"It's amazing how a few votes here and there give you completely different result. "Three things:1) While the vote the vote in FL, OH and Virginia was close, the vote in Colorado really wasn't. Obama won CO by almost 5%. The extra 114K voes Romney would have needed in CO would mean that he would have had to increase his vote total by 10%; actually that is a whole lot.2) Obama actually won the popular vote. The electoral college system actually has a strong republican bias to begin with. This analysis where you give Romney an extra 400K votes on top of that is just an exercise in how further biased you can make a biased situation. Only 200K people voted in Alaska for their 3 electoral votes. If you compare that with the 3 million people that voted in Wisconsin for their 10 electoral votes, a vote in Alaska counts 4 times as much as a vote in Wisconsin.3) Given 2) if you gave 0bama an extra 409,000 votes, allocated to his favor, he not only wins North Carolina, but Georgia as well if you run down the list of the closer results. If you allocate the extra 409K freely, Obama could have won: NC, Alaska, AZ, and Montana, an extra 32 electoral votes."It's amazing how a few votes here and there give you completely different result. "George Bush won the presidency by 1 vote."It does show you that vote fraud can be a game-changer. "Even in a close race, you would need to alter upwards of 50K votes to have an effect. There are two ways to do that only way to do that: 1) tamper with the voting machines, 2)tamper with the eligible voter rolls or the registration process. Both of these seem to be in the sphere of Republican antics."It also shows to me the Obama "mandate" isn't as mandatey as he thinks, especially since the house is republican. "Democrats won in terms of total vote for House seats. It is only Republican Gerrymandering that preserved Republican control.Mandate or no, Obama won and Romney lost. V.