Another Reason Obama Won

This is interesting. From the article:

President Obama must have run a great campaign considering the tremendous numbers he put up in numerous big cities. Over in Philadelphia, he was lucky enough to get 90% percent turnout in some districts with over 99% of the vote.

In Cleveland, in some districts he did even better with an astounding 100% of the vote in dozens of locations. For example, in Cleveland's Fifth Ward, Mr. Obama won districts E, F, and G 1,337 to Mitt Romney's... 0. And in case you're wondering, Gary Johnson received more votes than Mr. Romney.

Well, maybe that's just a fluke. In the Ninth Ward, Mr. Obama won districts D-G with a paltry total of 1,740 to... 3. Hey, at least Romney got .2% of the vote! In another Ohio county, Obama won with 108% voter registration! 1,337-0

Okay, what if we look at an entire Ward? No way this trend continues, right? An entire ward. Why not do the First Ward? Obama won that one 12,857 to... 94. This time Romney got .7% of the vote. He's moving up in the world!

In total, there are 21 districts in Cleveland where Mr. Romney received precisely 0 votes. In 23 districts, he received precisely 1 vote. And naturally, in one of the districts where Obama won 100% of the vote, there was 100% turnout. What a coincidence!

By the way, in case you are thinking that Romney did so poorly because maybe those districts were not very populated: Nope. In those 44 districts, Mr. Obama won 14,686 to 23. That's .16% of the vote for Romney.

But Ohio's not important in the electoral college, right?

Update: Mr. Obama won in St. Lucie County, Florida, which had over 140% voter turnout.

But if anyone mentions the "F" word (Fraud), we're called sore losers or crybabies.

Yeah, right. We know why Obama won. And it's consistent with the lying, dishonest and corrupt manner he's run his administration.



http://www.punditpress.com/2012/11/w...cleveland.html

If they had run Gary instead of Mitt it would have swung the other way.I have asked before do republicans want to win or just bitch..

Well, Mikey, you finally said something worthwhile. No. It is obvious the Republicans do not want to win. My guess is they will cooperate fully with the administration on liberty issues like NDAA and the Patriot Act, and only put up "agreed upon" dissent on other issues.

The last time I saw results lilke that Saddam Hussein had just been reelected. In this country we had results like that in Mississippi in 1866! 2500 registered republicans in Jones County, MS and only 8 voted. I guess we can thank the Klan and the democrats from saving this country from Lincoln.

But that can't be right.

I've seen the Bill Maher show. And he assured me that we don't need voter ID laws because voter fraud is practically non-existent in this country.

The last time I saw results lilke that Saddam Hussein had just been reelected. In this country we had results like that in Mississippi in 1866! 2500 registered republicans in Jones County, MS and only 8 voted. I guess we can thank the Klan and the democrats from saving this country from Lincoln. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Romney didn't inspire the vote.If Obies tally is less as been trumpeted over and over here then Mittens should have won even tho the black Latino and womens vote went against him. where were the whites?

And by calling the Hispanic voters lazy and moochers in conservative and right wing radio and TV, guess what? This is the time to build bridges towards the demographics that didn't support the GOP, but instead they're pushing them away. If the GOP wants to win elections they need to run the right candidate and they'll need to appeal to the demographics that are growing at a faster rate then their base.

And before you say anything about Hispanics being moochers, there are moochers across all races and ethnicities. Here are some facts:

ercent of recipients who are white 38.8 % Percent of recipients who are black 39.8 % Percent of recipients who are Hispanic 15.7 % Percent of recipients who are Asian 2.4 % Percent of recipients who are Other 3.3 %
Total number of Americans on welfare 4,300,000 Total number of Americans on food stamps 46,700,000 Total number of Americans on unemployment insurance 5,600,000 Percent of the US population on welfare 4.1 % Total government spending on welfare annually (not including food stamps or unemployment) $131.9 billion
What's interesting is here you have people complaining about welfare spending, but don't have a problem spending $800 billion a year in defense.

