Allegations Of Rampant Voter Fraud In Maine! This Is Real! Share This Please!

reply to post by v1rtu0s0


If you have proof that the numbers are being manipulated and that Ron Paul is as wildly popular in the real world as he is on the interent....please share this information with everyone.

The whole Waldo county "conspiracy" adds up to Ron Paul having a net gain of 6 votes over Romney...yes...such a huge conspiracy.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by interupt42

 

I did the analysis for Waldo county...the only county where there is proof that precincts were missing. The one other precinct they mention...I have not seen the proof for that or the "correct" tallys so I can't look at those numbers.

Washington county hasn't voted yet...they will tomorrow. Judging from 2008 turnout...if they get 200 votes that would be considered a huge turnout.

The analysis for Waldo county is correct...Ron Paul has a net gain of 6 votes on Romney. Or are you saying that isn't correct?

Your numbers may be correct but your method is flawed , because its using flawed data.

According to you (if I'm understanding you correctly) you came to your conclusion using the following tactics:

Take the county results: waldo.villagesoup.com...
subtract out the already reported tows from the official count: www.mainegop.com...

The problem with your method above is that you are assuming that the official count you mentioned above is valid. However,according to numerous news sources the official count released so far is invalid due to admitted numerous errors ,incorrect vote tallies ,and other issues. Hence they are recounting the votes. Therefore, the official data is incorrect and if you use it in your formula you will get incorrect data as well.

That doesn't even account for the fact that you are totaling all the counties to get the official count ,but only assuming that waldo county was the only one with errors.

The facts we have right now are:
1. Romney has already been declared a winner prematurely once before.
2. This is the second time that Romney has been on the winning side when errors have been discovered with the caucus.
3. Obama and Romney share top contributors:

Goldman Sachs
JPMorgan Chase & Co
Morgan Stanley
Citigroup Inc

Barack Obama (D):
www.opensecrets.org...

Mitt Romney (R) :
www.opensecrets.org...
4. More than half of Mitt Romney and Barack Obama contributions are not from small individuals.
Mitt Romney gets 9% from small individual donations. Obama 47% from 08 has been questioned and he would not agree to share more information about his small donor to a watch group.
www.thedailybeast.com...

reply to post by interupt42


I don't think you are following what I am doing.

For Waldo county, there is the county tally sheet that shows how all the precincts voted. Then there is the official Maine GOP tally sheet. The official Maine GOP tally sheet has zeroes in some precincts in Waldo county that are showing up on the Waldo county tally sheet. But not all of them are zeroes...the ones that are recorded match up exactly to the counts on the Waldo tally sheet.

So for to find the precincts that aren't recorded in the official Maine GOP tally...you start with the Waldo County tally sheet that has all the precincts reported. You then go to the official Maine GOP tally sheet and find which precincts were reported. You take those precincts, remove them from the Waldo county tally sheet and you are left with only the precincts that did not get recorded on the official count.

So now you have the "missing" precincts...add up the votes there and that is where I got my numbers that showed Ron Paul gaining only a net gain of 6 votes on Mitt Romney.

I'm not using any other county to calculate this...only Waldo county which is what most of the Paul supporters are freaking out about.

If voter fraud gets your goat...then you should be a mad MF...because it has been going on for years..so bad the below is the norm..

Gov. Spending - out of Control
Congress - out of Control -15% approval rating
Taxes out of control - you pay when you earn it..you pay when spend it, you pay whey you give it
and you pay when you die..and you pay on it again when you set SS..
You pay again for just owning it ...(property taxes)
Gov. employee's could give a # about you.
Banks could give a # about you.
Corporations could give a # about you - will get every penny out of you the can.
The only one who gives a # about you is your family and close friends...start preparing with them......it is not going to be nice.....NICE went out the window 40 yrs ago...

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by interupt42

 

I don't think you are following what I am doing.

For Waldo county, there is the county tally sheet that shows how all the precincts voted. Then there is the official Maine GOP tally sheet. The official Maine GOP tally sheet has zeroes in some precincts in Waldo county that are showing up on the Waldo county tally sheet. But not all of them are zeroes...the ones that are recorded match up exactly to the counts on the Waldo tally sheet.

