Galt's Gulch
14

"It doesn't matter who votes; it matters who counts the votes".

Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 9 months ago to Politics
88 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

I am convinced that the results of the elections have not much to do with the votes cast. Stalin had a point.

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by Kilroy 9 years, 9 months ago
    From the time I was a kid in the fifties I heard my parents talking about dead people voting. This has continued to the present day. Given the technology available today where the government can track everyone, their cars via license plate readers, every phone call they make and every site they visit on the Internet, it seems reasonable that they can tell when someone is using a dead persons identity to vote. Also, as we are tracked everywhere, it should be of little consequence to add to that file on us whether or not we are a citizen and eligible to vote. One of the other things that is needed is feedback as to whether our votes were ever counted. To address these issues I present the following draft proposal for your review:


    An idea for more accurate and fraud proof (or fraud reduced at a minimum) voting without the need for a national ID card.

    First we must agree that only legal of age citizens of the United States can vote in federal elections. Next we must also agree that only legal of age citizens of a state that is having elections can vote in those elections.

    That being the case, the following procedure could be put in place:

    1. Voter goes to voting place and presents ID proving citizenship
    The government recognizes several types of identification such as birth certificates and passports among others.
    2. Voter then votes for whoever and whatever, using an electronic voting machine.
    3. At the conclusion of voting, the voting machine issues a receipt indicating all votes cast by that voter and adds a randomly generated number to which these votes are linked.
    4. The voting machines are connected to a central location using the Internets VPN and high level of encryption. All voting information is sent there via that path.
    5. In addition, each voting machine contains a flash drive which is only accessible under lock and key. This drive contains a duplicate of all voting information that was sent via the VPN.
    6. When all voting is concluded at all precincts, all flash drives are collected and sent to the central location.
    7. Votes from the VPN connection are then compared with votes recorded on the flash drives.
    8. Votes are tallied and placed on the Internet along with any errors due to mismatches between the VPN and flash drive data.
    9. Error resolutions are updated with details as they are addressed
    10. Using the Internet, a voter can then look up their votes on the government run site using the number on their voting receipt. This shows that their vote was counted and what it was counted for.

    Though this proposal is likely not bullet proof, it would go a long way toward reducing fraud, IMHO of course.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 9 months ago
      This is a good plan. The ability of a voter to look up his vote and compare it to his receipt (in case he pushed the wrong button accidentally) is crucial. I might suggest a "Vote Preview" button (like Print Preview) so that, before a voter Saves his vote, he can look it over - and change it if he wants.

      Jan
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by Rocky_Road 9 years, 9 months ago

        I disagree about reviewing your vote at home.
        What do you if you voted wrong? Get to vote again?
        Apply this nationwide, and you would never get a final result.

        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 9 months ago
          I was thinking of this as QA, Rocky_Road. If you found that you had voted for Y when you checked online, but your receipt and your memory say you voted for X, the first thing you do is call your uncle, who you are pretty sure also voted for X. Have him check online: If the online record says he voted for Y, then you ask a few more people. If half of the people detect a change from X to Y, then you call the newspaper, Carter Center, X election committee and tell them a story of voting fraud.

          Jan
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by Rocky_Road 9 years, 9 months ago

            That would be good...check to see if your receipt matched the database. Make sure that your vote wasn't pilfered.
            Your reference to "(in case he pushed the wrong button accidentally)" would cover a voting mistake, and that should be 'too bad'. Otherwise, in a close election, a third party voter could claim "mistake", and demand to change their vote.
            I know a bunch of Perot voters that would have claimed to have meant to vote GOP...!

            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by scojohnson 9 years, 9 months ago
      I'm just the messenger on this, but the left's opposition to ID required for voting is always that it 'discriminates against the poor, the homeless, and disproportionately disenfranchises black people which have driver licenses in lower percentages to whites'.

      Unfortunately, they have somewhat of a point, we really don't have a system of ID in the US other than the driver license.. We could use passports, but then that requires paying for one and is pretty much a poll tax.