More interesting info:

Food Stamp Statistics Data Total annual cost of food stamp program $71,800,000,000 Number of Americans using the food stamp program 46,670,373 Percent of population on food stamp program 14 % Year Total Number of People Receiving Food Stamps Average Monthly Benefit 2011 44,709,000 $133.85 2000 17,194,000 $76.62 1990 20,049,000 $58.78 1980 21,082,000 $34.47 1969 2,878,000 $6.63 State Food Stamp Participation Rate 1 Mississippi 20.8 % 2 Tennessee 19.9 % 2 Oregon 19.9 % 4 New Mexico 19.8 % 5 Michigan 19.5 % 6 Louisiana 19.3 % 7 Alabama 19.1 % 8 Kentucky 18.8 % 9 West Virginia 18.5 % 9 Maine 18.5 % 11 Georgia 18.1 % 12 South Carolina 18 % 13 Arkansas 16.5 % 14 Arizona 16.4 % 15 Florida 16.1 % 15 Oklahoma 16.1 % 17 Missouri 15.6 % 18 Texas 15.4 % 19 Washington 15.5 % 20 New York 15.4 % 21 Rhode Island 15.2 % 22 Delaware 14.7 % 23 Vermont 14.6 % 24 Idaho 14.3 % 25 Wisconsin 14 % 26 Illinois 13.9 % 26 Ohio 13.9 % 26 North Carolina 13.9 % 29 Pennsylvania 13.4 % 29 Indiana 13.4 % 31 South Dakota 12.4 % 31 Montana 12.4 % 33 Massachusetts 12.3 % 34 Nevada 12.1 % 34 Iowa 12.1 % 36 Alaska 11.9 % 37 Hawaii 11.5 % 38 Maryland 11.4 % 39 Virginia 10.5 % 39 Connecticut 10.5 % 41 Kansas 10.3 % 42 Utah 10 % 43 California 9.7 % 44 Nebraska 9.4 % 45 Minnesota 9.4 % 45 Colorado 8.8 % 47 North Dakota 8.7 % 48 New Jersey 8.6 % 49 New Hampshire 8.5 % 50 Wyoming 6.3 %
If the Red states are truly Red because people believe in personal responsibility and don't want government assistance, why are they at the top of the list in participation rate? Shouldn't they be at the bottom of the list and the blue states, all those moochers that want the government to feed them be at the top?

Anyway, I do thank the GOP for demonizing the Hispanic population, as always, because the day will come when they will need us more than we need them.

But if anyone mentions the "F" word (Fraud), we're called sore losers or crybabies Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

StupidOldLoser, you are a loser and a crybaby unless you can provide something more concrete than wishful thinking.

But that can't be right.

I've seen the Bill Maher show. And he assured me that we don't need voter ID laws because voter fraud is practically non-existent in this country. Originally Posted by ExNYer

Doesn't Fl have a voter ID law?

The mainstream liberal media dragged BO across the finish line. They alone accounted for 15 percentage points.

They were so in the tank for him it was sickening.

Florida has finally tallied all the votes and has declared Gore the winner...

The mainstream liberal media dragged BO across the finish line. They alone accounted for 15 percentage points.

They were so in the tank for him it was sickening. Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

How many votes did they get to tally for him? I new corporations were people now so they get to vote also?

Doesn't Fl have a voter ID law? Originally Posted by WTF

Apparently not.

Nor Ohio.

Total government spending on welfare annually (not including food stamps or unemployment) $131.9 billion
What's interesting is here you have people complaining about welfare spending, but don't have a problem spending $800 billion a year in defense. Originally Posted by icuminpeace

You perpetuate the ignorant fucking mantra of the left. Fact is, “defense” is a constitutionally specified responsibility of the U.S. government; while social welfare spending is a contrivance of devised by you lefty-loonies. Furthermore, the defense budget to date has sustained the government you lefty-loonies now expect to spend even more on social welfare. You ignorant morons cannot pare down the U.S. defense forces to the degree that they are on par with its arch-rivals and simultaneously expect to sustain a government – a nation – that is capable of surviving to continue to provide the social services you lefty-loonies think the government is obligated to now provide.

Just an FYI, the Hispanics I've worked with, both in and out of the service, were/are not "moochers".

Defense is a responsibility, out of control spending in defense is irresponsible.