In 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, Mitt Romney got zero votes-- 19,605 to 0

[ShootSpeeders]

Explain this libs. Either it's vote fraud or massive racism on the part of black voters.

In 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, Mitt Romney got zero votes

POSTED: Monday, November 12, 2012, 5:30 AM
It's one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.

"We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic," said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. "It's kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia."

Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?

The unanimous support for Obama in these Philadelphia neighborhoods - clustered in almost exclusively black sections of West and North Philadelphia - fertilizes fears of fraud, despite little hard evidence.

 

[Charles_Main]

Explain this libs. Either it's vote fraud or massive racism on the part of black voters.

In 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, Mitt Romney got zero votes

POSTED: Monday, November 12, 2012, 5:30 AM
It's one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.

"We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic," said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. "It's kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia."

Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?

The unanimous support for Obama in these Philadelphia neighborhoods - clustered in almost exclusively black sections of West and North Philadelphia - fertilizes fears of fraud, despite little hard evidence.

It's impossible to imagine anyone getting 0 Votes any where in this country. Sounds pretty fishy to me. You would think at least 1 asshole would have accidentally voted the wrong way lol.

Shit like this reminds of 3rd world dictatorships where they hold so called "free elections" in which the Despotic dictator somehow gets 100% of the vote.

lol

 

[Katzndogz]

It's a massive desire for free stuff.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Dems finally moved to Stalin, Mao, Putin, Saddam and Fidel style elections.

Why bother pretending anymore?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-142949/Saddam-elected-candidate-vote.html

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No, no voter fraud in Dem controlled big cities.

None at all.

 

[candycorn]

Explain this libs. Either it's vote fraud or massive racism on the part of black voters.

In 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, Mitt Romney got zero votes

POSTED: Monday, November 12, 2012, 5:30 AM
It's one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.

"We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic," said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. "It's kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia."

Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?

The unanimous support for Obama in these Philadelphia neighborhoods - clustered in almost exclusively black sections of West and North Philadelphia - fertilizes fears of fraud, despite little hard evidence.

And now for the truth:

"In a city with 1,687 of the ward subsets known as divisions, each with hundreds of voters, 59 is about 3.5 percent of the total."

In 3.5% of the 1600+ districts, Romney got zero votes.

 

[AceRothstein]

So Romney gets about 6% of black votes overall. In some of the poorest, blackest neighborhoods in the country, he gets 0 votes in tiny census tracts. Not all that surprising. Has anyone compiled data from previous elections to compare to this election?

 

[ShootSpeeders]

So Romney gets about 6% of black votes overall. In some of the poorest, blackest neighborhoods in the country, he gets 0 votes in tiny census tracts. Not all that surprising. Has anyone compiled data from previous elections to compare to this election?

Tiny???? We're talking nearly 20,000 votes here - a small city!!!! And nobody votes for romney??

 

[AceRothstein]

So Romney gets about 6% of black votes overall. In some of the poorest, blackest neighborhoods in the country, he gets 0 votes in tiny census tracts. Not all that surprising. Has anyone compiled data from previous elections to compare to this election?

Tiny???? We're talking nearly 20,000 votes here - a small city!!!! And nobody votes for romney??

Are you from a large city? Census tracts take up a very small area. In this case they are 50 something tracts scattered around the city.

 

[konradv]

So Romney gets about 6% of black votes overall. In some of the poorest, blackest neighborhoods in the country, he gets 0 votes in tiny census tracts. Not all that surprising. Has anyone compiled data from previous elections to compare to this election?

Tiny???? We're talking nearly 20,000 votes here - a small city!!!! And nobody votes for romney??

Even the registered Republicans, and there are some, couldn't bring themselves to vote for Mitt. No fraud, just a sad fact.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

First up, there's always irregularities. The Bush/Kerry election had some pretty startling stuff too that ended up tossing Ohio and the election to Bush.

But the real problem is this: I'd bet good money that the districts in question use electronic machines with no paper trail. Meaning, even if there is fraud, you can't prove it.

At this point email or web based voting would be better than what we have going on.

I will say this though: On election night it wasn't stuff like this that surprised me, as there's always screwy stuff when it comes to electronic vote machines. What did surprise me was how long it took the results to come back from the blue counties in Florida. I don't think anything fishy happened, but if it did, that's the classical way to rig a vote. Hold a district you're expected to win until the results are almost all in and then stuff the ballot box.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Explain this libs. Either it's vote fraud or massive racism on the part of black voters.

In 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, Mitt Romney got zero votes

POSTED: Monday, November 12, 2012, 5:30 AM
It's one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.

"We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic," said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. "It's kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia."

Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?

The unanimous support for Obama in these Philadelphia neighborhoods - clustered in almost exclusively black sections of West and North Philadelphia - fertilizes fears of fraud, despite little hard evidence.

So now its racist for blacks to not vote for the white candidate.

Got it.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Explain this libs. Either it's vote fraud or massive racism on the part of black voters.

In 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, Mitt Romney got zero votes

POSTED: Monday, November 12, 2012, 5:30 AM
It's one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.

"We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic," said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. "It's kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia."

Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?

The unanimous support for Obama in these Philadelphia neighborhoods - clustered in almost exclusively black sections of West and North Philadelphia - fertilizes fears of fraud, despite little hard evidence.

