Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Fishy Ohio Voting?

by TONI H / November 13, 2012 11:43 PM PST
Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Fishy Ohio Voting?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Fishy Ohio Voting?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Not just there, check out Philly voting too.
by James Denison / November 13, 2012 11:52 PM PST
In reply to: Fishy Ohio Voting?

I feel there's been rampant election fraud this time around, even more than when Acorn was engaging in fraud in the first election.

Collapse -
I win the bet!
by Josh K / November 13, 2012 11:59 PM PST
In reply to: Fishy Ohio Voting?

Obama loses = "The People Have Spoken!"
Obama wins = "Fraud!"

Get in line behind Donald Trump. Romney couldn't take Ohio even with his own son's voting machines.

"End of the American Dream." They're free to leave along with the secession nuts.

Collapse -
I already pointed out your intentional lie about
by TONI H / November 14, 2012 1:00 AM PST
In reply to: I win the bet!

the voting machines that you keep perpetuating, Josh. Give it up. To refresh your memory:

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/11/does-tagg-romney-own-ohio-voting-machines/

Please make sure you only post the FACTS, Josh.......I mean you keep accusing me of lying, while you hide behind your own inability to conjure up the truth. Let's be fair for a change, OK? Now tell me how it feels to be called a liar publicly............

And I'M not the one who came up with the actual numbers for the Ohio District Votes.....OHIO did. Even YOU have to admit they are bizarre to say the least, right?

Collapse -
Thanks 2 the fact you never read the body of your links Tobi
by Ziks511 / November 14, 2012 10:39 PM PST

you probably missed this part.

"H.I.G. Capital, on the other hand, which does control Hart InterCivic, has clear ties to the Romney campaign — another part of this conspiracy theory. H.I.G. Capital's cofounder and managing partner, Anthony Tamer, was a partner at Bain & Co., where Romney once served as CEO."

So while Tagg (Taggart) Romney may be in the clear, the link to Mitt Romney is still solid, in fact I consider this even more solid.

And I think it may have been me you were attempting to address when you posted this, because I've made mention of the Tagg Romney story which I believed to be true.

Certainly, I think its more solid than this delayed reaction, ginned-up controversy. More Conservative Fakery and Toni Heckling.

Rob

Collapse -
Your 'direct tie' is a little hinky
by TONI H / November 14, 2012 11:27 PM PST
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.I.G._Capital

HIG was founded by Anthony Tamer in 1993........a full 20 years ago.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hart_InterCivic

Hart has been in the election voting business since 1912........and eventually became Hart InterCivic in 2000. Are you saying that Anthony Tamer knew in 2000 that machines he 'has control over' that were put into place in Ohio were put there deliberately to help his former friend out when Romney finally decided to run 12 years later in order to 'fix' that election for him?

Tamer left Bain & Company in 1993......Romney left in 1999.....machines 'controlled' by Tamer are now 'directly tied' to Romney 13 years later. Oh my.......shades of Bill Ayers (the Weatherground bomber who still doesn't think he bombed enough) helping get BO's career off the ground.
Collapse -
(NT) Hi Toby! LOL
by Glenda. / November 15, 2012 2:14 AM PST
Collapse -
So who did she complain to?
by JP Bill / November 14, 2012 12:00 AM PST
In reply to: Fishy Ohio Voting?

FOX news?

I don't know if it happened to anybody else or not, but this is the first time in all the years that we voted that this has ever happened to me," said Marion, Ohio, voter Joan Stevens.

Stevens said that when she voted, it took her three tries before the machine accepted her choice to vote for Romney.

"I went to vote and I got right in the middle of Romney's name," Stevens told Fox News, saying that she was certain to put her finger directly on her choice for the White House.

She said that the first time she pushed "Romney," the machine marked "Obama."

So she pushed Romney again. Obama came up again. Then it happened a third time.

"Maybe you make a mistake once, but not three times," she told Fox News.



Did she tell any Election Official?

Why not?

Collapse -
The only such computer issues I am aware of....
by Josh K / November 14, 2012 12:03 AM PST

......had the opposite happening -- someone tried to vote for Obama and it kept selecting Romney. There's a YouTube clip of it. Apparently it was limited to that one machine, which was shut down.

Collapse -
The trouble wioth machines/mechanical devices
by JP Bill / November 14, 2012 12:05 AM PST

You can't beat the pencil, as long as you don't let the person doing the counting have an eraser.

Collapse -
I believe it's time to require all voting
by James Denison / November 14, 2012 12:15 AM PST

to be done by absentee ballot, notarized by a notary or law officer. Then before the vote is removed from the envelope, any challenges can be checked out to verify it's proper, and then the vote is added to the others which can then all be counted anonymously. We MUST do something to verify the voting or the entire process is breaking down and fraud will/has run rampant. The more people come to believe Obama stole the election, the more the outrage will grow, and calls from some states even for separation.

