No. of Recommendations: 45
...that Romney had only written an acceptance speech and might be working on concession speech.

That tells me that they thought they had the vote rigged. They were that confident that they had suppressed the vote enough, fixed the early voting turnout by shutting it down as much as possible, cheated enough with misinformation, fear and smear billboards, purging voters. You name it, they worked on it. Remember they even made it hard to get people registered, especially in Florida. They deliberately made their voter ID laws difficult to fulfill for the people who generally vote Democratic. They should impeach that slimeball Rick Scott in Florida. Charlie Crist was outraged at what he had done there.

It didn't work, Thank God.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It also shows that Willard was a major jerk right to the end.

One speech? Jerk!

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

Did you see these? I'm not going to put on my tin-foil hat yet, but I do hope someone is investigating to see if there is any substance or validity to these allegations.
(original page gone)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1


I tend to take this testimony at face value, since complaining about the GOP stealing votes in an election where Obama won wouldn't make any sense ... unless it was actually happening.

Frikkin vile.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
That's why I want a system with a a paper trail. So if we need to recount, we have paper to recount. Those paperless touchscreens? Those are just an invitation to subvert our entire process.

A friend of mine opined a scenario which, at first blush, seems far-fetched, but I can't really find flaw in it. Imagine if a company that makes such voting machines is taken over (either through controlling interest in stock, or acquisition directly) by some other company that is owned by China (just to pick a country). They put their execs in charge, they put their engineers into key positions, and they could (in principle) change the firmware and algorithms to guarantee whatever result they want. And no one would know about it because it's all "black box" with no written record.

People are worried about a fraction of a fraction of a percent of votes from dead people when these machines make it feasible to take over the entire process.

Interesting in this particular case that it appears someone wanted Santorum to lose and Romney to win. Imagine what the general election would have looked like if Santorum where the GOP candidate. The implication in the article is that he should have been.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I already posted about this. N8larson's has a debunked explanation (below). I offer more evidence (way, way below) from Georgia that hardly anyone will be talking about because the President won. "...the list of voters in Fulton County who had problems could reach into the thousands and...would be "unprecedented." 1/2 million registered voters are in Fulton--want to guess what color the majority are? That is just wrong. People were denied the right to vote and many, many people spent a whole day voting. Christie Todd Whitman, a Republican and head of the EPA under Bush 43, said we look like a 3rd world country with our voting.

"While the premise (GOP's huge efforts to control the election process and remove any chance to audit) is true and has been repeatedly proven, this article is terrible. I hear what it's saying, but its numbers don't make sense (which probably means I'm missing something). The author's point is severely flawed. He refers to "vote tallies" going down, but it's not the vote TOTALS, it's the PERCENTAGES. I'm actually a little insulted that someone could write an article that mixes these up, and implies that votes can't go up while percentages are going down.

And in a cumulative precinct counting exercise, it's VERY easy to "show" Romney's percentages rising while others are falling by simply counting first the precincts where Romney's totals are lowest, which appears to be what the folks at "The Money Party" have done to produce the graphs shown in that article there.

To show how the manipulation works, here is a sample of the Ohio primary breakdown:

- In Mercer County, a total of 383 people voted in the Republican primary. Of those, 42% voted for Santorum, while 30% voted for Romney.
- In Highland County, 5,590 people voted, 39% for Santorum and 31% for Romney.
- Now examine the results from larger Ashtabula County, with its 8,932 voter turnout: it shows that Santorum suddenly dropped to 35% while Romney?s votes climbed to 33%.
- In the largest, Montgomery County, with its 56,283 voter turnout, Romney?s vote tally suddenly zoomed up to 38%, and Santorum?s tally dropped to a distant 31%.

THIS DOES NOT SHOW HOW MANIPULATION WORKS!!! It shows how MATH works! And as I said earlier, vote "tallies" don't suddenly zoom up to "percentages". So, larger counties have more Romney voters. Duh. Count them first, and you'll get an entirely different story. I can't believe the math in this article is supposed to convince someone that there was election fraud going on in the GOP primary.

You want to know the gory details on election manipulation by the GOP? Pick up the November Harper's. Or just read the article here:

That's the how. Proof of whether in 2012? I haven't seen it yet. If it's in the "AddictingInfo" article, please point it out."

-n8 (staunchly independent, but generally disgusted)

I still believe we have got to find a way to fix the partisan voting shenanigans in this country. Georgia was expected to win for Romney but I firmly believe that the Republican party did not want to chance a state that could be close, so they tried to fix the election here just like in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and other states. One of the most under reported stories this election year was the purging of voters. I have also heard that many districts simply don't count provisional ballots.

Some metro Atlanta voters denied regular ballots
Kemp said several Fulton County precincts ran out of the paper provisional ballots, forcing voters to wait until more could be printed.

...complaints of voters who were listed in the Secretary of State's central database of voters but who did not show up in the electronic lists at the precinct.

Separately, Kemp said his office received reports of voters who said they had submitted written voter registration forms but didn't show up on any voter list. He said Fulton County did not process all the registration forms it received.
Sarah Shalf, chairwoman of Georgia Election Protection, said poll workers should have allowed any voter who is on the Secretary of State's master list to use the routine touch-screen ballot. The protocol, she said, should have been for a poll worker who didn't see a voter's name to call another elections official who could verify that voter's registration.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'd be surprised if an NSA analyst (assuming he really was) would make such an error. Though I do understand what n8 is saying, and he may be correct that this is exactly what is going on.

I hope so. The vote is sacred. No matter who you are voting for you should vote. And we need to be sure those votes are tallied correctly, without bias or manipulation.

Which is why the touch-screen (no paper) machines scare me.
Print the post Back To Top