      So it's the honor system... and unfortunately a lot of the dead people in Chicago seem to vote every year and very reliably for democrats...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by whiskysmuggler 9 years, 9 months ago
    If memory serves me correctly, George Soros owns a major share in a Canadian company that tallies a large number of the electronic voting machines throughout the Eastern US. This was an article that was published prior to the election in 2008. I was scared back then. Since then we had the 2012 elections where David Axelrod stated 'Obama is going to win this election - I guarantee it!"
    Who is counting the votes?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by RonC 9 years, 9 months ago
      How does one arrange to have votes counted by a foreign company owned or controlled by a partisan? What standing do they have? Who provided the electronic machines that voted for Obama when the voter clearly pressed the Romney touch pad? How can a precinct in Eastern Cleveland have 100% of the votes attributed to Obama. You know there had to be at least one illiterate that pressed the wrong button. I believe the fix was in. And today we have a President that can't make a decision for the USA. He is anti-American in his behavior. Leading from behind is essentially "following" or withdrawing completely. I have believed for 6 years now he is one of them, he is conflicted, and cannot act in our behalf. I have wondered why, after releasing enemy combatants back to the battle field and by his decision process (late or no decision at all) allowing the enemy to gain substantial ground and resources, why hasn't a four star with a band of Marines relieved him and restored the Constitution? Just my opinion.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 9 months ago
        You may be correct about the fixing of the voting machines. The 100% score is as suspicious as you indicate. But the people around me (So Cal) love Obama and would vote for him another 10 times if they could. I think that he would have won without cheating (because the Republicans could not field a worthy opponent); this is not to say that the cheating did not occur.

        Jan
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 9 months ago
    It matters who decides which political committees get to be 501(c)3s, too. Why isn't Lois Lerner in jail yet?

    There's more than one way to cheat in an election.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 9 months ago
    This is much easier to control on the front end instead of the back end, and that is what happens.

    The parties choose candidates that they can control. The media and "bi-partisan" debate process are used to discredit and/or disqualify other potential candidates.

    Voting has little effect on the eventual office holders.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by NealS 9 years, 9 months ago
    Welcome to the State of Washington, this is how our elections go. Combine who counts them with the way the machines (in some States) can change your vote if you're not watching carefully, and most election results can be determined before the first vote is counted.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 9 months ago
    Sheesh -- I hope you're wrong!
    However, recognizing the state of affairs currently in the USA, you just might be right. If you are right, elections are a charade; a not too well orchestrated one at that. Cogitating about it, it really pisses me off when I think about all the trouble I go through in order to learn about the candidate and issues.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Kittyhawk 9 years, 9 months ago
    On the issue of fraud by the vote counters, check out this video. Here's the description: "Rep. Tom Feeney (Fmr. Speaker of The House in Florida) employed this man from Oviedo, FL to rig elections and flip them 51% to 49%. Exit polling data was proven to be significantly different than the published results. Rep. Feeney was also the lobbyist for Yang Enterprises, the company who delivered the program." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4aKOhbb...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
    Well for the most part I think that our vote counting is still relatively honest, but those casting the votes have been suspect for 50 yrs (remember the large cemetery turn-out for Kennedy in Chicago). Now we have illegals voting, and voters casting votes in multiple districts, both due to lax voter verification. We in Wisconsin find numerous bus loads of people with Illinois license plates parked at our polling locations. Couple that with the early voting where people vote in the name of others in different districts and you get a margin of fraud that is significant, particularly in the current era where the populace is nearly 50/50 split ideologically.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Rocky_Road 9 years, 9 months ago
      I agree that the counting is probably on the up-and-up...except for the Dade County recount during the Bush vs. Gore election. I still remember the "hanging chad" report, and the Democrat vote counter that was found with a mouthful of chads!
      I always wished that I had gone ahead and printed up a van full of bumper stickers that said: Hey Gore--EAT CHAD AND DIE
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 9 months ago
      See, I don't accept the assertion that "the populace is nearly 50/50 split ideologically". I know the media works hard to present that as fact.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
        Your problem is that the density of populace in the cities is very high, while the normal people in the rural areas is much less so, and decreasing all the time.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 9 months ago
          Yep. If you look at a Red/Blue map, you'll see that by land mass, no Democrat should ever win office. The vast majority of liberals are all concentrated in the cities. During the Bush/Gore election, Bush won like over 90% of the _counties_ in America, but the ones he lost held like 40% of the population, which was why the vote was so close.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 9 months ago
            "The vast majority of liberals are all concentrated in the cities."
            1. On some issues gov't is trying for a national or statewide solution to things that should be handled locally. If most everything were local, you could simply move to the area that does things your way.
            2. Politicians have to take advantage of this state of affairs to win. They have to say things that sound comforting to people in urban areas and bizarre to rural people, and vice versa.

