And just when I was starting to feel a sense of ease about this election . . . .

I don't know if anyone -- on either side -- can feel that great about what's going on.

After having lived through the bombardment of TeeVee commercials (Guernica) during the recall
election, here in Wisconsin earlier this year, I think that's part of the marketing program.
The same way that the Spanish Civil War was a warm-up, or a pre-season or exhibition game
forecasting WWII, the recall last June was a trial run for this presidential election.

I think the TeeVee commercials and the outrageous stuff we're going to see in "major media" --
or that will be ignored by the "major media" (where the heck is coverage of the Sensata story?) --
is just going to get more intense, day by day, until that First Tuesday.

I'm honestly afraid that the outcome will be the same. That they'll keep telling us "it's neck and neck"
all the way through the afternoon of election day. Then somewhere around 3 or 4 pm they'll do
what they did here and declare the election already over, with the polls still open. Then the
vote (excuse me, I mean the tabulation) results will come out not too long after the polls close,
and it won't show an even race at all. (Despite earlier evidence from exit polls, that had been
showing just that.)

......I'm halfway through Greg Palast's book, "Billionaire's & Ballot Bandits" and he referred to
the Wisconsin Recall as a warm up, a trial run for this November.

One positive thing he emphasizes in that book -- that makes election theft more difficult -- is to
make sure you go out and vote early, in person, at your local municipality. (City hall, or town
or village hall.)

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Hope to see this on TRMS soon.

Obama-assaulter Tagg???

Made by Hart InterCivic. Interesting that the SEQ-AVC Edge II 5.0.24 was the one voting machine approved for future use in California after the 2007 election. But some changes needed to be made.

http://gab.wi.gov/sites/default/files/page/voting_equipment_by_municipality_2_pdf_15114.pdf

...had people talking.

Where 46 Wisconsin County Clerks traded ONE old,
used (but paper ballot-scanning optical units) for
TWO brand New touchscreen (no paper trail) voting
machines. Three thousand of them:

http://wcmcoop.com/2012/05/22/meet-command-central-the-people-in-charge-of-wisconsin-voting-machines/

get more eyes.

But if you'd like to create separate thread, linking to the same story -- or a different one,
if you can find another -- please, help me out. Go for it.

The eerie parallel down-graph of the other three candidates seems to be impossible.

Let's pretend we're talking about cookies instead of votes.

And instead of precincts, we have a whole bunch of cookie jars.

There are thousands of precincts in the state, so there are
thousands of cookie jars. But they're not all the same size.
So of course you can't flip the same number of votes from
every precinct.

But if you take a few more cookies from the bigger jars,
and a few less from the smaller ones, that's a "normal"
pattern.

Only this statistical analysis is looking for just that. It
doesn't matter how many or from where, all they're doing
is looking for that "normal" pattern of theft.

More cookies missing from the bigger jars. Fewer taken from
the smaller ones.

And that's exactly what the data shows. Also -- since he
was the closest challenger -- it looks like more Santorum
votes had to be flipped, to ultimately reduce the total
number of cookies that needed to be messed with.

I believe votes were flipped - in equal percentage measure - from all three opponents, not just Santorum.

Thus the parallel downturns.

That was my first thought, too. But going back to the taking-cookies-away comparison, it
just looks like there's a slightly steeper slope to the Santorum line. And the math needed to
reduce his actually winning the election might add up to a few more cookies having been
swiped off of his totals. ...Either way, it would be good to have a better and easier to follow
breakdown of the numbers.

Adding an overview of the "overall pattern" of crying foul on vote fraud, GOP columnists
coming out today attacking early, in-person voting (not the same as requesting a mail-in
absentee ballot and sending one of those in, which is something you shouldn't do), the
struggles in courts all over the country....

This poster at dKos summarized it nicely:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/21/1148037/-GOP-Controlled-VSBE-REFUSES-to-Prosecute-Election-Fraud

To make a stronger statistical case for vote flipping.

For example, are the larger precincts in urban areas? Was Romney polling better in those areas?

Did this pattern show up elsewhere?

There's a table in the article that has data and percentages.

....And besides the actual vote tabulation, there was also a pattern of
behind-the-scenes arm-twisting and manipulation. Santorum actually
won Iowa, by a slim margin, but it wasn't revealed until days or weeks
later.

I remember some other business in Maine, where Ron Paul was going to
win delegates in the caucus balloting, but came away with many
fewer than he should have. Don't have the details but the Paul-ites
were loudly crying foul. (And being generally ignored.)

This is as jargon free as I could make it (I'm the Collins guy who wrote it). The intent was to make the case in a serious way and link the pdfs. The article has gotten beau coup hits and very good placement. In addition, some kind person posted the first pdf, the basic outline, and it has several thousand views. More importantly, over 3,300 Reddit users downloaded the first paper, Republican Primary Election 2012 Results: Amazing Statistical Anomalies, August 13, 2012

PDF URL http://www.themoneyparty.org/main/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Republican-Primary-Election-Results-Amazing-Statistical-Anomalies_V2.0.pdf


There is a sequel coming soon.

Some other articles on election fraud

http://www.themoneyparty.org/main/stolen-election-2004-plus-the-voter-fraud-scam-series/

There is much obfuscation and misdirection surrounding the electronic voting machines. You have provided both confirmation and clarity with sound data and analysis.

Whether the buzz regarding election fraud might actually work in our favor is yet to be shown; did you see the post regarding the international election monitors who are in Texas now?

Updated: Retired NSA Analyst Proves GOP is Stealing Elections

By Denis G. Campbell and
Charley James
(c) 25 October 2012

UPDATED: Why is Mitt Romney so confident?

In states where the winner will be decided by less than 10%, of the vote he already knows he will win. This is no tinfoil hat conspiracy. It’s a maths problem. And mathematics showed changes in actual raw voting data that had no statistical correlation other than programmable computer fraud. This computer fraud resulted in votes being flipped from Democrat to Republican in every federal, senatorial, congressional and gubernatorial election since 2008 (thus far) and in the 2012 primary contests from other Republicans to Mitt Romney.

This goes well beyond Romney’s investment control in voting machine maker Hart Intercivic and Diebold’s close ties to George W. Bush. Indeed all five voting machine companies have very strong GOP fundraising ties, yet executives (including the candidate’s son Tagg Romney) there is no conflict between massively supporting one party financially whilst controlling the machines that record and count the votes.

A retired NSA analyst has spent several sleepless nights applying a simple formula to past election results across Arizona. His results showed across-the-board systemic election fraud on a coordinated and massive scale. But the analysis indicated that this only happens in larger precincts because anomalies in small precincts can be more easily detected.

more including some of the same graphs in the OP
http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/breaking-retired-nsa-analyst-proves-gop-is-stealing-elections/article20598.html

G.H.W. Bush had come in third in the 1988 Iowa caucuses. His dramatic victory in the 1988 NH primary, way out of line with both tracking and exit polls, appears to have been assisted by new computers used in counting the votes and, no doubt, software commissioned by Karl Rove in his role assisting with his client in the primary.

Fraudulent manipulation of Republican primaries makes clear that this is a criminal problem that people of all parties should want to get resolved--most of all Republicans.

Cliff Arnebeck

That leads to an interesting question. When did computer vote tabulation chicanery start?

I found this old D.U. link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x340132

There are some interesting posts/replies down towards the bottom.

I had a computer back in 1988. It was a lunchbox portable with an LCD screen and dual
720k floppies. I used my RAM to run a third, virtual "flash disk."

The guys who sent the Apollo moon missions out (late 60's) would have killed for it.