Google accidentally released Maine election results early!

reply to post by Eurisko2012


of course those dirty tricks are not acceptable!



HOWEVER, like I said this isn't even an "election" this a nominational process yo!

So the truth is people should be complaining to the RNC for not assuring the supporters a clean and uncorrupted nomination process! The members of RNC should be outraged.

Originally posted by truthinfact
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

of course those dirty tricks are not acceptable!



HOWEVER, like I said this isn't even an "election" this a nominational process yo!

So the truth is people should be complaining to the RNC for not assuring the supporters a clean and uncorrupted nomination process! The members of RNC should be outraged.

You think that just maybe the powers that be were looking the other way on purpose?

Now we have the video how it is done. It is so easy.

Lets see if it gets fixed.

You know it seems to me that the technology exists to identify and then - remove -

dead people from that list. If they did that then even a fake ID wouldn't work.

How hard could it be? - read the obituaries - make a list then --- delete ---

Maybe Team Obama would declare that dead people are being disenfranchised.

Originally posted by truthinfact

HOWEVER, like I said this isn't even an "election" this a nominational process yo!

Which is worse in my book. If the nominees are chosen through fraud and lies, and political skewing, then what's the point of voting? It would be like me asking you to vote for which of my two shirts should win best shirt contest (both being the only nominees). In the end, your vote doesn't mean anything, because I own both shirts.
That's the level of corruption we're talking about here.

I see alot of people supporting Ron Paul. How are these people having their chance at a fair vote, if Paul is erased via corruption at the nominational level?

So what happens when Romney doesn't win Maine?

I read the first two pages, but it's 2/11/2012, 12:32 CST, and now the results say 0/600 and 0% reporting.

How is that even possible? Did something really dirty happen? Did we actually find proof of election fraud, and they're trying to clean up the mess? Or is it some kind of glitch that hasn't been fixed yet?

Originally posted by Furbs
So what happens when Romney doesn't win Maine?

The real results are coming out and it appears that Ron is stomping Romney. By the end of the day I believe we will see a Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Gingrich, Santorum result. In that order.

Originally posted by The_Zomar

Originally posted by Furbs
So what happens when Romney doesn't win Maine?

The real results are coming out and it appears that Ron is stomping Romney. By the end of the day I believe we will see a Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Gingrich, Santorum result. In that order.

So then.. it would seem that someone discovered a glitch and "Chicken Little'd" it at ATS again..

Is anyone surprised?

Originally posted by Furbs

So then.. it would seem that someone discovered a glitch and "Chicken Little'd" it at ATS again..

Or outted a premature lie, forcing the truth to surface for the sake of saving face.

Originally posted by Kenrichaed
OH MY GOD!! Pauls not in last place...look out everyone here he comes!

RP is probably in first or second place, but the MSM (from what I've seen so far) has thrown RP under the bus from the beginning. The majority of Americans are idiots, and won't do any research to find the facts. If the MSM was honest about the results, more people would see what RP is all about. The sad truth is that there is nothing we can do about it, and the MSM will decide who wins. And in saying so, what will Americans do about? Absolutely nothing!

reply to post by The_Zomar


Do you have a link to share? I would like to see how things are going so far, but I have not been able to find any info.

Thanks!

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul

Originally posted by eLPresidente

There is no way Google can report 100% before the largest chunk of Maine even votes...

You're under the impression that we the people cast votes that are counted, that those percentages aren't already statistically built to appease perception weeks, if not months in advance.
Your vote might pick a mayor or judge, your local sheriff, but at this level of the game? Sorry. We have no say what-so-ever. We're just casting stats to keep tabs on support, we aren't picking anyone, not in this stacked deck.

Yeah yeah what ever.
The paranoia amazes me.

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul

Originally posted by Furbs

So then.. it would seem that someone discovered a glitch and "Chicken Little'd" it at ATS again..

Or outted a premature lie, forcing the truth to surface for the sake of saving face.

Which is more likely?

Originally posted by The_Zomar

How will they explain this one?

Now that they are caught red handed I hope immediate action is taken. We do not live in a democratic society. We do not choose our leaders. The corporations do - and this proves it.

Google says 100% reporting while the voting is still happening. Check the dates in the image, on this post, or go take a look yourself.

