Questionable Results from Philly

The Fox News report here shows that other people are questioning Obama’s turnout and vote totals.

As the Philadelphia Inquirer first reported last week, six of Philadelphia’s 66 wards handed the president victory shares of 99 percent or better. In 20 of the wards, the Obama vote totals exceeded 97 percent.

On Monday, the Inquirer reported that in 59 of Philadelphia’s “divisions” — these are subsets of wards, wherein fewer than 1,000 people might be registered to vote — GOP nominee Mitt Romney failed to win even a single vote. Collectively, the votes for Obama across these divisions added up to 19,605, to Romney’s zero.

However, Barone noted that turnout rates in these areas was sometimes reported to have exceeded 90 percent, a level of enthusiasm that he said should arouse suspicion. “Philadelphia’s been a place that’s had some pretty irregular election procedures in the past,” he said.

State Rep. Sam Smith, the Republican from the 66th District who serves as speaker of the Pennsylvania House, called the results “questionable.” “In some precincts in Philadelphia, I think you’re going to see, as they finish the official count, places where there are more people voting in a precinct than actually signed in at the poll book,” Smith told Fox News.

Asked what gave him that idea, Smith cited the electoral history of the city and said he thought it would be “predictive” this time around, as well.

Turnout for Obama was 10 million votes south of his 2008 total. So obviously there was massive fraud. Even in Black areas, there would be SOME votes for Romney, from gentrifiers, and a few Black outliers. Romney got NONE. NONE. It doesn’t make sense. Save fraud.

About whiskeysplace

Conservative blogger focusing on culture, business, technology, and how they intersect.
This entry was posted in cheating, obama. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Questionable Results from Philly

  1. fakeemail says:

    Fraud, no fraud. . .does it even really matter any more, Whiskey my friend? The cunt-try has reached the tipping point. Just too many single sluts and non-whites who will mercilessly vote in their unjust self-interest.

    And whites will never be voting in big enough united blocks for the Republicans for the following reasons:

    -lots of whites find it objectionable and “racist” to vote in their own self-interest; even if they know that’s what opposing groups are doing.
    -lots of rich whites want to keep this status-quo because it makes them even more powerful in comparison to middle and working class whites.
    -always will be a large percentage of liberal kook whites who are true believers in socialism or just don’t like “the rich”.
    -always will be a large percentage of working and middle class whites who (somewhat rightly) believe the Republican party is just about “the rich” and are scared of losing what little they got.
    -lots of whites (somewhat rightly) believe that Repubs are just as complicit in their soft genocide as Dems.

    The only half-way feasible way I can imagine for Repubs to get an 80/20 white turnout for the is if they become the Democratic Party. . .but for white people. Welfare, affirmative action, free lunches, hand-outs. . .but for whites.

    But this is all just whistling past the graveyard. America is changed, conquered, whatever you want to call it. It’s done.

  2. sestamibi says:

    It would be interesting to find out how many votes were cast for GOP candidates for lower offices in the precincts in question. If the answer is zero across the board, then Houston we have a BIG problem.

    • anonymous says:

      So you have a problem? What the fuck are you going to do?

      Whiskey himself already predicted this. The game plan was to keep the numbers close using bogus polling and then cheat the rest of the way there. And it worked flawlessly. They got helped out by Romney being too stupid and/or too good-hearted to realize that’s what was going on

  3. Whiskey says:

    The Chinese, Putin, Israel, Iran, India, Japan, South Korea, North Korea, have certainly noticed this. The NRA, Emily’s List, New Black Panther Party, the Klan, SPLC, and the Knights of Columbus have all noticed. Quite likely they’ll have a free-for-all, turning the vote into a battleground of who spends the most money stuffing ballots and erasing votes.

    If the majority can’t have their say, are convinced that the game is rigged and corrupt, and Obama predictably starts throwing Whites out of jobs, locking them out overtly, and taxing every penny of those not connected, and shakes down the rest, then you have what historians call a “pre-Revolutionary condition” or what Machiavelli advised every Prince not to do. Ever. Make a man poor without killing him.