So for to find the precincts that aren't recorded in the official Maine GOP tally...you start with the Waldo County tally sheet that has all the precincts reported. You then go to the official Maine GOP tally sheet and find which precincts were reported. You take those precincts, remove them from the Waldo county tally sheet and you are left with only the precincts that did not get recorded on the official count.

So now you have the "missing" precincts...add up the votes there and that is where I got my numbers that showed Ron Paul gaining only a net gain of 6 votes on Mitt Romney.

I'm not using any other county to calculate this...only Waldo county which is what most of the Paul supporters are freaking out about.

I see what you are doing and its misleading and insignificant of the bigger problem with the results of the caucus. You are not accounting for errors so the gap COULD be much bigger or smaller (for or against) Romney or Paul. Until the official official count comes out Saturday their is no point on speculating on the numbers.

I guess we will see tomorrow. Here is another update from reality check

www.fox19.com...

reply to post by interupt42


I am using the only data that is available.

Unlike others who are using wild assumptions to try to say that Maine was stolen from Ron Paul.

Hey guys there has been fixed fraudulent voting in the US for the last 10 years in many elections including the last 3 presidential elections. How have you not noticed those when this is such a small conspiracy in comparison. Maybe its because the Republicans have usually been on the winning side previously and it seems Americans feel as strongly about their political party as their football team. Here in Australia we have compulsory voting (in fact I just got fined for missing 2 local elections accidentally) and we still use paper (check boxes) and pen. This is not because we are poor it is because we don't trust electronic voting machines. I have seen 2 documentaries on 2 different voting frauds perpetrated in the US and have read /investigated a few more. "Street Fight" is about corruption as it happened in the 2002 Newark Mayor election. Thankfully the corrupt Mayor Sharp is out now even though his sneaky tactics paid off then. I saw another documentary a person developed a hack for the electronic voting machines, which that took only a minute with the machine, made the votes give a 51% to 49% win to who ever he wanted. He confessed and whistle blew to the election he helped rig and confessed he sold the electronic hacker to a politician. The 2000 Presidential election debacle in Florida. Then there is 2004 Presidential election where there were efforts of the Republican Party to purge African Americans from voters’ lists, to frighten voters with conveniently timed ‘terror alerts’ (complemented by Osama bin Laden’s late-October Jack-in-the-Box act), and to ‘suppress’ the Democratic vote, wherever possible, by reducing the numbers of polling stations and voting machines in working-class precincts, have been widely reported and analyzed. And on and on... The CIA is renowned for rigging elections in countries other than the US to put in sympathetic leaders to the US. I wouldn't be surprised if they manipulate Americas elections too for their own benefit. Actually I would be surprised if they didn't.. I'm sorry but your slither of democracy by once in every 4 year voting for 1 of 2 options is gone. So are all your civil liberties, you have less rights than the Chinese (by law) and you are propagandised into thinking your the best country just like North Korean citizens. They lost millions to starvation and it just strengthened their love for "Dear Leader" believing his father was a near God like figure. Well that lie is kept as reality by excessively promoting patriotism and hanging the leaders portrait in every home. The US have their flag and patriotism is used constantly as a reason to support the Government without question. If someone in Australia put our flag on their house they would be classed as a knob head in general. If someone called another unpatriotic for their ideas it would be outright laughable as we believe in freedom of opinion.. Please im not trying to insult the US I just want them to fight through all the propaganda they are delivered constantly!

reply to post by BungleX


Please try to break your comments up into paragraphs when you write everything together it makes it hard reading. So much so that I can't bring myself to read your entire comment.

Thank you.

Should I be concerned? The day after I've suggested in a roundabout way that perhaps we need a revolution that morning when I turned on my computer a new wireless connection showed up. The name of it was FBI surveillance Van.

I thought it was odd but I really didn't think much into it. The main thing I thought was why would they purposely name the connection as FBI surveillance van. That would tip off anyone in the area that has a computer. It was only last night that I started thinking that there may be a possibility that they were here for me.

As far as I know I said nothing the ilegal but could they be concerned that people like myself and others are questioning the legitimacy of our government?

