10 responses to “How Did Romney Get 3 Million Fewer Votes Than McCain?”

1. 

   slcraignbc

   November 11, 2012 at 8:01 pm

   I agree that there is substantial circumstantial evidence of real time Vote Tally manipulation that was aided by inflated Voter Registration Rolls, the absentee, military and early voter ballot system.

   But as I have suggested elsewhere such a system would be designed to work like a toilet. Once flushed the evidence is lost to any forensic analysis.

   State election laws are wholly insufficient along with the Fed laws.

   We are now, officially, a “Banana Republic”.

   Reply
   1. 

      paraleaglenm

      November 11, 2012 at 9:59 pm

      I am not suggesting proving a negative.

      The machines must be analyzed to see if a deletion/corruption of specifically tagged entries is possible.

      The judge denied probable cause calling the Ohio case ‘ridiculous.’ However, saying the ‘patch’ was limited to Write Only is a strawman argument. The question ‘Why real-time tabulation is necessary,’ is a good one. It leads directly to the question posed by this blog entry, ‘Can that information be used to accurately determine how many opponent votes to delete to create a close but decisive victory.’ Finally, is that deletion of data possible.

      If those questions are not answered, we should refuse use of the computer/scanner voting machine. At least the mechanical voting machine complained about in Florida, 2000 (Votomatic) was extremely reliable and impossible to tamper with.

      Reply
2. 

   slcraignbc

   November 11, 2012 at 11:54 pm

   Well, I’m unwilling to speak to the specific’s of any of the system’s as I consider them all flawed as they operate under the various State Election laws.

   And yes, I suspect that there was/is an algorithm at play that allowed operatives to make adjustments as needed at various points throughout the process.

   But I would posit that any suggestion that ‘electronic voting’ can not be be made reliable is suspect given the billions of dollars “cast’ by electronic transfer every day.

   Even there the “fraud” is found in stolen cards and fraudulently created accounts, similar to the current voting systems.

   A secure html ballot could be set to open with a valid ‘pin #’ randomly generated at sign in in a separate program that maintains a count.

   At the html ballot could be set up as a fill-able pdf with a single print and read only save function that generated a readable and non-duplicatable bar code for a scan-count .

   Then you have real time tally with hard copy ballots verifiable by the randomly generated pin # and bar code scan count.

   That’s 3 counts at the polling booth with a hard copy ballot w/ bar code for recount verification, if needed.

   Reply
   1. 

      paraleaglenm

      November 12, 2012 at 12:09 am

      Electronic fraud is rampant in the banking system.

      Add to that the ‘fox’ guarding the ‘hen house,’ e.g., politically appointed secretaries of state and the problem is more severe.

      I mentioned a safeguard in the blog, and that is a bipartisan physical/mechanical counting of all ballots as they are recieved, and voters entering the polls. That count has to match up with the final tabulation.

      In addition, it is ludicrous that voter ID has been stymied by the courts, as is the alien/illegal alien motor voter effect of some states issuing drivers licenses to aliens.

      Reply
3. 

   arnash

   November 12, 2012 at 9:06 am

   When it comes to the democrat political election machine, where corruption is possible it has to be assumed to be probable. All one has to do is look at the endemic corruption of Chicago/Illinois politics, with 4 (?) governors convicted and sent to prison, along with the corruption scandal of ACORN. If the count can be manipulated, it will be manipulated by nefarious godless morally bankrupt crooks behind the scenes. That is the sad truth about human nature when it has no moral compass, as is the case with men like, -and far worse than, Obama.

   I hadn’t had any such suspicions regarding the inexplicable shrunken vote for McCain which should have been 3 million more votes, not less, (aside from Ron Paulians not voting) but just raising the possibility of electronic fraud puts an explanation on the table that makes perfect sense. I will have to assume the worst until it is proven to be untrue. Which is very unlikely, because like the eligibility issue, no one wants to go there because it involves the distasteful task of having to point a finger at someone, and the toothless oatmeal eaters of the Republican party haven’t yet seen a scandal they were incapable of ignoring. Just look at the pathetically small number of Republicans in the House who are demanding answers about Benghazi-gate. The silence of all the rest speaks volumes.