February 11th? Excuse me but we still have 3 hours before the 11th.

edit on 10-2-2012 by The_Zomar because: Fuzzed out my e-mail address in image

I demand an immediate investigation and the report should be on my desk by 10:00pm tonight !

reply to post by Furbs


If the results were real time and being updated constantly then I'd say that a glitch was likely, but since results were posted and date stamped for today (02/11/12) when they were actually posted yesterday, I'm calling bs on the glitch theory. Someone fumbled the ball here. We all know voter fraud happens all the time in every election, we all know mega corps keep politicians in their pockets to push legislation through; why is it so hard to believe that some underhanded tactics were uncovered here?

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul
reply to post by Furbs

 

If the results were real time and being updated constantly then I'd say that a glitch was likely, but since results were posted and date stamped for today (02/11/12) when they were actually posted yesterday, I'm calling bs on the glitch theory. Someone fumbled the ball here. We all know voter fraud happens all the time in every election, we all know mega corps keep politicians in their pockets to push legislation through; why is it so hard to believe that some underhanded tactics were uncovered here?

edit on 11-2-2012 by FugitiveSoul because: (no reason given)

Do you have information that others do not on how the real time updates by Google are handled? Because I would love to better understand the process so that I can make a more informed opinion. Right now, as someone that has done web-based IT work as recently as yesterday, my opinion is that someone ported a page early, and information from another database filled a bunch of fields that it wasn't supposed to fill.

Again, which is more likely?

One mistake, or multiple acts of urgency?

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul
reply to post by Furbs

 

If the results were real time and being updated constantly then I'd say that a glitch was likely, but since results were posted and date stamped for today (02/11/12) when they were actually posted yesterday, I'm calling bs on the glitch theory. Someone fumbled the ball here. We all know voter fraud happens all the time in every election, we all know mega corps keep politicians in their pockets to push legislation through; why is it so hard to believe that some underhanded tactics were uncovered here?

edit on 11-2-2012 by FugitiveSoul because: (no reason given)

Do you have information that others do not on how the real time updates by Google are handled? Because I would love to better understand the process so that I can make a more informed opinion. Right now, as someone that has done web-based IT work as recently as yesterday, my opinion is that someone ported a page early, and information from another database filled a bunch of fields that it wasn't supposed to fill.

Again, which is more likely?

One mistake, or multiple acts of urgency?

this is what has & is happening..



predetermined outcome being matched to real time results..

obviously...

enough giving them the benefit of the doubt..

that should have ended in everyone's mind after the 2000 bush election fiasco in Florida..

reply to post by Furbs


What multiple acts of urgency? A single leak was plugged, but not before the puddle was seen. If they had results last night that were legit, why not keep them up, making changes as more info poured in?
Why, after more than 15 hours are there still no results if they had info last night?

Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

Dead people casting votes, people voting multiple times, voters having their ballots cast before they ever actually get to the polls, and often times out of district, and sworn testimony about electronic voter fraud. You can call it an error. I'll place this leak in the column under "political b.s."

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul
reply to post by Furbs

 

What multiple acts of urgency? A single leak was plugged, but not before the puddle was seen. If they had results last night that were legit, why not keep them up, making changes as more info poured in?
Why, after more than 15 hours are there still no results if they had info last night?

Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

Dead people casting votes, people voting multiple times, voters having their ballots cast before they ever actually get to the polls, and often times out of district, and sworn testimony about electronic voter fraud. You can call it an error. I'll place this leak in the column under "political b.s."

edit on 11-2-2012 by FugitiveSoul because: (no reason given)

Multiple Acts of Urgency that would have needed to happen for Google to be involved in a conspiracy to produce an election results page.

1. An entity would have to have the idea.
2. Someone would have to create the data.
3. Someone would have to give the data to Google.
4. Someone at Google would have to import the data.

This is simplest list of things that would HAVE to happen, and it is still 4 steps.

Nothing in this list involves dead people voting, or any other type of fraud. This is simply about whether or not GOOGLE had anything to do with fraudulent voting outcomes.

Evidence that fraud exists in elections is not evidence that this was fraud.

1984 wasnt supposed to be an instruction manual

reply to post by Furbs


Or the gov already has the polling data that they want to use, and passes it to the networks to report on....

its not that complicated,

And since google is THE search engine icon of the net, they would be included on that list....

Looks like to me someone just posted it before they were suppose to.......

Seems pretty damn simple to me