            The result of this is lots of talking and no limiting the size and intrusiveness of gov't.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by Rocky_Road 9 years, 9 months ago
            And...
            This is why the Electoral College will favor the Democrats increasingly so, and the politicians will pander to the liberals dominating the real seats of voting power...the major cities.

            We need to shut the College down (it has outlived it's intended purpose), and go to a popular vote for the Presidency.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 9 months ago
              Several states have already passed laws mandating that ALL of their Electoral College voters must vote with the majority winner by population of that state. I don't like that rule at all because it means that in a 51-49 victory, the winner gets ALL the votes. If we're going to do it by popular election without changing the Constitution, I'd rather see the States' Electoral College votes split according to the voting percentages. This would greatly favor Republican candidates because right now, California and New York are already foregone conclusions in the Presidential race. Taking away even 35% of California's 55 votes is a big deal.

              That aside, it should be remembered that the office of President of the United States wasn't originally intended to be voted on by the population at large. The position of the President was supposed to be selected by the Governors of the States through their appointees to the Electoral College. That way the President was responsible to the Governors for carrying out the laws enacted by Congress and paralleled the Governors' duties as Executives. To go along with this, the Senate was supposed to be beholden to State Legislatures, being chosen from them, while only the House was chosen by popular vote. This was to make it so that the States retained more power than the Federal Government. Be making each of these races a popular contest, all we do is undermine the very safeguards written into the Constitution.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Rocky_Road 9 years, 9 months ago

                Exactly.
                It is obscene that California and N.Y. places my candidate in the 'hole' right out of the gate.
                Given the recent polls that give conservatives a sizeable edge over liberals, a popular vote would go a long way to 'fixing' the Republic.

                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Animal 9 years, 9 months ago
    Evidence?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ allosaur 9 years, 9 months ago
      What part of Robbie's post did you not understand?
      Your question strikes me as one Eric Holder would ask while restating his guileful garbage about requiring a voter to show a picture ID as being racist.
      It's damn obvious why Dems in high places dislike voter IDs.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by Animal 9 years, 9 months ago
        It was simple; I asked for evidence. And I understand the Stalin quote. I'm asking for some specifics. The implication is that there is some national-scale, systemic corruption in our election process, and I don't think there is; if there was, the GOP wouldn't have run away with the 2012 Congressional elections.

        An Objectivist shouldn't be offended when asked for evidence, eh? Should not an Objectivist's decisions and opinions be based on evidence?

        I'm not saying there isn't voter fraud. There is, especially in the big (blue) cities. But that's a long, long ways from saying that our election system as a whole is fraudulent and/or ineffective. As witness the 2012 overhaul of Congress.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 9 months ago
          Hello Animal,
          I have no way of ascertaining if the problems were of a scale required to alter the results, but... A google search with the Key words "voting machines changing votes" turns up 156,000 results. https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=ch...
          Additionally when our AG does nothing regarding the obvious voter intimidation like the black panthers committed... https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=ch...
          No doubt this is not the only act of voter intimidation or the kind Holder would be inclined to investigate. One is naturally suspicious of the system coupled with the fact that the contract for the voting machine code is foreign controlled (Scytl...the evidence of Soros' involvement is thin, but shell corporations do exist and who knows... there are ways to hide one's involvement...still rather speculative). Why any part of the American voting process should not be completely in American hands is unfathomable.
          http://townhall.com/columnists/michellem...

          Respectfully,
          O.A.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
            I think it was only 307 votes in MN that swung the election to Franken the first time. Well within the margin of fraud.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by Animal 9 years, 9 months ago
              Yes, in that election, absolutely. Fraud can certainly tip extremely close elections, and in that one it's very likely that this happened.

