BREAKING ELECTION FRAUD: Why Did ABC-TV Post Illinois GOP Primary Results 24 Hours Early?!

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

http://sgtreport.com/2012/03/breaking-news-illinois-gop-primary-results-posted-24-hours-early/

Edited March 20, 2012 by ArmyVeteran37214

[Dolomite_supafly]

Ok, this is pretty disturbing.

Dolomite

[Oh Shoot]

I'll don my tinfoil Tam O' Shanter if Pope Boy actually wins it at all, let alone with the actual numbers the "fixed election data" shows.

I'm sure they were testing the data system and forgot to wipe screen before going live in studio.

- OS

Edited March 20, 2012 by OhShoot

[Mike.357]

Don't much matter really.

The state will vote for Obozo in the fall anyway.

[kieefer]

Interesting, seems the Drudge Report would be all over this one?

We'll see tomorrow how it compares to the so-called real or not-real results.

Either way I can't see Paul pulling a win out of any state this late in the game.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Interesting, seems the Drudge Report would be all over this one?

We'll see tomorrow how it compares to the so-called real or not-real results.

Either way I can't see Paul pulling a win out of any state this late in the game.

Especially if the numbers were being cooked from the beginning.

Dolomite

[BryanP]

I'm sure they were testing the data system and forgot to wipe screen before going live in studio.

- OS

This. TV studios test their graphic setups and feeds with dummy data, it doesn't really mean anything. Now honestly, if it were me I would have used fake names with the fake data just in case of something stupid like this.

But yeah, classic case of "Nothing to see here, move along."

[kieefer]

Romney 429,533 - 46.7%

Rick Santorum 322,423 - 35%

Ron Paul 85,747 - 9.3%

Newt Gingrich 73,246 - 8%

Other 9,175 - 1%

Yep, looks like a non-story.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Romney 429,533 - 46.7%

Rick Santorum 322,423 - 35%

Ron Paul 85,747 - 9.3%

Newt Gingrich 73,246 - 8%

Other 9,175 - 1%

Yep, looks like a non-story.

+1 or at least the story isn't going to be fraud. The real story should be how the US is going to be doomed unless there is a major change in those in charge or their way of doing business.

Dolomite

[kieefer]

+1 or at least the story isn't going to be fraud. The real story should be how the US is going to be doomed unless there is a major change in those in charge or their way of doing business.

Dolomite

It's going to take time to change the direction of the way the gov. does "business".

Looks like Romoney may be as close as we can get right now but whoever it is suits me as long as BHO is out and we begin a step in the other direction, preferably far right (but that won't happen with Mitt).

We also can't forget about the House, Senate and local elections. Vote these career-politicians, leftists and moderates out and go for the constitutional candidate.

[Oh Shoot]

... as long as BHO is out and we begin a step in the other direction, preferably far right (but that won't happen with Mitt).

Won't happen period ever again in this country to a significant degree. A least not after we crash and burn and start over.

- OS

[kieefer]

Won't happen period ever again in this country to a significant degree. A least not after we crash and burn and start over.

- OS

We just might see that in our lifetime.

[Dolomite_supafly]

But Romney is the same as any Democrat from 20 years ago, maybe even more recent. His beliefs are the same, as well as his actions, as most Democrats current and past. I am finding a hard time seeing a lot of difference between Romney and most of the run of the mill Democrats other than the ® next to his name.

People are getting hung up on the ® and not looking at his actions. And some of us, including me in the past, have put the ® ahead of our beliefs.

The biggest enemy of the country right now is that little (D) or ® next to each candidate's name. If people would have looked beyond those letters and voted what is in their hearts the country would be in a much better palce right now. Just in the same way we can't put (M) or (F) next to a candidate's name we should avoid all labels including those little R's and D's. That would at least get people to do their own research and vote for those candidates they agree with most.

I won't vote for Obama but I won't vote for Romney either.

Dolomite

[kieefer]

Pretty much agree but a vote in the general for anyone else besides the republican nominee is a vote for BHO.

I don't like mitt at all but surely he can't govern any worse and his business experience has got to be a plus. At least the bleeding may slow down.

[Oh Shoot]

....

I won't vote for Obama but I won't vote for Romney either.

Dolomite

TN may go overwhelming red anyway, but maybe it could be closer than anyone thinks. TN did go for Clinton, twice, so it's possible.

Should it be close, enough votes for Paul/write ins/whatever "protest" votes could indeed make the diff should they instead have been cast for Romney; in which case it's guaranteed most of the those folks would regret it -- such regret might take a few years once The Hussein Supreme Court takes full effect, might be much sooner.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I doubt it would be close in TN for Obama. Clinton was an anomaly. But you're right. Anything's possible.

Ohio and Pennsylvania will concern me, but Illinois will go for Obama. Too much of a machine in Chicago.

More than the rest of the state. Been that way for years.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Rush was talking about Romney's latest speech and he said it was great, if he really means it.

