The election is already determined

[nickcoons]

Given the various electoral maps based on the polls, Obama is projected to win by dozens of electoral votes, perhaps even by more than 100, so it should be a clear victory for him. Some states that are typically red (like mine, Arizona) are now considered "undecided."

I've been paying attention to the methods of vote count fraud and interviewing people that spend huge amounts of their time working for vote integrity. And I paid close attention to the Republican side of the race that led up to McCain receiving the nomination. Based on what I've learned, I have a theory, which is that the election was determined well over a year ago. After tomorrow, we will learn that McCain will be our new president.

If McCain is the winner, it will be difficult to explain how that happened without some sort of foul play; that much is clear. If it turns out that I'm right, then I'll elaborate a bit on how I came to this conclusion.

[Pepsi]

One theory of mine is that they get a tie in electoral votes. The issue will head to Congress, and very controversial decision will happen and McCain becomes President..

[Andrew-Austin]

I've advocated this same theory every now and then, that McCain was the designated loser from the moment he was nominated.

[american.swan]

First and fore most, both candidates are worthless. Ron Paul should be president and every member of congress should be like Ron Paul. Socialist shouldn't even come into the equation.

With that said, I have a feeling McCain could pull this out with the "legal" Help America Vote Act. Democratic voters are going to find out they have to vote provisional ballots that WILL NOT be counted.

Does Obama have enough sheep to win in spite of the fraud?

[heavenlyboy34]

What kind of fraud do you see happening here in AZ, Nick? Is it along the lines of people voting multiple times?

[nickcoons]

What kind of fraud do you see happening here in AZ, Nick? Is it along the lines of people voting multiple times?

It's not a fraud perpetrated by voters (which is why I'm hesitant to call it "voter fraud"), but rather by those that are in charge of counting the votes.

Here's an example. The votes are casted on paper ballots, and then machine-counted. To verify the accuracy of the machines, precincts are chosen at random where the ballots are counted by hand and the compared to the machine-counted votes. If there are no discrepancies, then all is considered good. Sounds good, right?

Not when you realize the path that the paper ballots take. The ballots are placed into a plastic container which is zip-tied shut. The zip-ties are serialized so that any tampering would be evident. Recently at the Arizona Breakfast Club, I got to observe one of these plastic containers and witness someone breaking into it in all of 10 seconds without breaking the zip-ties and without leaving any evidence that the case was tampered with.

When a hand count of a precinct is required in order to verify it against the machine-counted votes, 24-48 hours is often allowed. The transportation and storage of the ballots is in no way secure. Many times unsupervised individuals are allowed to come into contact with the ballots. It would be a trivial task for someone to change the paper ballots for the precinct being verified so that it matched the machine count, thereby providing the illusion that the other machine-counted votes are accurate.

That's one possibility.

[sevin]

Given the various electoral maps based on the polls, Obama is projected to win by dozens of electoral votes, perhaps even by more than 100, so it should be a clear victory for him. Some states that are typically red (like mine, Arizona) are now considered "undecided."

I've been paying attention to the methods of vote count fraud and interviewing people that spend huge amounts of their time working for vote integrity. And I paid close attention to the Republican side of the race that led up to McCain receiving the nomination. Based on what I've learned, I have a theory, which is that the election was determined well over a year ago. After tomorrow, we will learn that McCain will be our new president.

What makes you think McCain will win? It seems to me they picked him as the Republican candidate because they knew he would lose. It's the democrats' turn now.

[Liberty Star]

After listening to now famous Palin prank call on you tube, I have dropped probability of McCain winning to about 1%.

[SovereignMN]

You guys are too paranoid. Obama will be declared the winner before the polls close on the west coast.

[nickcoons]

What makes you think McCain will win? It seems to me they picked him as the Republican candidate because they knew he would lose. It's the democrats' turn now.

I don't have any "inside" information other than perhaps the various ways voting fraud can and in fact does take place, I just have some circumstantial evidence. I'll get more into it if I'm correct. No point in going into it if it turns out that I'm completely wrong :D. Besides, my strengths lie in the philosophy of freedom and rational thought, not in political predictions.

[RonPaulR3VOLUTION]

If the election is being decided by 'TPTB,' you'd think they'd want Obama to win to complete the formation of the 'Neo-Liberals.'

Obama, should he win, will pull off the same 'trick' Bush did in the Republican party.

[nickcoons]

You guys are too paranoid. Obama will be declared the winner before the polls close on the west coast.

I may be completely wrong about my prediction. But unfortunately, vote count fraud is a reality and the motivation to pull it off certainly exists. There's already a thread here about what to look forward to in an Obama administration (such as getting the people that voted for him to realize who they elected). Additionally, I'd almost prefer Obama over McCain just to prove that I'm wrong about how easily the entire process might be rigged in McCain's favor.

[Working Poor]

Nick

I hope you are wrong.

[nickcoons]

Nick

I hope you are wrong.

It looks like I am.