Merged The election was stolen/rigged!

[Zax63]

So I was perusing the state results for PA and OH on politico and none of the counties Obama won in either state (a minority of counties) had 0 votes for Romney. So, is there any evidence for Robert's original claim beyond "unofficial" counts?

Here is a site for Philadelphia voting results.
Unfortunately I have not found a way to get a list of results by division. You have to manually look at each one. Ward 28 is a good one to browse. The ward as a whole went 5,920 to 34. Division 28-03 has no Romney votes but looking at a few others Romney got less than 5 votes vs hundreds for Obama in each division.


From an article on Philly.com

Take North Philadelphia's 28th Ward, third division, bounded by York, 24th, and 28th Streets and Susquehanna Avenue.

About 94 percent of the 633 people who live in that division are black. Seven white residents were counted in the 2010 census.

In the entire 28th Ward, Romney received only 34 votes to Obama's 5,920.

Although voter registration lists, which often contain outdated information, show 12 Republicans live in the ward's third division, The Inquirer was unable to find any of them by calling or visiting their homes.

Four of the registered Republicans no longer lived there; four others didn't answer their doors.

 

[JayUtah]

Symptomatic of massive fraud...

That didn't answer the question. In fact it just repeated the claim that the question was meant to refute. And, by the way, the handwaving sort of claim I predicted you'd be making. In conspiracism, every isolated occurrence is extrapolated to an absurd extent.

the win "by any means necessary" mantra the Dems have embraced.

No, this strategy exists only in your imagination. It would help the discussion if you didn't argue so much like the very worst of the GOP pundits.

As explained, the Machiavellian plot you envision would be eminently discoverable and therefore worthless as an actual plan. You don't get to try to argue your way out of your illogical proposals by insisting that your political opponents must be so frantically desperate as to commit such idiocy.

 

[JayUtah]

Iwould have thought the GOP would be screamig blue murder and sending out battilions of lawyers all over this, if it was happening....

What do we have deafening silence........

Indeed, the GOP will not even confirm that the "Republican auditor" now being quoted widely as witness of malfunctioning voting machines has anything to do with them.

Of course Robert's standard response to that is a new claim that Republicans are just as hoodwinked and cow-towed as the rest of us -- which is why they won't back Birther lawsuits. So apparently, according to him, the Democrats have a "win at all costs, even if we look absurd by doing so" approach, while the Republicans have a "let the Democrats win at all costs, even if we look absurd for letting them do so" approach. In Robert's world, everyone except the conspiracy theorists is an idiot.

 

[JayUtah]

The ward as a whole went 5,920 to 34. Division 28-03 has no Romney votes but looking at a few others Romney got less than 5 votes versus hundreds for Obama in each division.

Essentially identical in proportion though opposite in outcome to most rural Utah counties who turned in thousands of votes for Romney, yet less than a dozen for Obama. Apparently the hypothetical win-at-all-costs Democratic vote riggers forgot about Utah.

 

[Ambrosia]

It was the Smurfs....they stole it along with the tea partys chocolate tea pots..

Part of their nefarious plan to turn the country blue, no doubt.

Why are there no red smurfs?

 

[JayUtah]

"In a democracy, it matters not who gets the most votes. What matters is, who counts the votes." -- Joseph Stalin

You're quoting Stalin as an authority on democracy? I should just stop here.

But I won't. Once again you don't answer the question. You cited allegations of voting machines visibly miscounting votes, so as to potentially alert voters, election officials, and third-party monitors to what was going on. You have yet to explain how this would constitute an effective way to rig an election.

 

[JayUtah]

We have the virtual testimony of non-existent "voters" -- who are counted as having voted for Obama.

That doesn't address a single point in the post you quoted. "Virtual testimony?" You're now citing "virtual" evidence? Pardon me while I guffaw.

 

[Dcdrac]

RPs track record is not good, he has failed to prove the President is not American and now he is failing to prove the election was rigged.

I wander what his next trick will be

 

[R.A.F.]

Get a clue.

You can't accept that Obama is President, without it being some sort of "conspiracy"...if anyone needs a clue, it is you.

 

[R.A.F.]

RPs track record is not good, he has failed to prove the President is not American and now he is failing to prove the election was rigged.

I wander what his next trick will be

Uncontrolable weeping?

 

[SpitfireIX]

There are 1687 voting divisions in Philadelphia. Romney got no votes in 3.5% of the divisions in a city that went 85% for Obama. I'm surprised there weren't more.

Philadelphia - Obama 559,180 vs Romney 91,953.

Romney lost the state by 292,047

The 19,605 to 0 votes don't affect the outcome one bit.

I'm not surprised there weren't more, and I'm mildly surprised there were that many. Even in a 100% Republican or Democratic polling location, with a large enough number of voters (say > 1000), I'd expect at least one person to vote for the wrong candidate by mistake. I suppose that speaks well of Pennsylvania's voting-machine design and layout.