    My guess is that some conservative group will make its point. Jessie Jackson Jr. is resigning, if your are Black you can do so to avoid jail time, there are special rules just for Blacks, so there will be a new election. Some attempt will be made to make a White guy the winner, one who will be very conservative and tell his voters to shut up and sit down. It might well fail, but interesting lessons will be learned.

    Obama thought he was clever, use ACORN and the like to cheat his way in. Now he’s got a problem. Everyone who can count knows it, and what works for one can work for another. There will be 20 Democrats and 13 Republicans up for re-election in 2014. There is certainly the ability to switch the Senate now from 53 Democratic, 2 independent/Dems, and 45 Republicans to well, 33 Democratic, 2 independent/Dems, and 65 Republicans. Which means conviction of Obama as well as impeachment, and imprisonment. Which is civil war, basically.

    Republicans are not conservative politics. The NRA, NAM, a whole host of other groups WILL FIGHT and largely will do so effectively, cheating is not something that can be contained to just Dems as Obama supposed. No, Republicans are too wishy-washy to do this. The NRA, or Evangelical Religious groups, or Tea Party people are not. If Washington controls EVERYTHING then they must control WASHINGTON. There is no defeat-does-not-matter, if the result is cultural, social, economic, and physical annihilation. If you are taxed out of your business and on the street if you fail, anything and everything is on the table. People will do ANYTHING to avoid that.

  4. ErisGuy says:

    It is no longer technologically possible to have a democracy. The myriads of votes cannot be cast in a single day nor counted by hand within any reasonable amount of time.

    Automated tabulation is the only means. That would require a unique ID for each citizen (won’t happen) and secure software (not possible).

    The best solution would be to surrender democracy for a republic, to restrict the franchise to those who can buy it.

    • samsonsjawbone says:

      It is no longer technologically possible to have a democracy. The myriads of votes cannot be cast in a single day nor counted by hand within any reasonable amount of time.

      I can’t see that this is true. Here in Canada I have only ever voted with a paper ballot that actually gets counted by someone.

      It is ridiculous that there is ever, anywhere, a voting system that doesn’t leave paper records. It is likewise ridiculous that there is anyplace a person can vote without an ID (I was incredulous when I heard that this was an issue!).

      • GB says:

        Do you have to show an ID every time you vote in Canada? If so, what sort of ID? It would have been great to have some reporters ask Obama during the campaign “Mr. President, you claim that voter ID is an attempt to disenfranchise the poor and minorities, Canada requires showing an ID, are you accusing the Canadian government of disenfranchising minorities?”

      • sestamibi says:

        Canada has a parliamentary system, which lends itself to paper ballots, because an “election” is only for a member of the House of Commons for one’s own riding. You have 3-4 candidates for one position. You come in, check one preference, and leave. Winner is “first past the post”, as in Britain (Australia has a more complex system of preference order voting). Provincial elections are never held at the same time as a federal election. In contrast, the US has a “long ballot” with multiple offices to be voted on simultaneously, which is why we have to automate the process for a more accurate count.

  5. It’s cold comfort, but I’m glad someone’s keeping the heat on about this, even if it’s only on a tangential front like hegemonic/corrupt black Philly.

    Obama’s PoMo amoralism is so obvious, it demonstrates itself on so many fronts simultaneously: his concealed transcripts, his “born in Kenya” author’s pamphlet, his Warhol-like audacity in actually committing to print that he’s a blank slate people project onto, the multiple ugly enigmas of Benghazi– that a Chicago fix on the election is only too infuriatingly plausible.

    Everyone’s been scratching their heads trying to figure out the demographics on this. Did Rust Belt whites *really* sit this out, turned off by ‘plutocracy’ and offshoring? Maybe, maybe . . . But I’m pretty confident it wasn’t anti-Mormon Evangelicals. Probably Billy Graham’s ad-message was a dog whistle to allay those fears, and from what I pick up anecdotally, it worked. Enthusiasm for Romney felt, everywhere I looked, massive in the closing days, even if Sandy flooded the airwaves with positive Obamaganda.

    Even catching a few lowly players in the fraud-franchise would be of momentous impact. America has to wake up from its high-trust fantasy of objective elections. Those foreign observers weren’t incredulous because of our high-tech voting machines; they were incredulous because we’re 8th grade Civics class saps to believe our system isn’t being screwed with, esp. in our ever-Balkanizing state today.