              Why do you think the 2000 Florida case led to Al Gore coming mentally unhinged? No matter how hard they tried, the couldn't bullshit their way into a win.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 9 months ago
              Don't forget Washington state at the same time. One can also look at Harry Reid's re-election in Nevada. Or the Presidential elections of 2014. There are plenty of suspicious outcomes.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by Animal 9 years, 9 months ago
            Here's my problem with conspiracy theories in general, and this one in particular:

            Think for a moment about the scale of an operation like this. We're talking about deliberately corrupting thousands, maybe tens of thousands of machines, in thousands of precincts, all over the country. That's staggering in scope; it would take the (secret) involvement of thousands of people.

            Would you ("you" in the generic sense, not you personally) have us believe that not one of those people would have a pang of conscience and blow the operation? Or perhaps more to the point, not one of them would see the chance to become an instant celebrity and make millions in appearance fees, book sales and a TV mini-series by blowing the deal wide open?

            Not one? Out of thousands?

            Yes, a lot of the machines used are pieces of crap. Yes, there is a lot of voter fraud in the major cities - and in some small towns, too. Yes, Voter ID is vitally important to the integrity of the process.

            But a nation-wide, nefarious, Soros-funded conspiracy to rig elections? I don't think it passes the smell test.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 9 months ago
              I hear what you are saying and I am not big on conspiracies generally, but in some elections the margin is so small even some small discrepancies could change the results. I am not thoroughly convinced any outcomes have been changed, but we all do remember the hanging chads and the controversy of the 2000 election in Florida.
              A close election that uses only electronic voting could be thrown by one person (no conspiracy required) who has ability and opportunity to corrupt the machines code prior to installation or piggybacked on an update. All of us that use computers are painfully aware of the need for malware protection.
              As far as the pang of conscience goes: There are those of us with integrity and those without.
              An honest person has difficulty accepting the nature of the dishonest.
              Who is John Galt?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by khalling 9 years, 9 months ago
                I read an article by the Brennan Justice Institute regarding voter machines. There does not seem to be any evidence to support fraud, however lots of votes are not getting counted. There have been new Federal Election Commission guidelines put in place since 2012 to address this problem. They found that in one city, New York, for the last election for governor, over 60 thousand votes were thrown out due to "overvoting" this is when the voter chooses more than one candidate per office. They adjusted the machines to let the voter know this, however in these cases, the voter did not understand what "overvoting" meant. Of course the spin is out of these 60K votes, 1/10 were black or Hispanic and they made a case that these kinds of issues tended to affect minorities more than white voters.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  -
                • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 9 months ago
                  More than one way to skin a cat... the voting machine issues seem more like flukes... at least recently. Who knows what was happening ten years or more ago. The larger problem is more likely human in nature. There are a lot of dead people still voting. Maybe they are zombies. :)
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    -
                  • Posted by sumitch 9 years, 9 months ago
                    I think ACORN and SEIU and their ballot box stuffing with Mickey Mouse etc. gives a lot of evidence that the votes were being pushed to Obama in many places. The voting machines issue is well explained above as well and the Black Panther in Philadelphia who was not tried by Eric Holder for lack of evidence disregarding the video of him at the polling place with a police club intimidating voters. Stories of more votes than population were told about for more than a couple of places. If these tricks didn't give the office to Obama they sure gave it a shot. Who knows how much more was done?
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      -
                    • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 9 months ago
                      Hello sumitch,
                      Indeed. It smells very fishy. Somehow we keep teetering on this two party system. One wonders just who is in control and how much your vote is really worth. One thing for sure is that this administration and any of its appointed AGs will not pursue voter fraud charges as long they perceive it as helping their cause.
                      Respectfully,
                      O.A.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        -
                      • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 9 months ago
                        "how much your vote is really worth".I live in the south in a gerrymandered district, which was drawn in such a way as to insure a black representative at all times. When I tell you that over 80% of the black voters in this district are on welfare, you will understand that my vote and their votes are always different.
                        Point is, my vote is worth absolutely nothing. I feel like a black person in the south in the 20s who knew his vote was irrelevant! That was wrong then, and this is wrong now.
                        The only reason I keep voting is so I can gripe about the results.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by sumitch 9 years, 9 months ago
                        I believe you're right ObjectiveAnalyst. All one has to do is check out the credentials of his proposed replacement for Holder. No improvement there esp. on the immigration scene.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by Animal 9 years, 9 months ago
                Yes, as I noted below: In an extremely close election, on a small scale, where one box of ballots "found" in a car trunk can make the difference.