Collapse -
LOL
by Josh K / November 14, 2012 12:32 AM PST

Yes, let's spend billions and cause every election to take months over something like a dozen documented cases of voter fraud over the last ten years or so.

The only people who have "come to believe Obama stole the election" are wearing tin foil hats and/or reading way too many paranoid right-wing blogs.

He won. Get over it.

Collapse -
I'll accept his win
by TONI H / November 14, 2012 1:03 AM PST
In reply to: LOL

thru lies, scare tactics, intimidation, etc. That won't stop me from ranting for another four years or until the Benghazi murders are laid at his feet and he gets impeached. I'd rather deal with an idiot like Biden than a fraud like BO.

Collapse -
(NT) Shhh, Josh thinks Obama did a great job in Libya
by James Denison / November 14, 2012 1:35 AM PST
In reply to: I'll accept his win
Collapse -
River in Egypt, Toni
by Josh K / November 14, 2012 3:16 AM PST
In reply to: I'll accept his win

He won, fair and square, and one reason was that his opponent was a very weak candidate. Your inability to accept that fact is precisely what's wrong with the "party of personal responsibility."

But please, do carry on. The longer you refuse to understand what's wrong with your party, the better for ours.

Collapse -
You know what is most amazing to me?
by TONI H / November 14, 2012 3:46 AM PST
In reply to: River in Egypt, Toni

It isn't that you believe the Conservatives are 'sore losers'.....and it isn't that you don't like the fact that I will continue to complain/rant about this particular president and his lousy policies....but that you have absolutely no issues with anything he does. You are like the LSM......you literally slobber all over yourself with every post trying to defend everything that spills out of his mouth. You don't hold him accountable for anything, including the last four years, yet you tell me that I personally have no ability to accept what is wrong with the 'party of personal responsibility'. WHEN does the Democratic party and BO start taking responsibility and stop blaming Bush, Josh? BO made the statement again today about boo-hoo, look at what I inherited.........it's so disgusting to see him pawn off his bad decisions continuously on SOMEBODY else.....ANYBODY else........ANYTHING else. WHEN do YOU start getting tired of it and hold HIM responsible, Josh?

Collapse -
You ARE a sore loser
by Josh K / November 14, 2012 4:20 AM PST

You're blaming everything under the sun except your own party and your own candidate. The only way Mitt Romney could lose an election is via corruption on the other side.

That's some serious denial, Toni.

Collapse -
I'm not blaming anything, Josh
by TONI H / November 14, 2012 4:32 AM PST
In reply to: You ARE a sore loser

BO won.......I believe he won under very dirty methods since he had no record he could brag about, but he won.

I only posted a news story that turned up on the net showing really bizarre numbers. Take it for what it's worth.......a news story with factual results.

Collapse -
You're blaming your own party's failure....
by Josh K / November 14, 2012 4:57 AM PST

.....on some kind of cheating and/or dirty pool by the other side, because there's simply no way in your mind that there could be any other explanation for your candidate losing.

That's denial.

Collapse -
You really are dreaming Josh
by TONI H / November 14, 2012 5:50 AM PST

I'm not blaming the win on anything other than dirty BO Chicago politics/methods because he had nothing to brag about for his four years. Romney didn't get into the dirt with him and he lost. Oh well.......

What is really denial, Josh, is your inability to respond to the actual election results for those districts. Can you explain them or do you wish to keep deflecting away from how bizarre they really are?

Collapse -
RE: Can you explain them
by JP Bill / November 14, 2012 6:59 AM PST
Can you explain them or do you wish to keep deflecting away from how bizarre they really are?

Can YOU?

From your link

Look, I don't know what the truth is,

Tell us what the truth is Toni.

We're waiting ...what's "the truth"?
Collapse -
JP, you're an antagonistic PITA
by TONI H / November 14, 2012 7:35 AM PST

I don't have to explain anything. I never said anything about those vote tallies other than they are bizarre. Josh is obsessed with trying to get me to admit to something I haven't even hinted at. I just asked him if he thought they were bizarre as well and if not, can he explain the numbers. Since you decided to become a part of that conversation, can YOU explain them?

I'm waiting........

Collapse -
RE:I'm waiting........
by JP Bill / November 14, 2012 11:26 AM PST

You want a reason for the numbers..

The short answer is.........Romney got 0 votes in those precincts.

Them's the facts. It breaks my heart to tell you. It was bad last election...it's worse this time, you would think they could read the writing on the wall.


If We Lose, It Was Stolen

The 59 Precincts Theory is a natural, paranoid extension of this. In Wisconsin, Mitt Romney's state co-chair asserts that voter ID could have changed the result, stoking fears of "all sorts of different precincts and all sorts of same-day registrations." In Ohio, conservative bloggers are raising questions about Cleveland precincts that cast no Romney votes. In Pennsylvania, when Republican House Leader Mike Turzai said voter ID would "allow Mitt Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania," he was implying that fraudulent votes had made up the old Democratic margins.