  6. Justinian says:

    What I find truly amazing and disgusting when talking to loyal Republicans over the years is that they always just brush all the alleged voter fraud away with the often quoted line: “If its not close, they can’t cheat.” Then they proceed to berate everyone around them for not trying hard enough .

    That was the attitude of many of them in the past, they were just too afraid of being called racist or any of the other epithets the left choose use.

    I could never get through to them that their fear was plainly visible and that it only emboldened their opponents.

  7. dcanaday says:

    Were there any exit polls from Philly that would conflict with the “official” vote count?

    • whorefinder says:

      Ha. What reporter is dumb enough to stand out side a Philly voting precinct and get robbed and murdered? The Black Panthers own them, as they showed 4 years ago, brazenly standing outside them, billy clubs drawn, in the 2008 election.

  8. Brendan says:

    It’s interesting, because the official count has him winning Philly by ~470k votes, for 85% of the total. He wins PA by 290k votes, which means he lost the state ex-Philly. If the count in Philly were a bit less lopsided, PA is very, very close indeed. Of course the plan was to run up the score in Philly to win the state regardless of what the rest of the state was voting — whether there was fraud or not. This strategy — i..e, the critical nature of running up the score in Philly — would, however, be consistent with fraud in that specific place to maximize vote totals in that specific county.

  9. thrasymachus33308 says:

    Democratic vote fraud is understood to be an accepted part of the system. It has been going on for decades, and Republicans- or the Republican establishment- have chosen not to question it. It would put to question the very legitimacy of our government and democracy itself, and it would be impossible. The people who would have to investigate would be under machine Democratic control. The people who would need to cooperate, even if they wanted to, would be under machine Democratic control. It is simply an assumed part of the rules of the game that Republicans have to overcome the margin of Democratic vote fraud to get elected. Nixon didn’t do it, and Romney didn’t do it.

    Rather than futilely trying to fight this, defeat it, or work around it, it is better just to start from the position that is you are not part of the system- that is if you are a productive person- that the systemis controlled by people who want to exploit you in any way they can, for their own benefit and the benefit of their clients. This is not a democracy, and you don’t have any rights.

  10. dana says:

    I live in Philadelphia and during my brief attempt at a legal career volunteered on the Sam Katz poll monitoring legal team, when he ran against Street the last time. We were responsible for 5 polling places per team, I was in “Kensignton” which is all black and hispanic ghetto. It was all irregularites all the time–at the black polling place there was no GOP judge of elections and they wouldn;t even let us close enough to peer through the door, they were very hostile and drove us out. at the other places we saw poll workers openly pointing out the deocratic slate on the wall mounted sample ballot and going into the the booth with the voter with the curtain closed. through the walkie talkies we heard tales of union intimidation and vans of people being bussed around fro polling place to polling place. it was a chaotic ess. there was ntohing abot it that would have indicated you were in a first world european country, we might as well have been UN poll watchers in Zimbabwe. just give up on this country, black, hispanics and sluts have it and theres no putting the genie back in the bottle

  11. zyzz says:

    Well shit. So it was fraud.

  12. samsonsjawbone says:


    Do you have to show an ID every time you vote in Canada? If so, what sort of ID?

    Well, I always have (though I haven’t lived everywhere!). Normally government-issued ID, if I recall correctly, like your driver’s license… at least that’s what I always use.

    It would have been great to have some reporters ask Obama during the campaign “Mr. President, you claim that voter ID is an attempt to disenfranchise the poor and minorities, Canada requires showing an ID, are you accusing the Canadian government of disenfranchising minorities?”

    Yes, that would have been great. As I say, I couldn’t believe it when I read about this and the way that some people are arguing that ID requirements are “discriminatory”. Do you think maybe someone who doesn’t even have some form of ID maybe isn’t the best person to make decisions about the future of your country?

    And I’m still not really sure I’m clear on it, by the way. Am I really to understand that in some of these states, you just walk into the polling station and say, “Hi, I’m so-and-so – here to vote!”