They need to be staking out the GOP campaign headquarters and looking into these fraudulent elections and not worrying about citizens who are posting on ATS.

I seriously doubt they were here for me but I thought I would just share that bit of information.

Why would they name their Internet connection so blatant? I am not a big conspiracy theorist because if the government can't even run surveillance without huge blunders how could they pull off things like 9/11?.

BTW I am NOT a 9/11 Truther.

reply to post by Grimpachi


Lol, it's sort of an inside joke. A lot of people name their networks as such as a joke. I wouldn't worry about it.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


There are still a number of anomalies beyond Waldo within the detail county and precinct vote counts.

1) The individual precinct votes dont add up to the totals shown for Maine
2) Only 3 of the counties show all precinct votes - the rest have at least some precinct votes at zero
3) Of the 623 precincts, 157 show zero votes - Washington is yet to vote - except for 1 precinct. 20 of the 26 precincts in Waldo show zero votes (with only 3 of those 20 known not to have caucused). 11 other counties show precincts with zero votes. Maybe some of the other precincts are legitimately at zero, many are not.
4) Aroostook only shows a total vote, with no precinct detail
5) Your ajdusted totals, from which you derived your 6 vote swing in Waldo, includes 5 precincts with zero votes.

Originally posted by tallcool1
reply to post by VerityPhantom

 

The 2000 election of Bush over Gore was more of a controversy regarding the electoral vote - which Bush did actually win. However, Gore won the popular vote by over 500,000 votes...hence my previous comment about the US needing to get rid of the electoral college. Regardless of how much of an arrogant, hypocritical a$$ Gore is and how much worse the country would have been with him in charge, he did win.

Bush was actually the 4th president to not win the popular vote.
Andrew Jackson won the popular vote, but lost the electoral vote to John Quincy Adams in 1824.
Samual Tilden won the popular vote, but lost the electoral vote to Rutherford Hayes in 1876.
Grover Cleveland won the popular vote, but lost the electoral vote to Benjamin Harrison in 1888.

So, the only two presidents who were sons of previous presidents actually lost in the popular vote.

Well you sure know your history! So who is MORE in charge then? The electoral vote or the peoples' vote? I would think it to be the peoples vote right? What's the point of voting if the electoral vote always trumps the majority?

Originally posted by UKTruth
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

There are still a number of anomalies beyond Waldo within the detail county and precinct vote counts.

I want you to reference this document as I respond to the following points. This is the official Maine GOP tally sheet. I created my own spreadsheet based of this to look into some of your points below.

www.mainegop.com...

1) The individual precinct votes dont add up to the totals shown for Maine

All the counts add up perfectly for the individual candidates. However, if you take the "Total" column in each precinct and add them up...the total doesn't match the reported total. It is off by 92.

However, 77 of these is due to Bangor reporting "0" in their total column (go ahead and find it in the PDF I linked). So if you add those in...you have a difference of 15. They did the right thing and reported the total based off the cumulative candidate totals instead of the cumulative precinct totals. If you take out Bangor who reported a "total" of 0 but had 77 votes cast...Here are the remaining discrepencies...feel free to look them up. If you add up the "differences" below...you have your remaining 15. None of these scream "fraud"...rather they scream "human error".

15 votes out of 5585 votes is an error rate of 0.26%....I'd call that human error and not fraud.

County/Municipality/Reported/Actual/Difference
Cumberland/South Portland/81/85/4
Knox/Camden /28 /32 /4
Cumberland/Gorham /56 /59 /3
Penobscot/Alton /0 /3 /3
York/Kennebunk /45 /47 /2
Knox/Friendship /7 /8 /1
Penobscot/Newport / 21 /22 /1
Somerset/Cambridge / 8 /9 /1
Kennebec/Augusta /40 /38 /-2
Penobscot/Dixmont /4 /3 /-1
York/Eliot /44 /43 /-1

2) Only 3 of the counties show all precinct votes - the rest have at least some precinct votes at zero

Some precincts can combine and report together...just like Aroostook combined them all and reported together.

There is nothing wrong with this. Unless you have proof (like in Waldo county) that there are precincts that caucused and weren't reported....then this isn't anything suspicious.

