|
I'm Canadian and this doesn't concern me directly per se but I don't like the idea of any kind of possible fraud. This seems to be largely glossed over since not too many people visit the election thread.
Edit:: For the sake of showing the other side and possible explanations visit along with the reddit post
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=16732588
http://www.reddit.com/r/statistics/comments/123pt7/would_rstatistics_care_to_critique_the/
The two documents
http://www.themoneyparty.org/main/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2008_2012_ElectionsResultsAnomaliesAndAnalysis_V1.51.pdf
http://www.themoneyparty.org/main/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Republican-Primary-Election-Results-Amazing-Statistical-Anomalies_V2.0.pdf
Essentially what's happening is since electronic voting machines were implemented, in general elections between democrats/Republicans, there appears to have been a systematic vote flipping system, where larger precincts have up to 10% of the democratic votes swapped to be republican votes instead. What this means is that in a small area of say 100 people where 60% vote D, 40% vote R, you wind up with 60 votes D, 40 votes R but in a larger area with 50,000 votes, with the same 60% vote D, 40% vote R, the final tally in that particular precinct would be 50% D, 50% R.
The general idea behind what should normally happen is that an area with 1,000 voters should generally have the same voter preferences as an area with 10,000 voters. This is not what's observed though, the vote flipping is observed in both urban and rural areas and completely absent in elections that took place via paper ballots and manual counting.
This has been seen both in the 2008 general election where voting abnormalities surfaced in favour of McCain and in the 2012 Republican primaries where Romney appears to have had votes flipped in his favour at the expense of the other candidates.
Some relatively painless articles if you don't feel like going into the report itself
http://www.globalresearch.ca/why-is-mitt-romney-so-confident-is-the-gop-stealing-the-elections/5310109
http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/breaking-retired-nsa-analyst-proves-gop-is-stealing-elections/article20598.html
edit::
TL;DR
There is a clear trend of people who voted Democrat having their votes changed to a vote for the Republican party, only in states where electronic voting/counting machines are in effect. This is done via changing the votes of up to 10% of people in larger precincts. This flipping is not seen when only paper ballots are used nor when there are no republican candidates. This effect is also seen in the Republican primaries where Romney got a surprisingly large amount of votes.
|
As far as I know its only certain voting machines in certain states, but yeah, it could effect the elections.
|
On October 31 2012 08:53 nennx wrote:
As far as I know its only certain voting machines in certain states, but yeah, it could effect the elections.
This isn't limited to certain voting machines. This is on a massive scale, as in hundreds of thousands of votes flipped scale. It could very well decide the election in certain states.
|
Yup. I have been hearing stories leading up to the election about how easy the voting machines are to hack. The government seems to give fuck-all about it.
|
I just added a tl;dr, I just want more people to see this. The USA is probably the last country I would've expected this large of a problem from but after looking into the money behind politics, I'm not too surprised.
|
132 Posts
Hey Bush have been elected twice.But he didn't win because of machine ...
|
OSCE election observers have been observing US elections since 2002. Not once have they ever came across anything but very minor issues. The internet gives rise to a wide range of conspiracy theories, but they never really ever pan out. We have everything from 9/11 truthers, planet X and free energy cold fusion. And no one seems to ever find out about these things but people on the internet.
The POTUS is a Democrat. You think he's not even going to at least look in to this if there was any truth to it? ... but wait, most conspiracy theories think the President is in on "it" (What "it" is seems to change a lot).
|
Any credible sources? From you know, somewhat respectable news organizations?
|
On October 31 2012 09:04 Imzoo wrote:
Hey Bush have been elected twice.But he didn't win because of machine ...
Highly Debatable. There were similar issues with electronic voting machines during his first election.
|
I personally think our electoral process is shit anyways.
|
that really astounds me, how comes theres not a bigger shitstorm about this?
|
WHY THIS IS FALSE (with proof)
I posted this in the other thread, but I'll copy it over here since you couldn't keep this contained in the relevant thread:
Please remember that I do volunteer election work (legal) on partisan elections for some Republicans in the State of Wisconsin, which was one of the states accused of cheating in that report.
On October 31 2012 08:36 Lmui wrote:
Secondary confirmation of the statistical anomaly I posted earlier. It did seem pretty impossible at the time and some people, BluePanther especially tried to refute it but didn't have a concrete reason. This article elaborates further and suggests that it has occured starting only in 2008, only for republican candidates and is only ever in favour of republican candidates.
