Reply With Quote
nope, plenty of other people have speculated, written books about the 2000 and 2004 stolen elections
oh...how convenient...so we just take your word for it...
nope, plenty of other people have speculated, written books about the 2000 and 2004 stolen elections
oh...I bet those "books" were written by left wing nutjobs.
Was Ohio's Marijuana Vote Stolen? TV Screen Shots Show Massive Number of Votes Flipping
The secretary of state's live returns don't make sense.
Televised screen shots taken Tuesday night of live election returns in Ohio provided by the Secretary of State's office showed hundreds of thousands of votes flipping from the "yes" to "no" column of Issue 3, the ballot measure to legalize marijuana.
When seen against the backdrop of Ohio's longstanding history of Republicans manipulating the vote count to obtain the outcome they seek, such as in the 2004 presidential election when Ohio returns elected George W. Bush to a second term, there are compelling reasons to question the official result where the pot measure went down to defeat.
To understand the context for this likely chicanery, you have to understand the backdrop of current Ohio politics.
According to the election night returns provided by Secretary of State Jon Husted, the people of Ohio defeated a November 3 proposition to legalize marijuana by a tally of nearly two-to-one.
The controversial measure would have established an oligarchy of 10 licensed growers operating regulated indoor grow sites of up to 300,000 square feet each. The pro-marijuana activist community was divided on the measure.
Husted was not a neutral election administrator. He vehemently opposed the measure, threatened its proponents with legal action, and live TV results showed hundeds of thousands of votes moving from the yes to no column in a matter of minutes.
Take a look at the two screen shots below, where hundreds of thousands of votes flipped from the 'yes' to the 'no' column in 11 minutes, even though the number of precints that reported only increased by 6 percent. These figures are provided by Husted's office to the media and public. In the first screenshot, with 39 percent of precincts reporting, the measure is winning 65-to-35 percent.
In the second screenshot, taken 11 minutes later, those percentages are flipped from the yes and no columns, even though the number of precincts reporting has only increased by 6 percent. Look at the number of votes in each column and you will see that 100s of 1,000s have been jumped from supporting to opposing the measure.
The promoters of the pot measure, Issue 3, should demand a recount, though the system is rigged and they would certainly be stonewalled. As in 2004's presidential election that came down to Ohio's close vote, critical election records are likely to not materialize even though they are legally required to be maintained.
Why is the system here rigged? It starts with the fact that Husted, a right-wing Republican and future gubernatorial hopeful, ran this election while visibly and actively campaigning against Issue 3 and threatening its proponents.
Husted vehemently opposes legalization of marijuana in any form. Less than a week before this year’s election, Husted accused Issue 3’s promoters of fraud, and has vowed to prosecute. He also is allied with state legislators who were prepared to negate (on “anti-monopoly" grounds) Issue 3’s legalization plan if it were passed by the voters.
Here are other factors that cast doubts on the official defeat of the Issue 3:
1. Pre-election polling showed far more support. Three major polls prior to the election showed public support for Issue 3 in the range of 51 percent- to 53 percent and Responsible Ohio, the coalition behind Issue 3, confirmed to the Free Press that its internal tracking polls were consistent with these numbers.
http://www.alternet.org/drugs/was-oh...ter1045379&t=6
My understanding was that a lot of pro-pot voters voted against it because the fix was in to reward the politically connected grower cartel instead of going with the Colorado/Oregon model where pot entrepreneurs somewhat compete.
Speaking of off year 2015 elections...how many in here besides me voted last Tuesday?
yep, it seems like the cartel got outed during the campaign, but this is Ohio, and vote counting fraud is rampant.
New evidence emerges of vote counting subterfuge in Ohio pot ballot initiative
More evidence is emerging calling into question the officially reported results of Tuesday’s marijuana legalization vote in Ohio, where Issue 3 was defeated by a two-to-one margin.On Friday, the Columbus Free Press published a series of screenshots of live televised election returns from Dayton’s WHIO-TV provided by Ohio’s Secretary of State. The sequence showed hundreds of thousands of votes flipped within minutes from the “yes” to “no” column of Issue 3. The controversial measure would have established a state-licensed cartel of 10 licensed growers operating regulated indoor grow sites of up to 300,000 square feet each. The pro-marijuana activist community was divided on the measure.
The screenshots, posted below, show hundreds of thousands of votes flipping from the “yes” to the “no” column in 11 minutes, even though the number of precincts reporting only increased by 6 percent. In the first screenshot, with 39 percent of precincts reporting, the pot measure is winning 65-to-35 percent.
In the second screenshot those percentages are reversed, even though the number of precincts reporting results has only increased by 6 percent. Look at the number of votes in each column and you will see that hundreds of thousands have been jumped from supporting to opposing the measure.
Late on Friday, Bob Fitrakis, Free Press editor and publisher, received another set of screenshots taken by an Oberlin College faculty member on her cell phone from another media outlet in another part of the state. (Disclosure: Fitrakis, his colleague Harvey Wasserman and I co-authored a 2006 book do enting how Ohio Republicans rigged the rules and vote count in the 2004 presidential election that returned George W. Bush to the White House.)
The first of these newly obtained screenshots shows Issue 3 passing statewide with 84 percent approval, based on 58 percent of precincts reporting. More than 700,000 voters are supporting legalization.
The next screenshot, taken seven minutes later, shows a dramatic reversal. Issue 3 now only has 35 percent voter approval, based on 67 percent of precincts reporting their tallies.
These screenshots raise substantial questions about the accuracy of the officially reported vote count. In the second screenshot, more than 1.3 million No votes have been added to the official results, yet the number of precincts reporting has only gone up by 8 percent. That does not make sense, because in Ohio, like the rest of the country, precincts are uniformly sized, even the largest ones. These results suggest there were more voters in the latest 8 percent of precincts reporting than the previous 58 percent.
Moreover, if the second screenshot is accurate, it would appear that almost all precincts that were first to report were filled with pro-pot voters, while almost all of the voters in this latest wave of precincts were anti-legalization voters. Such a swing of the electoral pendulum seems questionable.
Finally, it is odd that in both of these sets of screenshots the pro-pot vote settled at 35 percent.
While there may be a logical explanation for these anomalies, these sets of screenshots, taken at different times in different parts of the state, suggest something is not right with how the state’s top election administrator—Secretary of State Jon Husted—managed the vote count.
As the Free Press’ Fitrakis and Wasserman reported, Husted publicly opposed Issue 3 and one week before Tuesday’s vote accused Issue 3’s promoters of fraud and has vowed to prosecute.
The promoters of Issue 3 should demand a recount, although that is not likely to change the officially reported outcome. Ohio’s media should also demand an explanation, as they were posting the official results obtained from Husted’s office and as these screenshots show, the results show something wasn’t right or credibly reported to the public.
Looking toward 2016, Ohio is once again considered a swing state, meaning it will have an outsized role in electing the next president. These anomalies in Tuesday’s election should merit a thorough investigation of the state’s plans, especially when it comes to transparency and accountability of the 2016 vote count.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/11/new-...ot-initiative/
Matt Bevin pardons a child rapist on his way out the door.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