 

[JayUtah]

RPs track record is not good, he has failed to prove the President is not American and now he is failing to prove the election was rigged.

He has also failed to prove that anyone but Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK.

I wander what his next trick will be

Likely continuing to spin the thread and attract attention by conspicuously failing to engage the points raised while bringing up new irrelevancies.

 

[swright777]

I'm not surprised there weren't more, and I'm mildly surprised there were that many. Even in a 100% Republican or Democratic polling location, with a large enough number of voters (say > 1000), I'd expect at least one person to vote for the wrong candidate by mistake. I suppose that speaks well of Pennsylvania's voting-machine design and layout.

I don't know about the whole state, but I've voted in 3 different precincts (not in the same year ) and the machines were very easy to use. You would have to be a complete idiot and klutz to accidentally vote for the wrong candidate.

 

[SpitfireIX]

As I've mentioned elsewhere, I've had RP on ignore for quite a while, because I find him to be a particularly tedious, boring, and unoriginal troll, so the following is for the benefit of other participants in, and readers of, this thread, rather than for his benefit.

I've been a poll worker at most elections in my county for the past 20 years, missing only a few because of my job. For most of those I've been an inspector, the senior poll worker at each polling place.

In Indiana, political party officials are generally not allowed in the polling place. Each party is allowed to have one poll-book holder and one challenger, each of whom has very specifically defined and limited duties and powers. No one from a political party would be allowed to show up and examine voting machines, or observe voters voting.

If a voter reported such a problem, I would notify the county election board, and they would most likely send out a technician to examine the machine.

 

[SpitfireIX]

I don't know about the whole state, but I've voted in 3 different precincts (not in the same year ) and the machines were very easy to use. You would have to be a complete idiot and klutz to accidentally vote for the wrong candidate.

And if you have a large enough group of voters, you will most likely have at least one or two who are both complete idiots and klutzes.

 

[Robert Prey]

That didn't answer the question. In fact it just repeated the claim that the question was meant to refute. And, by the way, the handwaving sort of claim I predicted you'd be making. In conspiracism, every isolated occurrence is extrapolated to an absurd extent.



No, this strategy exists only in your imagination. It would help the discussion if you didn't argue so much like the very worst of the GOP pundits.

As explained, the Machiavellian plot you envision would be eminently discoverable and therefore worthless as an actual plan. You don't get to try to argue your way out of your illogical proposals by insisting that your political opponents must be so frantically desperate as to commit such idiocy.

Naivete squared. No cubed.

It's just one example, but the good guys don't have cameras everwhere.

There Is No Voter Fraud’ Myth Takes a Torpedo
By John Fund

"We are constantly told by liberals that there is no voter fraud — or at least not any that involves voting at the polls.

Well, the son of Representative Jim Moran, the Democrat who represents Virginia’s Washington suburbs, has just resigned as field director for his father’s campaign for essentially proving them wrong. Moran was caught by videographer James O’Keefe’s camera advising an undercover reporter on how to commit in-person voter fraud. The scheme involved forging utility bills that would satisfy Virginia’s voter-ID law and then rely on the assistance of Democratic lawyers stationed at the polls to make sure the votes were counted."

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/331572/there-no-voter-fraud-myth-takes-torpedo-john-fund#

 

[JayUtah]

No one from a political party would be allowed to show up and examine voting machines, or observe voters voting.

Hence the dubious validity of the WND's reporting and the state party organization's utter unwillingness to involve themselves in the tabloid's claim in any way. If the party leadership acknowledges that the "auditor" in this report was a designated party representative, and he admits to observing voters in the process of voting or of physically tampering himself with the voting machine to elicit the behavior he claims to have observed, then the party becomes subject to investigation for vote-tampering.

If the "auditor" exists, he may have been one of the self-appointed "vote watchers." These groups often state a sympathy for or affiliation with a political party, but are not sanctioned or approved by them.

 

[JayUtah]

Naivete squared. No cubed.

Still fails to answer a single point I raised. Please stay on the ball, Robert.

 

[BazBear]

That doesn't address a single point in the post you quoted. "Virtual testimony?" You're now citing "virtual" evidence? Pardon me while I guffaw.

Perhaps when Robert used the word virtual, he actually meant imaginary?

 

[JayUtah]

Perhaps when Robert used the word virtual, he actually meant imaginary?

Indeed. He alleges that there exist voters in certain precincts who undoubtedly voted for Romney but had their votes suppressed or changed. It is his burden to prove that such a voter exists as he alleges. So far that burden remains unsatisfied, hence the affirmative claim that unanimous precincts are instead examples of voter fraud remains unproven. Until he can prove that fraud actually occurred, they remain unanimous precincts.