You're asking me to disprove something that didn't happen. It is hard to do that. I also believe when you throw around these kinds of accusations, it's YOUR job to PROVE that it happened. And correlations are not PROOF. Like I said, the author of that study noted that in Wisconsin, we've had that same trend. But I pointed out that we use paper ballots, and that the machines only count. When there is a recount, they count the paper ballots. Just recently we had a huge election scandal. A Democrat won the election for a spot on our Supreme Court. A clerk in a large (and very Republican) Milwaukee suburb failed to submit a large group of votes until the day after the election which swung the results in favor of the Republican candidate for Supreme Court. Obviously, hell was raised and a recount commenced to verify the results.
See: http://waukesha.patch.com/articles/latest-report-to-gab-shows-waukesha-county-recount-628-completed
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/122443704.html
They used a partial hand recount in this Supreme Court election (which was hugely partisan) where the Republican won by a miniscule amount. He still won after the recount. About 1/3 of the counties in the state were required to recount the ballots BY HAND. There was no suggestion of wildly varying vote totals nearing the 10% your conspiracy theorist alleges. The mistakes were well within reasonable changes to the total, and nobody accused anyone of stealing the election.
Here are the historical counts as this whole debacle unfolded so you can see these changes from a machine count to a hand count:
http://gab.wi.gov/elections-voting/results/2011/spring
You are chasing a ghost. Our machines are not rigged. And this is proof (at least in a single example). Where is YOUR proof?
|
On October 31 2012 10:15 Denzil wrote:
that really astounds me, how comes theres not a bigger shitstorm about this?
I think Americans stopped caring what their rulers did long ago.
|
On October 31 2012 09:17 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 09:04 Imzoo wrote:
Hey Bush have been elected twice.But he didn't win because of machine ... Highly Debatable. There were similar issues with electronic voting machines during his first election.
plus when your brother is in charge of the counting in the state that decided the election.....
|
On October 31 2012 10:15 Denzil wrote:
that really astounds me, how comes theres not a bigger shitstorm about this?
Democrats don't want to give the republicans ammo to pass though voter ID. With the republicans doing this they literaly show why there should be voter id for a vote.
Its literaly a win win situation for them. By hook or crook reps get an advantage of votes. Classic electioneering.
|
On October 31 2012 10:15 Denzil wrote:
that really astounds me, how comes theres not a bigger shitstorm about this?
Because this is more than likely conspiracy theorist horseshit with no basis in reality. If it actually IS true, (smart) people will notice and a shitstorm will promptly ensue.
I'd argue that most non-US countries in the developed world would probably prefer to see an Obama victory (not basing that on any research, but it certainly seems that way), so if there's shenanigans their media will absolutely hop on it and rip the shit out of the US. Plus the left-leaning/Democrat media in the US itself.
4 random websites does not constitute proof of electoral fraud. Let's wait and see what reputable newspapers/websites have to say.
EDIT: More than likely they will have nothing to say because this is utter tripe.
|
On October 31 2012 10:20 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 10:15 Denzil wrote:
that really astounds me, how comes theres not a bigger shitstorm about this? Democrats don't want to give the republicans ammo to pass though voter ID. With the republicans doing this they literaly show why there should be voter id for a vote. Its literaly a win win situation for them. By hook or crook reps get an advantage of votes. Classic electioneering.
How would a ID change what the op claims?
|
You guys are believing garbage with no citations. I have a degree in Political Science from a major University and pretty much all worthwhile studies with credible, non-partisan funding have found there is basically no truth to this. The cases of this happening have been extremely minimal as well as extremely rare. With all the money and interest in politics these days it's pretty much impossible to get away with. Both sides have their fingers on the trigger waiting to bring down a shit storm on the other party at the first wiff of foul play. This voting fraud non-sense has as much credibility as the people that believe the earth is flat.
|
Need far more proof then these websites. Besides it doesn't matter who wins this election, we lose no matter what.
|
On October 31 2012 10:22 heliusx wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 10:20 Sermokala wrote:On October 31 2012 10:15 Denzil wrote:
that really astounds me, how comes theres not a bigger shitstorm about this? Democrats don't want to give the republicans ammo to pass though voter ID. With the republicans doing this they literaly show why there should be voter id for a vote. Its literaly a win win situation for them. By hook or crook reps get an advantage of votes. Classic electioneering. How would a ID change what the op claims?
It would be a lot harder to rig votes if they required every person to have an ID to vote. People would be able to check off who voted and when in the election records.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