It's impossible to imagine anyone getting 0 Votes any where in this country. Sounds pretty fishy to me. You would think at least 1 asshole would have accidentally voted the wrong way lol.

Shit like this reminds of 3rd world dictatorships where they hold so called "free elections" in which the Despotic dictator somehow gets 100% of the vote.

lol

I love your logic. I saw something like it from a FOX Commentator. Basically, you're stating that because Mitt Romney got zero votes in error - it must be fraud. Think about how fucking stupid that is.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Explain this libs. Either it's vote fraud or massive racism on the part of black voters.

In 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, Mitt Romney got zero votes

POSTED: Monday, November 12, 2012, 5:30 AM
It's one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.

"We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic," said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. "It's kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia."

Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?

The unanimous support for Obama in these Philadelphia neighborhoods - clustered in almost exclusively black sections of West and North Philadelphia - fertilizes fears of fraud, despite little hard evidence.

And now for the truth:

"In a city with 1,687 of the ward subsets known as divisions, each with hundreds of voters, 59 is about 3.5 percent of the total."

In 3.5% of the 1600+ districts, Romney got zero votes.

Is anyone really that surprises that Mitt Romney got zero votes in 3.5% of precincts in an almost 100% black urban area of an Obama state?

Fuck now the right is saying that Obama committed fraud because he got too many votes!

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

First up, there's always irregularities. The Bush/Kerry election had some pretty startling stuff too that ended up tossing Ohio and the election to Bush.

But the real problem is this: I'd bet good money that the districts in question use electronic machines with no paper trail. Meaning, even if there is fraud, you can't prove it.

At this point email or web based voting would be better than what we have going on.

I will say this though: On election night it wasn't stuff like this that surprised me, as there's always screwy stuff when it comes to electronic vote machines. What did surprise me was how long it took the results to come back from the blue counties in Florida. I don't think anything fishy happened, but if it did, that's the classical way to rig a vote. Hold a district you're expected to win until the results are almost all in and then stuff the ballot box.

The blue counties tend to be more urban and hence tend to have a higher number of voters per poll worker and a higher number of voters per polling booth. Its absolutely no surprise at all that they should take a bit longer, its just common sense.

 

[Dick Tuck]

I just read a piece where Bush got a slightly higher percent of the Mormon vote than Mitt. Makes you go figure.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

First up, there's always irregularities. The Bush/Kerry election had some pretty startling stuff too that ended up tossing Ohio and the election to Bush.

But the real problem is this: I'd bet good money that the districts in question use electronic machines with no paper trail. Meaning, even if there is fraud, you can't prove it.

At this point email or web based voting would be better than what we have going on.

I will say this though: On election night it wasn't stuff like this that surprised me, as there's always screwy stuff when it comes to electronic vote machines. What did surprise me was how long it took the results to come back from the blue counties in Florida. I don't think anything fishy happened, but if it did, that's the classical way to rig a vote. Hold a district you're expected to win until the results are almost all in and then stuff the ballot box.

The blue counties tend to be more urban and hence tend to have a higher number of voters per poll worker and a higher number of voters per polling booth. Its absolutely no surprise at all that they should take a bit longer, its just common sense.

They also tend to have fewer voting machines thanks to hostile administrations. So yeah, it was surprising, but not necessarily indicative of a fix being in.

I'm just saying, if you want to make the case that there WAS a fix, that's what you should be looking at. Turns out there were valid reasons for the results to come in so late, but when I look at fixed elections in history, they're often fixed by holding some of the voting districts late.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

First up, there's always irregularities. The Bush/Kerry election had some pretty startling stuff too that ended up tossing Ohio and the election to Bush.

But the real problem is this: I'd bet good money that the districts in question use electronic machines with no paper trail. Meaning, even if there is fraud, you can't prove it.

At this point email or web based voting would be better than what we have going on.

I will say this though: On election night it wasn't stuff like this that surprised me, as there's always screwy stuff when it comes to electronic vote machines. What did surprise me was how long it took the results to come back from the blue counties in Florida. I don't think anything fishy happened, but if it did, that's the classical way to rig a vote. Hold a district you're expected to win until the results are almost all in and then stuff the ballot box.

The blue counties tend to be more urban and hence tend to have a higher number of voters per poll worker and a higher number of voters per polling booth. Its absolutely no surprise at all that they should take a bit longer, its just common sense.

They also tend to have fewer voting machines thanks to hostile administrations. So yeah, it was surprising, but not necessarily indicative of a fix being in.

I'm just saying, if you want to make the case that there WAS a fix, that's what you should be looking at. Turns out there were valid reasons for the results to come in so late, but when I look at fixed elections in history, they're often fixed by holding some of the voting districts late.

Hostile administrations? The President doesn't get to decide how many voting machines are in each precinct, local governing bodies do that. Urban districts will almost always take longer to get their vote totals in. They have to stay open longer because the lines are longer at closing time, and there are simply more votes to count. This is why Democrats often rack up votes late in the game.

 

[Dick Tuck]

For analysis, who would you prefer on your side? Nate Silver or Karl Rove?

 

[bobcollum]

Eventually you folks will realize how horrible a candidate Romney actually was...maybe.

Then this stuff will make sense to you.