There is a common thread: a total lack of evidence that any fraud occurred. Let's start in Cleveland, where bloggers have been writing about more than 100 precincts where Obama won at least 99 percent of the vote and 16 precincts where Mitt Romney won no votes at all. "How in the world did this happen?" asked an anonymous author at YoloHub. "Third world dictators don't even get 99 percent of the vote."

But black Democrats do, sometimes, get 99 percent or more of the vote in black precincts. In 2008, Obama actually pitched a shutout in 18 Cuyahoga County precincts. And you would expect him to. In 2008, Obama won 97 percent of the black vote in Ohio. In 2012, it was 96 percent. In Pennsylvania this year, he won 93 percent of the black vote and 80 percent of the Hispanic vote. This was why Obama could clean up in precincts that are almost entirely black or Hispanic.

There are places where Obama won less than 10 percent of the vote. In King County, Texas, he won exactly five votes to Romney's 135. But nowhere was Obama's loss among white voters as stark as Romney's loss among urban blacks.

Yesterday, as I checked into the flimsy "fraud" stories, I got an email from TheTeaParty.net. This is one of the more hard-to-classify groups that take the name of the taxpayer movement. I haven't seen it in action in elections or local government, but I've seen it sponsor tables at conferences. Now, it was promising—without really saying how—that it would get to the bottom of the 59 Precinct Theory.

"Stand with us as we work to demand a full recount of ALL votes for the 2012 election," read the letter. "In this fight, we are up against a well funded progressive, far left machine funded by the likes of George Soros. Any amount that you can contribute, whether $5 or $500 or anything above or in between, will assist us in the fight for the integrity of elections in this country!


RE: I haven't even hinted at.

You haven't even hinted at, EH?

YES, you have Toni, YES you have.

Fishy voting results?

Everything that seems too good to be true most likely IS too good to be true; there's something suspicious about that.

Collapse -
Either there was fraud involved
by James Denison / November 14, 2012 11:58 PM PST

Or those areas are filled with racist bigots! I know that has to be true since the Liberals here have taught me when you see such a lopsided vote only for someone of your racial background, that means you are a BIGOT!

Collapse -
(NT) LOL, Not as bad as the Gore losers were:)
by Glenda. / November 15, 2012 2:16 AM PST
In reply to: You ARE a sore loser
Collapse -
a sore loser, is a sore loser.
by JP Bill / November 15, 2012 2:27 AM PST

The degree of sore loser is in the eyes of the beholder.

Collapse -
Suggest you check out this Wikipedia entry on the Florida
by Ziks511 / November 14, 2012 11:03 PM PST

Elections Commission in 2000 under Katherine Harris, the Bush Campaign Chair for Florida (but that can't be suspicious or a conflict of interest, she's a Republican).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Central_Voter_File

The Palm Beach Post reported that

"[C]omputer analysis has found at least 1,100 eligible voters wrongly purged from the rolls before last year's election. [...] At least 108 law-abiding people were purged from the voter rolls as suspected criminals, only to be cleared after the election. DBT's computers had matched these people with felons, though in dozens of cases they did not share the same name, birthdate, gender or race.

As you said after the contentious vote in Ohio in 2004, "He won, get over it." Of course you were refering that tall pile of natural fertilizer, George Witless Bush.

But I have to say, entrusting a vote for Office to a machine is the stupidest idea in the world. I was always uncomfortable that my vote was being counted properly even before computers entered the equation. Use a paper ballot for the Candidates for Office, and the bloody Computer for all the other stuff. At least you could have a proper re-count of paper ballots to be sure the candidates were right.

Rob

Collapse -
when you have a name like
by James Denison / November 15, 2012 12:00 AM PST

Mike Smith or John Jones, Tyrone Jones, etc, then yes, sometimes the law might get confused between all of them.

Collapse -
Ahem...about that weak candidate remark
by Steven Haninger / November 14, 2012 5:30 AM PST
In reply to: River in Egypt, Toni

If the president won by only around 2% against a "very weak candidate", that doesn't speak all that strongly for his win.

Collapse -
(NT) Obama won , by default.
by JP Bill / November 14, 2012 5:50 AM PST
Popular Forums
icon
Computer Help 49,613 discussions
icon
Computer Newbies 10,349 discussions
icon
Laptops 19,436 discussions
icon
Security 30,426 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 20,308 discussions
icon
Windows 10 360 discussions
icon
Phones 15,802 discussions
icon
Windows 7 7,351 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 14,641 discussions

Tech Tip

Stuck without Internet and want to watch movies?

CNET shows you how to download movies and TV shows onto your device using Amazon Prime so you'll always be entertained.