   Reply
4. 

   unbontir

   November 26, 2012 at 12:48 pm

   The crooked machines are a symptom of a malignant disease within our two major political parties as well as throughout our society. Perhaps I should not throw stones as I live in a glass house of my own making, but th ere is a vaccuous absence of integrity, honesty, sincerety, principled morality–all that–within our society. Moral relativsim has infected our culture and is evident within the liberal-socialist left as well as the accomodating, compromising right. On the left they term it ‘political correctness’ and on the right, or the other side of the same coin as it were, they describe their self-promoted, supposed superior quality as ‘fair and balanced.’
   Yes, the machines are corruptable, but no repair or replacement will solve the problem. Consider the Republican State Caucus in Shreveport this past election cycle. The majority of delegates voted for Ron Paul including my neighbor Mr. Gary King. First of all the Republican party establishment leadership actually changed the Robert’s Rules immediately before the caucus–I believe it was within 24 hours of the actual meeting. Many didn’t learn of the changes until they got there. The Ron Paul supporters voted out the Chairman, Roger Villere, and on the second day he still assumed the position he had been voted out of and when the Ron Paul supporters turned their chairs around and started their own caucus since they were being completely disregarded and disrespected, law enforcement was called in and order deteriorated. One man who was speaking at a podium for the Ron Paul delegates was injured in ensuing scuffles.
   Then there was Tampa. My friend Gary King was a state delegate there. A vote was taking place on changes that would, if adopted, make it considerably harder for independent thinking Republican party members to nominate anyone other than the party’s pre-determined nominee du jour four years from now. Now here’s the disgusting thing and Gary King has posted the video on his website yourvoiceincongress.com: there was a teleprompter in front of the stage scrolling everything that was transpiring in the vote. The person at the microphone called for the ‘Ayes’ to vote and they shouted ‘Aye!’ Then, you could read the teleprompter as it scrolled where the ‘Nayes’ were asked to vote…AND BEFORE THE WORDS OF HIS REQUEST FOR THE ‘NAYES’ TO CAST THEIR VOTE HAD LEFT HIS MOUTH THE TELEPROMPTER SCROLLED UP WITH THE WORDS “THE ‘AYES’ HAVE IT’ !!!
   My whole point being, no matter how accurate the machines are, simply correcting their deficiencies will not be enough to prevent corruption when the ethical foundation of those officials tasked with the responsibility of conducting an election is established on the shifting sands of moral relativism for, like the manipulable foundation upon which they construct their ‘fair and balanced,’ ‘politically correct’ worldviews, another avenue of approach towards stealing an election will quite simply be employed.
   I’m not suggesting we don’t condemn unreliable voting machines, but that’s just the tip of an iceberg.

   Reply
   1. 

      paraleaglenm

      November 26, 2012 at 3:49 pm

      Ron Paul’s incursion into the Republican convention was a farce. I personally know one of Paul’s delegates, and what he and the other Paulians did to attempt to corrupt the convention. Don’t start in with Gary Johnson either.

      The topic of this blog was the digital theft of an election . . . an elaborate plan to undermine the Republic and disenfranchise voters, i.e., citizens. It suggested how the pre-poll closing access to tabulation enabled the fraud to be foolproof, e.g., how many of Romney’s votes to delete.

      For more information, see the WorldNetDaily article summarizing more fraud. The Pennsylvania tallys not adding up forensically is more proof. http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/the-big-list-of-vote-fraud-reports/

      Reply
5. 

   unbontir

   November 27, 2012 at 6:51 am

   I was not endorsing Ron Paul, but providing a specific example of the ubiquitious corruption within the Republican party when I asked the reader to ‘Consider the Republican State Caucus in Shreveport this past election cycle.’
   In fact I summarized my point explicitly writing: “My whole point being, no matter how accurate the machines are, simply correcting their deficiencies will not be enough to prevent corruption when the ethical foundation of those officials tasked with the responsibility of conducting an election is established on the shifting sands of moral relativism for, like the manipulable foundation upon which they construct their ‘fair and balanced,’ ‘politically correct’ worldviews, another avenue of approach towards stealing an election will quite simply be employed.
   I’m not suggesting we don’t condemn unreliable voting machines, but that’s just the tip of an iceberg.”
   ‘Ron Paul’s incursion into the Republican Convention’ amounts to a 30 some-odd year career of standing for what he believes. I disagree with much of his libertarian platform–especially the “Zionist” bullshit–as I am a Follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, but to malign his endeavor as a “farce” is unfair for, if nothing else, he was a pillar of consistency throughout his career, though the election process in these united states may quite accurately be described as farsical.

