Was the 2012 Election Stolen?

Was the 2012 Election Stolen?

Posted by:  Posted date: November 15, 2012 In: Voter Fraud | comment : 0

As the 2012 election approached, conservative enthusiasm grew. Mitt Romney was drawing huge crowds while Barack Obama spoke in half-filled stadiums. All the passion lay on the right while the left was discouraged with a promised messiah who proved merely a politician. And the prediction was that, in contrast to 2008, Republican turnout would dwarf the tuned-out and carry the day. Hence the shock November 6 eve. How could Romney lose, especially by such a wide electoral margin?

Maybe he didn’t At least not legitimately.

When I predicted Obama’s re-election, I stated that, despite our country’s inexorable leftist slide, Romney would still win on Election Day were it not for vote fraud. I explained that the Democrats could steal more than enough votes in crucial swing states to turn the election. And I still believe what I did then: electoral criminality put Obama over the top.At the time, we heard stories about electronic-machine “glitches” switching Romney votes to Obama ones. And Patrick Moran, son of Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA), was caught on tape facilitating vote fraud while Bridgeport, CT mayor Bill Finch essentially promised to commit same for a political partner in crime. 

Since then, the indications of electoral criminality have been overwhelming. First there are the anecdotes, such as the court-appointed Republican poll watchers illegally expelled from 13 Philadelphia polling places in wards that, in most cases, went 99 percent for Obama; the poll observers who noted what they considered vote fraud but were powerless to stop; and the Democrats who actually bragged about voting more than once.

Then there are the statistics, such as this staggering fact: in 59 Philadelphia districts, Romney failed to get even one vote. Final Obama-Romney tally: 19,605 to 0.

Huh? Not even one person voted GOP accidentally? I mean, there even was a Washington, D.C. councilman who inadvertently voted to approve faux marriage, saying that he didn’t know what he was voting for (that would be Marion Barry).

Next, consider this report from The Columbus Dispatch:

More than one out of every five registered Ohio voters is probably ineligible to vote.

In two counties, the number of registered voters actually exceeds the voting-age population: Northwestern Ohio’s Wood County shows 109 registered voters for every 100 eligible, while in Lawrence County along the Ohio River it’s a mere 104 registered per 100 eligible.

Another 31 counties show registrations at more than 90 percent of those eligible, a rate regarded as unrealistic by most voting experts. The national average is a little more than 70 percent.

[…]Of the Buckeye State’s 7.8 million registered voters, nearly 1.6 million are regarded as “inactive.”

Understand the significance. Years ago I was contacted by a Washington, D.C. community leader (who’ll remain anonymous) who told me that he had “done some computer work for several candidates over the years in DC” and had conducted his own study of urban vote fraud. He said that inner cities’ great transiency ensures that any given large metropolis will have a great number of voters who no longer live in their precinct of registration. These areas also have Democrat operatives known by the get-out-the-vote term “block captains” or “apartment captains,” people who know the lay of the land and thus what registered voters have left town. So all they need do then is vote for these people or have others do so. This is very easy, too, with few voter-ID laws. And this is why Democrats oppose these laws so vehemently.

Now consider that Obama “won” Ohio by 100,000 votes. This means that to flip the state, Democrat surrogates had to illegally “activate” only 6.25 percent of its 1.6 million inactive voters.

Note also that Ohio secretary of state Jon Husted did ask Eric Holder’s DOJ for help negotiating conflicting federal laws pertaining to purging ineligible voters from the rolls. The DOJ’s ultimate response? “No comment.”

Yet a voter doesn’t even have to be inactive, just disengaged. For example, when the aforementioned Patrick Moran offered advice on surrogate voting, he told an undercover reporter to masquerade as a pollster and call a targeted individual to make sure he wasn’t planning to vote. And this is nothing new. In fact, liberal leg-thriller Chris Matthews himself admitted that it has been going on for years.

Then there is the case of the missing military ballots. As Rachel Alexander at Town Hall reported:

The conservative-leaning military vote has decreased drastically since 2010 due to the so-called Military Voter Protection Act that was enacted into law the year before. It has made it so difficult for overseas military personnel to obtain absentee ballots that in Virginia and Ohio there has been a 70% decrease in requests for ballots since 2008. In Virginia, almost 30,000 fewer overseas military voters requested ballots than in 2008. In Ohio, more than 20,000 fewer overseas military voters requested ballots. This is significant considering Obama won in both states by a little over 100,000 votes.

Frankly, it is inconceivable that military interest in voting could’ve dropped so drastically given conservatives’ passion this election season. The damning conclusion? The Obama machine wants our soldiers to shed blood while it sheds their votes.

Striking as all this is, however, it’s likely just a partial picture. As with all crime, it’s a given that the discovered vote fraudsters represent only a tiny percentage of the total. And what about vote-fraud methods we haven’t even thought of yet? Remember, the Democrats have been honing this act for many, many years.

And vote fraud is a Democrat domain. Liberals are the situational-values set, people who for years insisted that right and wrong is relative and that if it feels good, do it. And what feels good to them at election time is stealing votes to win — and they do it. They relish it, in fact. Like the liberal who addressed Bill Clinton’s it-depends-on-what-is-is infidelity and adamantly told me, “He did the right thing,” leftists love the con. To pull a fast one like private eye Jim Rockford, fool everyone, and get away with it is like winning the Nobel Prize in Prevarication in their world. Thus, it’s assured that there’s no small number of liberals who are currently brimming with pride at having negated the votes of countless knuckle-dragging conservatives.

