he made up for that with enough new female white voters to make the difference in swing counties like Loudoun in Northern Virginia. In Virginia coal country Obama was very unpopular due to his war on coal. In Tazewell county with about 36k voting population there were less than 18k votes with Romney winning 78 to 21. Meanwhile in the city of Petersburg which is 80% black with a voting age population of 26k, they had 16k votes which went 90-10 Obama.
(Early voting enables cheating with multiple voting by the same individual.) Plus, the number of votes from those precincts could have been inflated by electronic hacking of optical scanners and centralized vote tabulators.
That's mostly speculation. Early voting cheating is entirely possible, but the documentation and criteria are fairly strict in VIrginia. There is no evidence of hacking of computer systems related to voting.
And why shouldn't whites turn out in numbers to vote against Obama's policies? In fact, it was generally observed that crowds at polls in predominantly white areas around the country were larger than at any election in memory. (Yes, this is only anecdotal.)
They simply didn't. I talked to whites who didn't vote, they've mostly stopped caring about elections years ago. My anecdotal evidence is the opposite. In my rural county I had no lines at my polling place, all white with a smattering of diehard democrats. Meanwhile there was an hour or more line at the high school near town, near our black area and more infested with in-town liberals.
I would definitely include Wisconsin and Iowa on that map.
And who thinks that they’ve “discredited” his web site? Does telling the truth discredit one these days?
Your opinion, and your “evidence” seems to always be opposite.
My facts are simple: a city of blacks had higher turnout than a motivated coal mining county. Some people might see that as evidence of fraud. Blacks also voted up to 99% Obama (in Richmond. Some people might see that as evidence of fraud. That’s fine speculation but not evidence of anything other than a vote for their own race and more handouts.
In other words, you’re in total denial of reality.
>> “And yet, not a peep out of the GOP.” <<
.
By now you must be aware that the GOP establishment is in the tank for global tyranny, just as much as the DNC.
Las Vegas consistently records 120% to 140% voter turnout; how can the DOP (dumb ol’ party) possibly win there?
He’s not trying to do himself any favors; he’s doing America the favor of risking his life to tell the truth.
Yes. I realized it was dead somewhere in the middle of W’s reign when he was taken over by pods. Then McLame was pimping for hussein in ‘08 and they totally freaked when Palin nearly backfired on them. They had pegged Romney since ‘08 and clumsily eliminated the republican candidates clearing the field. Now, quietly accepting an obviously stolen election, it’s welcome to Al Amerika.
That's a problem and it will get worse if we let it. OTOH, we didn't lose any states because of it and claiming that we did without evidence is pointless. On the barackofraudo site I click on any of the black states where it is claimed that Obama won by fraud and there is no evidence of fraud. But if you see some, please point it out.
Your “reality” is whatever you imagine it to be.
It has no connection with objective reality.
I'd doubt that any predominantly black district would vote without coercion or fraud less than 3% for Romney, and I'm being very low with that number. Nationally, polls were showing (1) less enthusiasm for Obama nationally among blacks compared to '08 and (2) Romney getting as high as the 10-15% range among likely voting blacks.
Isn't it insulting to many blacks when you talk about "a vote for their own race"? Some may think like that but certainly not 99%. I heard quite a number of blacks calling in to conservative talk radio shows and supporting Romney. It's not as if Romney were George Wallace or Orville Faubus.
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.