   A part of the selection of writings above in bold red reads, “BUT IF TRUE, FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS ARE OVER. YOUR VOTE, YOUR VOICE AS A CITIZEN IS NULLIFIED BY THOSE COUNTING THE VOTES . . . ESPECIALLY THOSE COUNTING BEFORE THE POLLS CLOSE.”
   If I might be so bold as to assert that the size, boldness, and red color of the font conveys intended emphasis, and utilizing the very basic elements of higher textual criticism, extrapolate from the emphasis that that section of the article is to be emphatically emphasisized. (I intentionally repeated the word ’emphasis’ in its varied forms to emphasize the emphasis intended–hah!), and so I propose that, beyond your legalistic perspective on everything that you read, (a hinderance to nuances of meaning in literature I might add, regardless of your legal analysis usually being of superior intellectual quality), there is in the article in question a major theme expressed in the red, emboldened passages that you are overlooking because of your advocatally-myopic vision which is keenly focused with the trained eyes of a legal expert on the less significant issue of ‘the digital theft of an election’ which you describe as ‘The topic of this blog.’ I would argue that ” IF TRUE, FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS ARE OVER. YOUR VOTE, YOUR VOICE AS A CITIZEN IS NULLIFIED BY THOSE COUNTING THE VOTES . . . ESPECIALLY THOSE COUNTING BEFORE THE POLLS CLOSE.” is the cental theme, or “topic” of this blog, but even if upon closer examination I was wrong, there was no reason for you to condemn my employment of the Ron Paul delegate’s experience in Shreveport and Tampa as indicative of my endorsing Ron Paul, libertarianism, or Gary Johnson who I know nothing about–though I can see how you might easily jump to that conclusion, when I made it so clear by starting the last paragraph with, ‘My whole point being, no matter how accurate the machines are,…’ and concluded with a fair summary of the thrust of my argument where I wrote, “I’m not suggesting we don’t condemn unreliable voting machines, but that’s just the tip of an iceberg.”
   You are light years beyond me when it comes to legal analysis, but your starting to get so legalistic in your observations that you see the gnats, but sometimes fail to observe elephants–or Rhinos–Hah! (Just threw that in there as a little subject matter humor.) Have a wonderful, Christ centered Christmas, ctf

   Reply
   1. 

      paraleaglenm

      November 27, 2012 at 8:55 am

      This blog was 1000 words, 700 if you subtract the three quotes at the bottom. Your comment above was 630 words.

      I take it for granted that in my state, New Mexico, my vote was disenfranchised by Sec of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron issuing 82,000 drivers licenses to illegal aliens.

      However, if the congressional hearing with the NASA computer programmer is accurate, the electronic voting in key precincts and counties was compromised so that accurate deletion of Romney votes in swing counties, and thus swing states, changed the election.

      There is serious statistical analysis that shows an impossible variance in congressional versus total presidential votes. It is an incongruity. That is not legal analysis, but facts and math.

      What this blog is trying to say that the Republican ‘shrug’ of voter fraud is now obsolete, because no matter how well we get out the vote, the counters and tabulators can delete them.

      Keep in mind that to a computer, a ‘1’ is no different than a ‘1,000,000,’ In other words, deleting 1 vote is no different than a million . . . or 3 million in this case . . . not hard to do spread across several high-density population counties.

      Reply
6. 

   paraleaglenm

   November 10, 2020 at 8:04 pm

   The ‘Must See’ link is missing . . . gone now. But, some good soul saved it on YouTube back in 2011. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1thcO_olHas

   Reply