    In contrast, the US has a “long ballot” with multiple offices to be voted on simultaneously, which is why we have to automate the process for a more accurate count.

    Oh, I see. Plus you guys are always voting on these “ballot initiatives” that I read about. Well, it still seems like it would be worth the extra time and money to have a paper trail, but I guess in a world where everyone wants the election result ASAP that may not be popular.

  13. whorefinder says:

    Blacks can’t do math well, and largely don’t think logically, and just want their “Big Man” to win.

  14. feeblemind says:

    I doubt we see much cheating from the right. I don’t believe the media and law enforcement will allow it. They just look the other way when the Left cheats. And there’s the rub. With no adverse consequences for ballot stuffing, it is only going to get worse.

  15. Prof. Woland says:

    It is worth observing that two of the hottest political flashpoints right now both have to do with the decreasing ability to commit identity fraud. Illegal immigration and Voter fraud thrive in an environment where people’s identities can be concealed. Technologically speaking, this could be fixed right now but for the foot dragging and obstruction by the vested interests. Having secure ID, whether that be Social Security cards for employment, Voter ID cards for voting, or multiple use cards for everything would be a real game changer.

  16. MT Isa Miner says:

    This is a rather long staory about the voter tractice is Australia to give you a comparison. We have a very different system, all paper and to my knowledge no reported fraud. In Australia voters have to register to vote with the federal government once they are 18 by and you need to show evidence of your identity by:
    providing your driver’s licence number, or
    providing your Australian passport number, or
    having your identity confirmed by a person who is already on the electoral roll. Voting is compulsory in Australia and there is a $ 20 fine up front and if you don’t come up with a good excuse there is a $50 extra fine for paperwork/bloody mindedness!

    I know compulsory voting is seen by some as an infringement of civil liberties but it means we in Australia don’t have to work to the fringes of our parties we can appeal to the middle ground- we know everyone’s going to turnout anyway so we can discuss other things.

    On voting day, always a Saturday, and always at the same schools and churches or scout halls for convenience, always at the same times, after lining up, and buying a breakfast/lunch snack etc from the scouts or the church ladies to at while you wait- but its’s very fast – NEVER more than 15 minutes NEVER- you get to a voter ballot paper issuing officer who has a bound paper book of electors for that district and must cross off the name of the voter as they present themselves to collect their individually numbered voting slip.

    Before you are given your slip you are asked to identify yourself by your FULL name, your FULL address and post code , then asked if you have voted before – we are so trust worthy. if the answer is no and you ARE recorded as having done ( you can’t see their book) then there is a special process that MUST be followed- LONG and BORING declarations enough to weed out any fraud by any really big numbers of people as it would take so bloody long.

    The only voter fraud I am aware – is my unusual personal experience of was with Aborigines living in isolated areas ( which is a very small % of the 2% ) where rules were not policed in times past when they were seen as less entitled to the benefit of their citizenship rights. There were times then they were persuaded to vote en bloc by both whites and blacks who stood to gain.

    The practice is that the voter goes ALONE into a private booth and votes then fold the vote and drops it into a locked box. The hall is overseen by the scrutineers ( chosen by the parties, and the vote issuing officials which are chosen by either or BOTH or NEITHER party.

    Each person running for a seat is entitled to have a person supervising the votes at each booth if they can get one and they must abide by the hand book and everyone knows the rules and there are court cases run on breaches of them. The most important job is seeing that the vote boxes are locked and counted properly but scrutineers must not touch the ballot papers. The rules are generally obeyed and the courts have enforced them when things have got dirty.

    So, from across the sea, in distress at the Romney outcome, I find the US system shockingly full of holes and problematic and really not supportive of your democratic rights.

  17. SOBL1 says:

    When the era of unfettered democracy and universal suffrage is over, we will look back on these outrages and shamster voting events and say “Why did we put up with this so long?”

    Whiskey, why do you think that the press has been silent on the Elmo puppet-pedo guy compared to Sandusky? Is it more Hollywood vs. sports or black perp vs. old white male perp? I’m leaning towards the Hollywood angle. If this were chased down the road, it might uncover far more about Hollywood’s predators than the media would like to reveal.

Comments are closed.