Skip to main content

Latest conspiracy theory - Obama stole the election with voter fraud in Virginia!

Virginia Republican Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli recently spoke on WMAL radio with hosts Brian Wilson and Cheri Jacobus about voter fraud and how e-mails from listeners of theirs proved the state of Virginia and with that, the election, was stolen by one Barack Obama. Of course, no evidence was provided by the listeners. They just saw some strange things happen - like women, minorities, and young people vote. Who knew?

Part of the discussion went as follows:

Jacobus: "There needs to be a way for people to be able to report this stuff and have it looked into. I mean, just across the country, we're hearing so many stories. And people can talk about it, but nothing seems to be done. And, in fact in these states where voter ID is required to vote..."

Wilson: "Photo ID."

Jacobus: "Photo ID. Voter photo ID. Obama lost every one of those states. He can't win a state where photo ID is required. So clearly there's something going on out there and until there's a way to have something done about it where when you report it, you know it's going to be looked into, the other side just says, 'Oh well, you're just poor losers,' and that sort of thing."

Cuccinelli: "Your tone suggests you're a little upset with me. You're preaching to the choir. I'm with you completely."

So, which states had strict photo ID laws for the 2012 election? Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, and Tennessee. That's right - there were only four, worth a combined 44 electoral votes. President Obama did lose all four of those. However, last I checked, there were 51 contests (50 states and the District of Columbia) on election day. Those four states equal just 7.8% of the total of states (and D.C.) to be won and the 44 electoral votes account for only 8.2% of the total. So, just looking at those numbers, it's a pretty asinine statement for Jacobus to make that Obama couldn't win a state which required photo ID. Did she see the numbers out of states like: Hawaii, California, Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Washington, Oregon, New Mexico, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Maryland, Illinois, and the District of Columbia? The president won all of those contests by at least high single digits. I'm not thinking he would would have had much of a problem winning them and their 227 electoral votes, which accounts for 37.3% of the total number of races and 42.2% of the total number of electoral votes. Actually, we can raise those numbers some, because seven other states had photo ID laws in effect as well, just not as strict as the four I mentioned earlier. Of these seven, Obama won four of them: Florida, Hawaii, Michigan, and New Hampshire. So add Florida and New Hampshire to that list of states the president would have won if photo ID laws were in effect - bringing him to 260 electoral votes, just ten shy of the number required for re-election. The president also seems to be on track to win Pennsylvania by between 5 and 6 percentage points, and with that their 20 electoral votes. The gap may have closed some, but I have a difficult time seeing Romney winning the Keystone State with or without photo ID laws. Living in Ohio, I can say that Secretary of State Jon Husted did everything in his power to limit early voting. He did everything he possibly could (and thensome) to give Romney an advantage in the Buckeye State, and Obama still won the 18 electoral votes here. That's 38 more electoral votes, giving Obama a total of 298 - 28 more than what was needed to win another four years in the Oval Office. The only states left are Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, and Virginia, which total 34 electoral votes. Even if we gave all of those votes to Romney, Obama would still have won by the final electoral count of 298 to 240.

Jacobus' argument is even more ludicrous based on the four states Romney won, which had strict voter ID laws. These weren't battleground states. The states were: Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, and Tennessee. These states are so red, they make Rudolph's jaw drop at the sight of them. Saying the president couldn't have won any state which required photo ID based on these four red states would be like if the only four states which required photo ID were Vermont, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Maryland - none of which Romney could win even if he were the only candidate on the ballot - and saying it was proof that the Republican candidate couldn't win any state which required photo ID.

Also, even in the off-chance there was voter fraud in the state of Virginia, do these three individuals not know how many electoral votes its worth or even what the final tally of electoral votes was for this year's election? Obama won 332 electoral votes, compared to just 206 for Romney. Unless Virginia became more populated than even California and accounted for a whopping 63 electoral votes (Republican House would have voted him in as president in the case of a tie), Romney still wouldn't have won the election. Virginia is worth 13 electoral votes. If Romney won the state, he would have closed the gap from 126 (332 to 206) to 100 (319 to 219). Yeah, I'm seeing beginner's courses in math, geography, and politics in these three stooges' futures. I hope that's the case anyway.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/11/27/1240681/virginia-attorney-general-suggests-obama-stole-the-election/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i...