Election Reform
Related: About this forumObama getting 55% of the Vote
In the tally of the last ballots being counted from the Nov. 6, 2012, US presidential election, Obama is marking up 55% of the votes.
These votes are probably all paper ballots, coming from provisional, absentee and others. Definitely not electronic.
These are in the order of millions of votes. So why is there such a difference from the votes cast before and on the day of the election that were used to call it for Obama?
Obama is said to have won with just under 51%.
And now he's tallying 55%.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)and more Democrats were taken off voter lists/targeted this election so there were more Democrats that had to vote with a provisional ballot.
Also, many of the remaining ballots are coming in from BLUE states.
The current vote totals here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AjYj9mXElO_QdHpla01oWE1jOFZRbnhJZkZpVFNKeVE
and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012#Results
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)
FogerRox
(13,211 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Nov. 29
Obama 65,006,643 minus 11/7... 60,652,149 equals 4,354,494 late votes
Romney: 60,538,051 minus 11/7... 57,810,390 equals 2,727,661 late votes
Total late votes Obama and Romney 7,082,155
From Nov 7
Obama 60,652,149
Romney 57,810,390
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251234427
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)ilikemaps
(11 posts)I usually use this website: http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/
Right now, it has Obama at 50-51%
Cliff Arnebeck
(305 posts)As you point out, late votes are "not electronic." Election day votes are. A five point "red shift" has characterized our Presidential elections since 1988--denying our elected Democrats the landslide result they deserved and denying defeated Democrats elections they actually won. It has been suggested that this phenomenon is associated with Karl Rove getting technology on the side of his primary and general election clients over this period.
The mathematics of all this has been brilliantly researched and documented by professional mathematician Richard Charnin. Since 2004 this has been the primary, if not exclusive focus of his professional life. The same difference you observe between election day votes and late votes applies to early votes.
Here is the link to Charnin' s analysis for the 2012 election--state-by-state and national (including weighted averages for the national numbers and percentages): http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/01/02/2012-election-fraud-a-true-vote-model-proof/
The problem was addressed at a NYC press conference on October 22, 2012, and in DC at the National Press Club on October 24, 2012 featuring former Rove operative, Jill Simpson. Both conferences can be viewed at: http://electionprotectionaction.org. Richard Charnin participated in the DC conference by telephone.
Cliff Arnebeck
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Folks, Cliff is correct. Richard Charnin is the person who got me thinking about this. That after I read this report from him at the link below from opednews.
The numbers are evidence of the manipulation of election numbers.
I don't care what anyone says, in a very large set of numbers like this there should be similar outcomes. Democrats and republicans don't vote all that different, it is just in the way the votes are counted.
LINK:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Late-Votes-and-the-True-Vo-by-Richard-Charnin-121127-108.html