3) Of the 623 precincts, 157 show zero votes - Washington is yet to vote - except for 1 precinct. 20 of the 26 precincts in Waldo show zero votes (with only 3 of those 20 known not to have caucused). 11 other counties show precincts with zero votes. Maybe some of the other precincts are legitimately at zero, many are not.

Like I said...some precincts can combine with others...their total will be in the other precincts totals.

4) Aroostook only shows a total vote, with no precinct detail

There is nothing wrong with this. Looking at 2008, the vote totals are similar. 140 in 2008, 137 this year.

uselectionatlas.org...

And...Ron Paul won this county...and by a larger margin than he did in 2008...and he got nearly double the votes he got in 2008. Romney got less...almost by half. If anyone should be suspicious of this counties results...it should be Romney.

5) Your ajdusted totals, from which you derived your 6 vote swing in Waldo, includes 5 precincts with zero votes.

Yes...and these are the totals from the county and are vouched as being correct. If you are saying these aren't correct either...than we shouldn't count any of them and Paul shouldn't gain those 6 votes.


Again...I'm not seeing anything that screams out a huge amount of fraud. I am seeing evidence of human error..but that's about it.

reply to post by Wookiep


I am not worried about it. Thanks. I just thought it very peculiar. However it is a network that had never shown up before so it was definitely someone passing through or they took it down but the number of networks in my area always stay the same. Except the other day.

It did occur to me that it was probably a joke but I would think it would be even funnier if it wasn't.

Incompetence is universal. Just think about (fast and furious) they were thwarted because they forgot to change the batteries.

Fast and furious should be called slow and low. Get it. Low batteries.

On the subject of the election I expect some level of incompetence but it seems pretty clear that this is a deliberate and coordinated push from the GOP to skew the results.

Earlier I had posted the website to complain to the elections commission I hope everyone that is outraged has sent e-mail voicing their concerns to them. You do not need to be from their state to send a message, I already have. I told him I will not vote for corrupt government so if they keep on the track they are on their doing the Democrats the favor.

Yes, I know the Democrats are corrupt as well but if the Republican Party cannot even hold fair elections for themselves I can only imagine how corrupt they would be if they take power. It would be just like saying we are okay with that, keep it up, or good job. We have to hold their feet to the fire or things will only get worse.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Waste of time without the yet to be cast votes, missing data, and corrected available data.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

Waste of time without the yet to be cast votes, missing data, and corrected available data.

edit on 17-2-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

Why is looking at allegations of fraud a waste of time?

Are you just going to wait until tomorrow night...and if Paul is still losing...THEN you will look at fraud? Because I'm pretty sure that if Paul would end up winning...you wouldn't look into fraud.


If you see where I am off in any of my analysis...please let me know.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


You are off because you are trying to make a point with faulty data then trying to defend your attempt at making a point with faulty data by giving a false, alternative righteous reason of "i was having myself a patriotic, unbiased, look for possible fraud."

I have looked at the info, but I know it's as good as meaningless until they vote and recount (and still then they should have penalized Webster more so he couldn't further manipulate, fool them once and then twice apparently).

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

You are off because you are trying to make a point with faulty data then trying to defend your attempt at making a point with faulty data by giving a false, alternative righteous reason of "i was having myself a patriotic, unbiased, look for possible fraud."

I have looked at the info, but I know it's as good as meaningless until they vote and recount (and still then they should have penalized Webster more so he couldn't further manipulate, fool them once and then twice apparently).

You have deemed the entire vote fraudulant...I have not.

The data is not meaningless...it is what we currently have to work with....that is all we can do.

I know that you desperately want Ron Paul to win, so for you it makes sense to just say it is all wrong...stick your fingers in your ears and close your eyes and just pretend that it is all a dream.

But don't expect me to do the same. If you are expecting wildly different results come tomorrow night...I think you are setting yourself up for dissapointment.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


I am sure you are very concerned about me and my potential disappointment. Embrace your agenda man, don't try to be so subversive it's very transparent to everyone. It's not like it's only people on this site that thought something was afoot. The state isn't doing a recount because ten people on this website hoped they would.