                But on a national scale? I ain't buying it.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  -
                • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 9 months ago
                  Understood. If the election is so close that it comes down to one state, and that state has the problem... well, that could happen but probability... Still, if one knew and could prove it, I suspect they might be "disappeared." Strange how things that sure look nefarious like the death of Breitbart's coroner and how another witness happen to vanish and nothing more is heard... who knows?
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    -
                  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 9 months ago
                    And one should note that the 2014 Presidential election came down to just a few Counties in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. Those three states were worth 18,20, and 19 (57 total) votes respectively and would have swung the results the other way. And in those three states, it was mainly just a few counties that determined the vote there. (http://www.politico.com/2012-election/re...)

                    It doesn't have to be a nationwide conspiracy - just one that covers the critical states.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by Rocky_Road 9 years, 9 months ago
                      "It doesn't have to be a nationwide conspiracy - just one that covers the critical states."

                      That is why we need a popular vote, and the end of the Electoral College.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 9 months ago
                      "It doesn't have to be a nationwide conspiracy "
                      It amazes me we don't have a better system.

                      I was in Tampa from 98 to 04. While I was there they instituted voting machine that didn't generate a receipt. You just touched the screen, at it said, "your vote has been recorded."

                      In the 2000 election, in which they abandoned counting and selected Bush president, they used paper ballots. They sent out a thing a few weeks showing which chad should be punched out for which candidate. It told you to check b/c if you didn't have it inserted all the way, you would punch the wrong chads. It wasn't confusing, but I could see it being difficult for elderly people.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by Rocky_Road 9 years, 9 months ago
              "Yes, there is a lot of voter fraud in the major cities..."

              Those are your words, and the ever increasing migration into the major cities makes these voting blocks the outcome factor in how a state swings.
              Why do you think that the candidates focus on the largest cities in each state? Because that is where the campaigns get won.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by Animal 9 years, 9 months ago
                And because that's where the people are.

                This is a great argument for requiring Voter ID. Simply requiring proof if identity for voters would eliminate a LOT of this fraud.

                But my observations about massive, nationwide conspiracies still apply.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by sumitch 9 years, 9 months ago
                  That is exactly why Obama and Holder are against pictured voter I. D. They know that it would cost them huge amount of votes, especially in the illegal immigrant population due to his illegal amnesty, but I suspect also the black population because Obama is black. In talking to the ladies in the apartment complex where I live, I get the feeling that they don't care much for Billary. That gives us a shot and makes it even more important that the GOP does it's homework and get a winning team together. My winning team includes Ted Cruz and he is not all that well liked in the liberal camp, so I'm not sure if he would be a good candidate or not. The other is Scott Walker, but I don't think he'd do well with the unions and doesn't have much national exposure. Just my two cents worth.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
              Then you're just being naïve. It does exist. It's called the Dem party. And they are true believers. They believe in the ends justify the means, and win at all costs. Ideology trumps ethics.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by Animal 9 years, 9 months ago
                And there's a counterpart. It's called the Republican party. Many of them are true believers as well. The problem we've been having isn't conspiracies; it's that the Dems play to win, and we don't.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 9 months ago
          You have to understand the philosophy of the left. They believe in BIG gov't, and the biggest is the Pres. That gets many more people energized to vote for a presidential election. They have less interest/energy for congressional (one of many reps), and when you get to state and local elections, they have very little interest. That accounts for the swings shown in the overall vote tallies, the difference in R vs. D percentages, and in the amount of known or suspected voter fraud.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by sumitch 9 years, 9 months ago
            Not saying anything but reported facts here. But when 94% of the blacks that voted were for Obama sure rings of at lease racist driven voting. There's probably much more fraud, trickery and vote counting that hasn't been discovered or maybe discovered but not reported on, Maybe not totally, but many votes are fixed.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo