Tag Archives: Romney

In 2012 Election, African American Voters Surpassed White Turnout For The First Time Ever

Post image for They Tried, But They Could Not Stop Us. We Went To Court. We Stood In Line. We Voted! And We Won!

They tried to take our voice from us, but we would not let them. We stood in line. We endured their slings and arrows. We braved their threats and insults. And then, we voted…

This is great news.  In 2012 we stood our ground and defied the many attempts at voter suppression.  ”We stood in line”…

Think Progress

Though Republican election officials in battleground states sought to dampen voter turn out of traditionally Democratic voters through by instituting identification requirements and limiting early voting hours, a new analysis of census data by the Associated Press shows that African-Americans “voted at a higher rate than other minority groups in 2012 and by most measures surpassed the white turnout for the first time.”

The analysis finds that had “people voted last November at the same rates they did in 2004, when black turnout was below its current historic levels, Republican Mitt Romney would have won narrowly”:

The 2012 data suggest Romney was a particularly weak GOP candidate, unable to motivate white voters let alone attract significant black or Latino support. Obama’s personal appeal and the slowly improving economy helped overcome doubts and spur record levels of minority voters in a way that may not be easily replicated for Democrats soon.

Romney would have erased Obama’s nearly 5 million-vote victory margin and narrowly won the popular vote if voters had turned out as they did in 2004,according to Frey’s analysis. Then, white turnout was slightly higher and black voting lower.

More significantly, the battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida and Colorado would have tipped in favor of Romney, handing him the presidency if the outcome of other states remained the same.

African Americans outperformed their voter share, representing 13 percent of total votes cast in 2012 while making up 12 percent of the population — despite facing great obstacles to exercising the franchise.

A poll conducted by Hart Research poll immediately after the election reported that 22 percent of African-Americans waited 30 minutes or more to vote, compared to just 9 percent of white voters. A more thorough analysis from Massachusetts Institute of Technology confirmed that black and hispanic voters waited nearly twice as long to vote as whites. In Florida, home to the longest lines, at least 201,000 people may have been deterred from voting by the long waits.

Black youth was also far more likely to be asked to show ID, a study by professors at the University of Chicago and Washington University in St. Louis found, and many did not even try to vote because they lacked the required identification.

“The 2008 election was the first year when the minority vote was important to electing a U.S. president. By 2024, their vote will be essential to victory,” William H. Frey, a demographer who analyzed the 2012 elections for the AP, said. “Democrats will be looking at a landslide going into 2028 if the new Hispanic voters continue to favor Democrats.”

1 Comment

Filed under African-Americans, Voter Disenfranchisement, Voter Suppression

Mystery man behind ’47 percent’ video revealed

prouty

Scott Prouty

Get ready for the far-right’s all out assault on Scott Prouty…

The Raw Story

The curtain has been lifted.

The man who secretly filmed then-presidential candidate Mitt Romney telling a private audience that “47 percent” of voters would vote for President Obama “no matter what,” outed himself Wednesday night during an hour-long segment on “The Ed Show.”

Scott Prouty, a bartender who was working Romney’s private meeting with major contributors at a Boca Raton, Fla. fundraiser, told Ed Schultz, “I was behind this whole thing.”

”I didn’t go there with a grudge against Romney,” said Prouty. “… I really had no idea he would say what he said.”

The “47 percent” remark is considered — even by Romney himself — to have been a major blow to the campaign. Prouty said he remained anonymous in the aftermath of the comment  because he didn’t want to distract from the video itself.

“I wanted Mitt Romney’s words, and Mitt Romney’s words only” to be the news story, said Prouty.

According to the Washington Post, Prouty said he expects “to be torn apart by the right-wing media,” now that he’s come forward.

Watch a segment of the interview below:

 

2 Comments

Filed under U.S. Politics

Mitt Romney’s first post-election interview: 5 takeaways

The Week

Romney started his return to the public spotlight on Fox News Sunday

On Sunday, Fox News aired the first interview with Mitt Romney since the former Massachusetts governor lost the 2012 presidential race. Fox New Sundayhost Chris Wallace flew out to California to interviewRomney and his wife, Ann, and they dissected what went wrong for the Romney campaign, what the Romneys plan to do now, and what ails the GOP, President Obama, and America, among other topics. (Watch the Mitt Romney solo interview below.) Here, five key takeaways from Romney’s first big post-election interview:

1. He and Ann thought he was going to win until the very end (think: Ohio)
Both Romneys believed they were moving to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. right up until the returns started coming in, they tell Wallace. “I think Mitt intellectually was thinking it was possible we couldn’t” win, Ann says. “He knew how close it was, but my heart and whole soul was, we’re going to win, I was there.” Mitt agrees that “we were convinced that we’d win,” even though the polls were close. “We knew the energy and passion was with our voters, and my heart said we were going to win.” The first hint that his internal polls were wrong was when Florida exit polls started coming in showing a very close race — “we thought we’d win solidly in Florida,” Romney says — and from there it was “a slow recognition” that he’d lost. “Ultimately, when the Ohio numbers began coming in and they were disappointing,” he began to give up hope.

2. The Romneys blame his loss on his campaign, plus ObamaCare
Mitt Romney mostly blames his own campaign for his loss, singling out his poor showing among blacks, Latinos, and other minorities. The campaign wasn’t “effective at taking my message primarily to minority voters,” he says, and “the ObamaCare attractiveness and feature was something we underestimated… particularly among lower incomes.” ObamaCare? “ObamaCare was very attractive, particularly to those without health insurance,” Romney says. “And they came out in large numbers to vote.”

At the same time, Romney acknowledges that his infamous “47 percent” remark “hurt and did real damage to my campaign,” even though suggesting that almost half the people in the country are moochers is “not what I meant.” Reinforcing a common criticism — or excuse, from supporters — that he’s a “famously unprincipled political weather-vane,” says Daniel Larison atThe American Conservative, Romney added: “What I said is not what I believe.”

Ann Romney, for her part, contributed this little “sound bite that’s sure to get all kinds of rotation over several news cycles this week,” says Eric Wemple at The Washington Post: “I’m happy to blame the media.” She says that the campaign didn’t let people “really get to know Mitt for who he was,” but “it was not just the campaign’s fault. I believe it was the media’s fault as well” for not giving him “a fair shake.” There’s “a mound of contradiction” in that critique, since the campaign tightly controlled media access to Mitt Romney, says Wemple. Blaming both the campaign and the media “at the same time is a touch precious.”

One thing Romney explicitly did not blame: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R). “I’m not going to worry about how Chris was doing what he thought was best for the people of his state,” he says. “I lost my election because of my campaign, not because of what anyone else did.”

3. Mitt Romney thinks he would be doing a better job as president
Romney doesn’t have many nice things to say about the man who beat him. The president, mostly, is letting a “critical moment, this golden moment just slip away” to fix America’s long-term fiscal problems.

It kills me not to be there, not to be in the White House doing what needs to be done. The president is the leader of the nation. The president brings people together, does the deals, does the trades, knocks the heads together. The president leads. And — and I don’t see that kind of — of leadership happening right now. [Fox News]

Instead, Obama is “out campaigning to the American people, doing rallies around the country, flying around the country and berating Republicans and blaming and pointing,” which only makes GOP lawmakers “retrench and then put up a wall and to fight back.” Maybe Romney is right that he “would have been better at working out a deal, says Ann Althouse at her blog, “but Obama, being better at campaigning, won the election, and if what he is doing now is more campaigning… well, that’s the downside of democracy, isn’t it? We judge the campaigns. We don’t know what expertise they’d bring to negotiating and reconciling differences.”

Continue here…

 

Comments Off

Filed under U.S. Politics

Ann Romney has not gotten over losing the election

Some people have dubbed Ann Romney The Queen of Mean…just saying…

The Week

Fox News has bagged the first interview with the Romneys since President Obama’s convincing victory in November, and the conservative-leaning network has offered a sneak preview to whet the appetite of political junkies and Romney fans. In an interview with PoliticoFox News Sundayhost Chris Wallace says Mitt has taken his defeat in stride, but his wife Ann “feels the pain and the what-ifs and the hurt more than he does.” Wallace adds, “There’s a lot of emotion that comes through in the interview, and she’s more open about it — the ‘what might have been.’”

Mitt, on the other hand, reportedly went into the election knowing he’d face liberal bias in the media, but “you don’t expect anything different and that’s part of what you wage in a campaign,” says Wallace. Romney also reportedly believes he could handle “the mess in Washington” a “lot better” than the White House’s current occupant.

The full interview will air this weekend on Fox News Sunday.

Watch the clip…

 

5 Comments

Filed under U.S. Politics

Man Behind “47 Percent” Video Opens His Own Research Firm

BuzzFeed

Jimmy Carter’s grandson turns his big scoop into a career. He’s already taken down another Republican with a hidden-camera video.

The freelance researcher who became a minor campaign celebrity after unearthing the now-infamous video of Mitt Romney railing against 47 percent of Americans at a private fundraiser has used his political fame to start his own opposition research firm.

When the researcher, James Carter IV, first saw the secretly recorded footage of Romney in August, he immediately identified it as a bombshell, and sent it to David Corn, a Mother Jones reporter with whom he had worked in the past. When the magazine published the scoop — headline: SECRET VIDEO: Romney Tells Millionaire Donors What He REALLY Thinks of Obama Voters” — Corn received a solo byline, with Carter getting a modest mention at the foot of the post: “Research assistance: James Carter.”

Corn would later turn what his magazine called “the scoop of the decade” into a HarperCollins e-book, which he titled, 47 Percent: Uncovering the Romney Video That Rocked the 2012 Election. Carter is thanked in the acknowledgements for “his diligent pursuit of the source for the Romney fundraising video and for introducing the two of us,” writes Corn. “It was a consequential hook-up.”

It was, in fact, Carter who found the video, researched Romney fundraisers, identified the likely location and date of the one featured in the video, and convinced the source of the footage through a series of Twitter direct messages to hand it over to Corn.

“[Corn] got a lot of the credit for it, and that’s fine — that’s the way it had always worked,” Carter told BuzzFeed, adding, “I was perfectly fine with it. I’m the research guy, and he was the reporter and publicist.”

Continue reading…

Comments Off

Filed under Mitt Romney, Mitt Romney Pandering

3 reasons President Obama’s lunch with Mitt Romney is a good idea

Formal rivals Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are meeting for lunch: Might they chow down on these cookies depicting their faces?

Closing words from President Obama’s Victory Speech, November 7, 2012:

I believe we can seize this future together because we are not as divided as our politics suggests. We’re not as cynical as the pundits believe. We are greater than the sum of our individual ambitions, and we remain more than a collection of red states and blue states. We are and forever will be the United States of America.

The Week

The former campaign-trail rivals are meeting in the White House’s private dining room. And, arguably, it’s a win-win situation for them — and America

Mitt Romney will join President Obama for a private lunch on Thursday, White House press secretary Jay Carney announced Wednesday. While Obama aides didn’t release any details on the luncheon’s agenda, the president offered some hints in the first news conference he gave after defeating Romney and winning re-election three weeks ago. At the time, Obama suggested that he would welcome Romney’s input on how to address some of the nation’s most pressing problems: “There are certain aspects of Gov. Romney’s record and his ideas that I think could be very helpful….” Many in Washington have dismissed the upcoming lunch as a feel-good PR move, but others say the event can benefit both politicians, and even the nation. Here, three reasons this bipartisan lunch is a good idea:

1. Romney could help ease Washington gridlock
It’s easy to make jokes about what’s likely to be an awkward meal, says Michael Tomasky at The Daily Beast, but this lunch “could conceivably be a good thing.” Despite his loss, Romney remains “one of the country’s best-known Republicans,” and has “more juice with the broader public than Mitch McConnell or John Boehner.” The former Massachusetts governor and two-time failed presidential candidate no longer has to play to the conservative base, so he can “play a moderating role” in the GOP, if he chooses. He could start by making nice with Obama and “telling Republicans, hey, gang, let’s drop the unceasing obstinacy.” Whether they’ll listen is another matter.

2. Obama can show he really wants to work with Republicans
“It behooves Obama to be gracious” after his big election win, says Peter Grier at The Christian Science Monitor. “With large margins of Americans telling pollsters they want Democrats and Republicans to work together, the lunch offer is a big flashing light of a signal that Obama intends to do just that.” Or at least look like he’s doing so. This is a golden opportunity for Obama to “set a tone of civil discourse” that could help him face the daunting challenges ahead, starting with negotiations on a deficit-reduction deal needed to avoid the “fiscal cliff” of painful tax hikes and spending cuts scheduled for Jan. 1. Romney can do the same thing for Republicans by publicly setting aside partisanship — polishing up their brand, and his own (especially after his remark that Obama beat him by buying votes with “gifts”).

3. This helps Romney stay relevant
Romney might be leery — Richard Nixon was hesitant to accept an invitation from John F. Kennedy after losing the 1960 election to his Democratic rival, says Tom McCarthy at Britain’sGuardian. Former president Herbert Hoover contacted Nixon at the request of Joseph Kennedy, the president’s father. According to Nancy Gibbs and Michael Duffy, authors of The Presidents Club: Inside the World’s Most Exclusive Fraternity, Nixon resisted taking part in what he dismissed as “a cheap publicity stunt,” but Hoover reminded him that Kennedy, who had just been elected president, wasn’t the one who needed help drumming up publicity. “This is a generous gesture on his part,” Hoover reportedly told Nixon, “and you ought to meet it.” The same holds true for Romney. Who knows, says David A. Graham at The Atlantic, Romney might even come out of this with a job. Obama “could make a bipartisan gesture by appointing Romney to be commerce secretary, treasury secretary, or the first to fill a ‘business secretary’ [slot] that Obama offhandedly suggested late in the campaign.”

2 Comments

Filed under Mitt Romney, President Obama

It Gets Worse for Mitt Romney as He is Named the Least Influential Person of 2012

Oh well, if one acts despicable their entire adult life, this is what might happen…

PoliticusUSA

Apparently, Mitt Romney hasn’t hit rock bottom yet. Romney has gone from being one of only two men vying to be president to being named the least influential person of 2012 by GQ.

Mitt Romney beat out such luminaries as Amanda Bynes, Jerry Sandusky’s lawyer, Lance Armstrong, Madonna, and George Zimmerman to win the title of GQ’s Least Influential Person of 2012.

Here is how GQ described Romney, “Was anyone inspired by Mitt Romney? Did anyone vote enthusiastically for Mitt Romney? Of course not. Voting for Romney is like hooking up with the last single person at the bar at 4 a.m. The only successful thing he did this year was embody every black stand-up comedian’s impression of a white person. Thank God the election’s over. No more endless photos of Mitt staring winsomely off-camera with that attempted smile on his face. No more glaring campaign mishaps week after week after week. No more labored media efforts to make him look like anything other than Sheldon Adelson’s pampered money Dumpster.”

At first, I wasn’t sure if I agreed with this reasoning. I mean Romney did manage to become one of the two finalists to be the next President of the United States of America. That has to make him more influential than Amanda Bynes, right?

Not really. Mitt Romney spent six years of his life running for president. In those six years can you name one original idea or policy proposal that he came up with? Just one. You can’t, because Mitt Romney spent nearly a decade planning and running for president without adding a single new idea to our national discourse. Some people called Romney an empty suit, but his problem was an empty mind.

Then, there were the gaffes. Mitt Romney’s self inflicted wounds were so severe that he made Sarah Palin look like Stephen Hawking.

Romney spent the entire 2012 campaign being the least popular nominee in modern American political history. Not only was Romney completely devoid of ideas, but people felt historic levels of dislike for him. One of the great oddities of Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign was that the more voters saw of Romney, the less they liked him. (At this point Republicans will point to the October public opinion polls as proof that Romney was liked, but as we found out on Election Day, the national polls were overestimating the Republican makeup of the electorate.) The writing was on the wall in state polls of places like Ohio and Pennsylvania, where Romney remained more disliked than liked.

Mitt Romney was such a turn off to voters that his political convention actually gave his opponent a bounce in the polls.

Continue reading here…

5 Comments

Filed under Mitt Romney

Rise of the Left: Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnnell Beat Fox for an Entire Week

Apparently some of the more sane viewers of Fox News realize that they are indeed a Conservative Entertainment Complex

PoliticusUSA

Changing demographics aren’t just winning elections, they are also reshaping cable news. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell beat their Fox News competition every day last week in the key 25-54 demo.

According to TVNewser, “For the week of November 12-16, Maddow’s 9 p.m. program averaged 480,000 A25-54 viewers, while “Hannity” had 439,000. In the 10 p.m. timeslot, “The Last Word” averaged 396,000 viewers in the demo, and “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren” had 362,000.” Thanks to Bill O’Reilly, Fox News edged MSNBC in total prime time 25-54, 454,000-420,000. Partially due to the fact that they are available in more homes, Fox News still dominates in total viewers, but the fact that younger viewers are powering MSNBC is a definite threat to the Fox News empire.

Fox News has the oldest audience in television.  The average Fox News viewer is 65 years old.  In 2010 the average MSNBC viewer was 59, but they are the top cable news network with both African Americans and younger viewers.

One of the trends that has not been discussed is the fact that the audience fueling MSNBC’s rise shares many characteristics in common with the coalition that turned out to the polls to reelect Barack Obama.   A new report from the Pew Center Project for Excellence in Journalism found that MSNBC and Fox News tilted their coverage in opposite directions during the final week of the presidential campaign, “In the final week of the campaign, both Fox News and MSNBC became even more extreme in how they differed from the rest of the press in coverage of the two candidates. On Fox News, the amount of negative coverage of Obama increased-from 47% in the first four weeks of October to 56% the final week. Meanwhile, positive discussion of Romney grew, from 34% of segments to 42%. On MSNBC, the positive coverage of Obama increased from 33% during most of October to 51% during the last week, while Romney’s negative coverage increased from 57% to 68%.”

It isn’t a coincidence that as MSNBC’s ratings have increased in direct relationship to their positive coverage of Obama. Fox News viewers will be comforted by the fact that they still lead by a large margin in total viewership, but MSNBC is gaining on them. The aging of the population will continue to benefit Fox News in the short term, but the demographic shift that tilted the 2012 election to the Democrats is also impacting cable news.

MSNBC is building a coalition that can win a demo today, and could challenge Fox News for cable news supremacy tomorrow. MSNBC is on the rise. If the 2012 election does translate into a leftward shift, Fox News’ days of ratings supremacy may be numbered.

2 Comments

Filed under MSNBC

Why Mitt Romney will regret blaming his loss on Obama’s ‘gifts’ to minorities

Mitt Romney is coming off as a bit of a sore loser by arguing that the real reason President Obama won was because he showered liberal constituencies with "gifts."

Mitt Romney is coming off as a bit of a sore loser by arguing that the real reason President Obama won was because he showered liberal constituencies with “gifts.”

This is my question to the obvious sore loser, Mitt Romney:

You intended to lower the current tax rate for the top one-percent, isn’t that a “gift” as well?

The Week

The defeated GOP candidate faces a backlash after he points the finger at young and minority voters in the wake of his landslide defeat

Mitt Romney is taking fire from both the left and the right after telling donors on Wednesday that he lost last week’s election because President Obama had showered young voters, minorities, and other key liberal constituencies with “big gifts.” “With regards to the young people, for instance, a forgiveness of college loan interest, was a big gift,” Romney said on a conference call with his national finance committee. “Free contraceptives were very big with young college-aged women.” He also said that Obama’s health care reform was a “huge” gift for Latinos and blacks. Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, among other GOP leaders hoping to reach out to Latinos and other groups that spurned Romney, quickly denounced Romney’s comments. “We have got to stop dividing American voters,” Jindal said. “We’re fighting for 100 percent of the vote.” Here, four reasons why critics say Romney was wrong to place the blame where he did:

1. First, he’s simply incorrect
Romney’s analysis is somewhere on the spectrum from “incomplete to inaccurate,” says Mike Allen at Politico. “Obama didn’t win Janesville, Iowa or New Hampshire because of gifts to minorities.” Those places are overwhelmingly white. Indeed, says Doug Mataconis at Outside the Beltway, Obama didn’t somehow buy votes by showering Americans with “free stuff.” He convinced people “he actually cared about the problems they were dealing with,” which “is something that Romney never seemed to be able to do.” Still, it’s silly to deny that Obama made several major gestures to his liberal base — from imposing a safe harbor for young illegal immigrants to “evolving” on gay marriage — during the campaign, says Allahpundit at Hot Air. So the question “isn’t whether O is guilty of ‘clientelism’” — “it’s whether clientelism was decisive.”

2. Romney is hurting the GOP effort to broaden its appeal
It’s hardly a surprise that Romney’s fellow Republicans, including Jindal and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, are upset, says Aaron Blake at The Washington Post. They’re obviously “ready for the Romney chapter to be over.” Romney’s White House dreams might have vanished, but theirs haven’t. And Romney’s sour grapes “won’t help the GOP’s efforts to win over minority voters,” especially given his earlier  remark about how the “47 percent” of Americans who pay no federal income taxes were destined to vote for Obama because they’re dependent on the government. “What Jindal says is not political rocket science,” says Joe Gandelman at The Moderate Voice. If the GOP “wants to thrive and even survive nationally, it must expand its tent and compete to get more voters inside its tent,” not by offering better “gifts,” but by offering “policies relevant to their dreams and lives.”

3. Republican constituencies get plenty of loot, too
“On the off-chance this nonsense still needs rebutting, let’s be very clear: There are plenty of reliable Republicans who get heaping piles of government goodies,” says Noam Scheiber at The New Republic. Seniors get Medicare, veterans get VA benefits, and corporations “gorge on lavish subsidies” — all with a thumbs-up from Romney. “Believe it or not, there are even wealthy financiers out there who don’t pay income taxes on their loot and who deduct the mortgage interest on their vacation homes. (Not that I have anyone specific in mind.)” And don’t forget, “Romney himself promised an exceedingly large ‘gift’ to elderly Republican voters: restoring $718 billion worth of savings from Medicare that Obama had achieved through the Affordable Care Act.”

4. This just shines a light on Romney’s other failures
“Romney, a famously data-driven decider, has completely missed the boat when it comes to explaining his loss,” says Peter Cohan at Forbes. The real cause was “a self-inflicted wound — the failure of Romney’s online voter turnout system — ORCA.” The Romney campaign touted ORCA as an “unrivaled high-tech means of communicating with more than 30,000 field workers who were stationed at polling places on Election Day.” It failed miserably, and it was that “lack of tactical execution excellence” that sank the campaign. Plus, “Romney’s favorable ratings were among the lowest recorded for a presidential candidate in the modern era,” says Andrew Kohut at The Wall Street Journal. It’s true that Obama benefited from a big turnout among Latinos, blacks, young people, and other members of his base. But anyone chalking up the GOP’s defeat to supposed gifts to these voters is “paying too little attention to how weak a candidate Mitt Romney was, and how much that hurt Republican prospects.”

5 Comments

Filed under Mitt Romney

Machine turns vote for Obama into one for Romney

Screengrab from YouTube video

Politics Nation

 - 12:52 pm on 11/06/2012

A Pennsylvania electronic voting machine has been taken out of service after being captured on video changing a vote for President Obama into one for Mitt Romney, NBC News has confirmed. Republicans have also said machines have turned Romney votes into Obama ones.

The video was first posted on Youtube by user “centralpavoter.” It shows a voter’s finger repeatedly pressing the button for Obama, but a check mark coming up next to Romney’s name:

NBC News confirmed that the machine has been taken off line.

Underneath the video, the user gave an account of what happened:

My wife and I went to the voting booths this morning before work. There were 4 older ladies running the show and 3 voting booths that are similar to a science fair project in how they fold up. They had an oval VOTE logo on top center and a cartridge slot on the left that the volunteers used to start your ballot.

I initially selected Obama but Romney was highlighted. I assumed it was being picky so I deselected Romney and tried Obama again, this time more carefully, and still got Romney. Being a software developer, I immediately went into troubleshoot mode. I first thought the calibration was off and tried selecting Jill Stein to actually highlight Obama. Nope. Jill Stein was selected just fine. Next I deselected her and started at the top of Romney’s name and started tapping very closely together to find the ‘active areas’. From the top of Romney’s button down to the bottom of the black checkbox beside Obama’s name was all active for Romney. From the bottom of that same checkbox to the bottom of the Obama button (basically a small white sliver) is what let me choose Obama. Stein’s button was fine. All other buttons worked fine.

I asked the voters on either side of me if they had any problems and they reported they did not. I then called over a volunteer to have a look at it. She him hawed for a bit then calmly said “It’s nothing to worry about, everything will be OK.” and went back to what she was doing. I then recorded this video.

There is a lot of speculation that the footage is edited. I’m not a video guy, but if it’s possible to prove whether a video has been altered or not, I will GLADLY provide the raw footage to anyone who is willing to do so. The jumping frames are a result of the shitty camera app on my Android phone, nothing more.

Separately, the RNC last week sent a letter (pdf) to elections officials in six other states, including Ohio, Nevada, and Colorado, raising concerns that machines had wrongly counted votes for Romney as ones for Obama, and asking them to address the problem.

Late Update,2:35pm: A spokesman for the Pennsylvania Department of State told Mother Jones a machine that showed that problem, likely the same one, is back online after being “recalibrated.”

1 Comment

Filed under Election Fraud