Having said this, we can’t be sure about the exact magnitude of the vote fraud. But my judgment is this:

The election was likely stolen.

And whatever Barack Obama is presently, I don’t believe he will be a legitimate president come January 20.

This is why Congressman Allen West was right not to concede his Florida race. And, frankly, if Romney believes that the election may have been stolen nationally, he should withdraw his concession.

Radical?

Unprecedented?

Yes, but so is vote fraud on the scale perpetrated by Obama’s minions. And people needn’t fear creating a national crisis — we are already in a national crisis. The only question is whether good Americans will stand and be counted or allow 2012 to mark our official descent into banana-republic status.

http://americainruin.com/2012/11/15/was-the-2012-election-stolen/

 

 

It’s Bush’s Fault!

I find it funny how so many are saying that Obama won and we should just “shut up” and not talk about him.  Of course that makes zero sense.  Seriously, not only did Bush win his reelection, but they are STILL talking about him.  Obama didn’t exactly win a landslide either, no matter how they spin it.  Three million votes, that’s it, and there are questions hanging over this election, bigger questions than in either of Bush’s campaigns.  Considering there is a full effort to radically transform the United States, something that has nothing to do with race, gender, or birth control, coupled with a sour economy that is likely to get worse, don’t expect people to fall in line with the Obama faithful.  That’s simply not going to happen.  If Romney had won, the liberals would still fight.  In fact, that was one advantage I saw in a Romney victory; the media would actually watch him instead of spouting off his talking points.  As the federal government moves beyond it’s limits further and takes a one size fits all approach to the states and the people (regardless of who is in the White House or the Congress), trampling our rights in the process, there will be division, and yes, it will get louder.

 

Random Thoughts on the GOP

Česky: Oficiální portrét amerického prezidenta...

Image via Wikipedia

The first time I ever voted in an election was in 1984, and that vote was cast for Ronald Reagan.  Unfortunately I have not had the honor of voting for anyone even close to his caliber since.  In my mind, he was and is everything that Republican should be.  I wish that were the case to the GOP.  I’ve heard that the establishment never really liked Reagan, and have abandoned true conservatives since the defeat of Goldwater in ’64.

Since 1984, I have voted Republican except in 1996 and 2008.  In 1996 I voted for Harry Browne, Libertarian and author of the book “Why Government Doesn’t Work“.  I supported Harry Browne in 1996, and yes, I support Ron Paul now.

In 2008 I voted on every issue and every race except for President.  I loath John McCain.  I believe that Barack Obama won in 2008 not because he was such a great leader or speaker, but rather because McCain was so completely wrong.  The best thing McCain had going for him was Sarah Palin.  Conservatives did not like McCain, and although he won the nomination, he never had the support of the base.  The angry white RiNO was never going to win, and that was obvious when his campaign became one of defending Obama and not bringing real solutions to the table.

I would never have voted for Obama, and I will not in 2012.  The man had no experience, and when our nation needed leadership, he is what we got.  Of course his politics are pretty far removed from mine as well.  I am not liberal.  I lean libertarian, so there are issues I agree with liberals on, but my distrust of big government runs far too deep.

The primaries are going, and the race is down to Romney or Gingrich.  If Paul is still in I will vote for him in the primary, and in the general I will vote for Romney or Gingrich.  I’m not thrilled by either, and I am left wondering if the GOP isn’t going to see itself fall apart.

Simply put, the GOP has become Liberal Lite.  In the absence of the Soviet threat, and holding a disdain for Goldwater and Reagan, it is a party that has lost its soul.  You are not the party of vision when what you stand for is nothing more than “We aren’t them”.  Everything else is just lip service.  The party of small government and less regulation has grow government and increased regulation, but to a lesser degree than the Democrats.  Democrat Lite!!!

At a time when many in this country still subscribe to the Reagan Revolution, to the ideals of the Republic, it seems both parties are intent on growing government.  The Tea Party emerged not out of the GOP, but out of the people who observed a government that no longer reflected the will of the people.  Most Americans agree with the Tea Party.  In many ways the Occupy Movement reflects the same frustrations from the base of the other side.  Big government is rightly perceived as a threat, and a pawn to big business and big labor.  The people are betrayed, and it is time to reclaim our birthright.

Gingrich is the face of the post Reagan GOP, that gave lip service to the Gipper but followed corruption.  The GOP failed in their contract with America.  They did keep Clinton in check, thus his legacy is greater than it should have been, but for all the opportunity, the GOP went for power over principle.  In going after Clinton and not just keeping him in check, they laid the groundwork for what was later seen with the Democrats accusing Bush of masterminding 9-11.  Of course they also said he was the village idiot.  Politics doesn’t always make sense.

Romney is the face of the GOP today.  He is not a conservative.  I know what he says, but how much does it really mean?  I have no issue with the concept that what is fine at the state level is not fine on a federal level, and thus I can overlook RomneyCare.  I believe he will work to overturn ObamaCare.  He will not fulfill the ideals of the Reagan Revolution.  He will not work to restore our rights.  He will not work to scale back government.  He is better equipped to deal with our economic reality than our current president, but he is no Reagan.

So liberal lite, or conservative?  Conservatives are the single largest ideological group.  The future of the GOP hinges on that question, and if it is the former and not the latter, the GOP will go the way of the Whigs.