StanScratch
My Penis Is Dancing!
We all know the issue of voter fraud, and the amount of work the GOP has been putting into making sure that registered voters are registered, are American, and all that jazz, making sure the grand total of 633 documented cases are never again repeated.
However, there is not much said about the voting machines. Yes, there was the case of King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell, in which voter tampering charges were leveled against the former Ohio Secretary of State, but the case fell apart when key witness Michael Connell was ****** in a plane crash.
However, a former National Security Agency analyst, Michael Duniho, has been working for seven years in looking at voter data, especially in Arizona and during the 2012 Republican primaries:
Premium Link Upgrade
In a nutshell, Duniho has found this: In the larger voter-heavier districts Diniho researched, there were greater swings towards singular candidates - swings varying from 8 to 10 percent. Pretty large swings, but not swings large enough to be noticeable, unless one were actively looking for them.
For instance, he took at the close Gabrielle Giffords and Jesse Kelly Arizona House 2010 race. While Giffords had clearly won many of the smaller districts, all districts with larger amounts of votes cast swung towards Kelly by about 10 percent. The mean wages, ages, class, race nor religions seemed to matter in any of these districts, only the size. Statistically, this would be an impossibility. All districts of larger sizes are not going to all pull towards one candidate - perhaps one of those districts could be Giffords' home district, or a district with predominately female voters less apt to vote for Kelly. Furthermore, there are past voting trends, and how these trends did not follow. Some districts which Giffords won by 8 to 10 percent in the previous election suddenly found themselves swinging towards Kelley. A swing of 8 to 10 percent for a candidate who is not that controversial and had not been involved in any scandal is a pretty heavy swing. This did not matter, though - all significantly larger districts pulled towards Kelly. However, this did not matter in the end, As Giffords narrowly won.
Move to the 2012 primaries. As we all remember, the popularity of Republican favorites was a revolving door. For quite some time, it seemed the favorite was literally "anyone but Romney." As highly unpopular Romney was with Republican voters, it seemed he should not have done very well, at all. Yet, during primary after primary, there he was.
Along came Francois Choquette and James Johnson: Premium Link Upgrade
Once again, they found that, in smaller districts, his opposition usually did better - yet, as the size of the number of voters in the districts increases, so do his. There are a series of graphs in the report - I highly suggest you take a look at them, for a couple of reasons.
One, the rate of increase in Romney's popularity and the size of the district is rather consistent. You could take the line graphs, put them over each other, and they would be almost mirrored. Again, a statistical abnormality. And, once again, the wealth, age, population, race nor religion seem to matter in any of these, making this quite the statistical abnormality.
Two, is Utah. Romney is already highly favored in Utah, because of the Mormon population. The same increase in popularity trend seen in almost every other state is not seen here.
Three, is 2008. Yes, a lot can happen in four years and the popularity of a candidate can change quite a bit. However, if we look at Romney's state by state voting trends, we see he completely flatlines, no matter the size of the district.
Of course the argument will be made that voting machines cannot be rigged. However, it has been tried, as far in the past as 12 years ago.
However, there is not much said about the voting machines. Yes, there was the case of King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell, in which voter tampering charges were leveled against the former Ohio Secretary of State, but the case fell apart when key witness Michael Connell was ****** in a plane crash.
However, a former National Security Agency analyst, Michael Duniho, has been working for seven years in looking at voter data, especially in Arizona and during the 2012 Republican primaries:
Premium Link Upgrade
In a nutshell, Duniho has found this: In the larger voter-heavier districts Diniho researched, there were greater swings towards singular candidates - swings varying from 8 to 10 percent. Pretty large swings, but not swings large enough to be noticeable, unless one were actively looking for them.
For instance, he took at the close Gabrielle Giffords and Jesse Kelly Arizona House 2010 race. While Giffords had clearly won many of the smaller districts, all districts with larger amounts of votes cast swung towards Kelly by about 10 percent. The mean wages, ages, class, race nor religions seemed to matter in any of these districts, only the size. Statistically, this would be an impossibility. All districts of larger sizes are not going to all pull towards one candidate - perhaps one of those districts could be Giffords' home district, or a district with predominately female voters less apt to vote for Kelly. Furthermore, there are past voting trends, and how these trends did not follow. Some districts which Giffords won by 8 to 10 percent in the previous election suddenly found themselves swinging towards Kelley. A swing of 8 to 10 percent for a candidate who is not that controversial and had not been involved in any scandal is a pretty heavy swing. This did not matter, though - all significantly larger districts pulled towards Kelly. However, this did not matter in the end, As Giffords narrowly won.
Move to the 2012 primaries. As we all remember, the popularity of Republican favorites was a revolving door. For quite some time, it seemed the favorite was literally "anyone but Romney." As highly unpopular Romney was with Republican voters, it seemed he should not have done very well, at all. Yet, during primary after primary, there he was.
Along came Francois Choquette and James Johnson: Premium Link Upgrade
Once again, they found that, in smaller districts, his opposition usually did better - yet, as the size of the number of voters in the districts increases, so do his. There are a series of graphs in the report - I highly suggest you take a look at them, for a couple of reasons.
One, the rate of increase in Romney's popularity and the size of the district is rather consistent. You could take the line graphs, put them over each other, and they would be almost mirrored. Again, a statistical abnormality. And, once again, the wealth, age, population, race nor religion seem to matter in any of these, making this quite the statistical abnormality.
Two, is Utah. Romney is already highly favored in Utah, because of the Mormon population. The same increase in popularity trend seen in almost every other state is not seen here.
Three, is 2008. Yes, a lot can happen in four years and the popularity of a candidate can change quite a bit. However, if we look at Romney's state by state voting trends, we see he completely flatlines, no matter the size of the district.
Of course the argument will be made that voting machines cannot be rigged. However, it has been tried, as far in the past as 12 years ago.