That's everyone's problem with Romney. Don't know where he is on anything.

[Guest ThePunisher]

I refuse to believe that Romney is a Marxist like Obama. I really think that Romney loves America and has been proud of America all his life, and will not bow down to foreign leaders and apologize for the exceptionalism of America. Staying out this election or voting third party is a vote for Obama. If anyone doesn't understand this by now, they probably like the way things are going under this Marxist regime.

[Oh Shoot]

I refuse to believe that Romney is a Marxist like Obama. I really think that Romney loves America and has been proud of America all his life, and will not bow down to foreign leaders and apologize for the exceptionalism of America. Staying out this election or voting third party is a vote for Obama. If anyone doesn't understand this by now, they probably like the way things are going under this Marxist regime.

I think Mitt might surprise us if elected and be a quite effective president.

We're in way too deep for any president's admin of even two terms to significantly unravel things (that's ultimately going to take some real sustained national pain). but Mitt will likely make rational and practical moves based in business and economics rather than blind ideology. And as mentioned, I believe he really loves this country. And he doesn't care if he ever makes another buck, either.

That's one reason I discount a lot of the "seesaw" criticism thrown at him. I know we all want to see some man of unwavering long time principle and all that, but flexibility to change to meet changing circumstances is important too.

Lest we forget, The Conservative God Ronald Reagan was a liberal Democrat until the 60's.

- OS

Edited March 22, 2012 by OhShoot

[Guest ThePunisher]

I think Mitt might surprise us if elected and be a quite effective president.

We're in way too deep for any president's admin of even two terms to significantly unravel things (that's ultimately going to take some real sustained national pain). but Mitt will likely make rational and practical moves based in business and economics rather than blind ideology. And as mentioned, I believe he really loves this country. And he doesn't care if he ever makes another buck, either.

That's one reason I discount a lot of the "seesaw" criticism thrown at him. I know we all want to see some man of unwavering long time principle and all that, but flexibility to change to meet changing circumstances is important too.

Lest we forget, The Conservative God Ronald Reagan was a liberal Democrat until the 60's.

- OS

Well said.

[kieefer]

I think Mitt might surprise us if elected and be a quite effective president.

- OS

Obama made the reference today during an interview about how great his ObamaCare is, matter of fact he said it works great in Massachusetts.

I can see Romoney defending his position during a debate with BHO, the position he had then and the one he has now. We really don't know which Mitt we will get, he has outspent every opponent to get this job, told us want we want to hear and has bashed the others with the exception of RP to a lesser extent.

He's still getting my vote if he's the nominee but I don't believe or trust him.

BTW, Reagan may have once been a Democrat, but liberal? I think not.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/22/obama-says-romneys-pretending/

[Dolomite_supafly]

I seen on the news last night that Romney changed a stance to exactly what Obama has been saying. I don't remember which, I've slept since then, but I believe it was on energy or oil exploration.

I am just scared of a person who speaks to the audience he is standing in front of.

I think that no matter what happens we are in for a rough time. Whether it happens within this decade or takes a few decades we are going to have a major economic meltdown. It is because so many people have their hand in the cookie jar that you can't put more cookies in. I once said our children would see an economic collapse in their lifetimes but I now believe it will be in mine. Regardless of who is the next POTUS the country is pretty much doomed as a whole without hitting the reset button. And even then I do not see much of a change.

Our representatives recently stripped a lot of the safeguard regulations that would prevent another major collapse so we will probably see another round of collapses and bailouts within this decade. Couple that with the increasing debt that we are having problems paying now and I believe by the end of this decade we, as a country, are going to be begging for help from the world community. And look at how well we are liked around the world now and think of who would be willing to help. Countries don't like us, the like the mighty American dollar but when that dollar isn't so mighty they aren't going to like us so much.

But most importantly for this country to be successful again the people, as in individuals, need to take responsiblity. If you can't afford a $500K house don't try to buy it, finance it using an ARM then expect a bail out when the interest rates hike. I do feel compassion for those who lost their income and can't afford their home but there were those who could barely make their ARM payment in good times. I live in a modest house because that was all I could afford 9 years ago when my wife and I built it. And when I say built it I mean we built it from the ground up because we couldn't afford someone to build it for us. I never have and probably never will own a new car because even that is out of my comfort level.

Dolomite

[Oh Shoot]

BTW, Reagan may have once been a Democrat, but liberal? I think not.

Wouldn't know what else to call one who voted for FDR four times, loved the man, loved the New Deal, president of Screen Actors Guild (that's a union, ya know), campaigned for other lberal Dems up through the early 50s', etc

He became a less liberal Dem after that, then finally a Rep. But he praised FDR his whole life.

I'm not the only one who characterizes him as such back then, history does.

- OS

Edited March 23, 2012 by OhShoot

[Oh Shoot]

dang, ever since this new look, I seem to hit quote instead of edit for some dang reason.

Edited March 23, 2012 by OhShoot