When dems lose elections, DU provides tons of threads with dubiously rational conspiracy theories about how the "rethugs stole the election" with their Diebold machines or Tagg Romney machines. They obsess on vote fraud to the point where they would indict their own mom if they suspected her of being a "teabagger." And Daily Kos loves to create highly detailed, quasi-plausible yarns about Jesse Ventura-esque secret society bullshit about highly organized voter fraud actions by the GOP.
So for the most part, I look at such DU-inspired conspiracies not with a grain, but a bowlful of salt.
Having said that, I've accepted the results of the election, though I will fight like hell any implementation of the policies as much as I can politically muster. So this is not really about trying to turn things around for now; it's more like identifying the source and reasons for my own suspicions. It's not about making excuses, but about trying to identify the most baffling political disconnect that I've had in years ever. Finally, I confess I have no technical knowledge of what really could have happened, but in providing the outline based upon my own relatively experienced political intuition, I can at least put out a basis for discussion...or for being called loonytunes, or worse. So let me have ONE "crazytime" moment on CC; and if a unanimity of you guys think I'm nuts, we can have a good beer and I'll stick to rational prose.
OK. First, my observations:
1. The GOP was energized more like 2010 than like 2008. Conversely, the libs were NOT energized like 2008. This energy was shown in the last two weeks. The storm notwithstanding, Romney still had the momentum going.
2. In the last week, the ground game was more energetic for the GOP by all anecdotal accounts. My intuition was geared to following such anecdotes, coupled with whom were communicating it: which pundits, which sources, etc.
3. Trusted conservative and even moderate pundits, notably Michael Barone, while not overtly providing guarantees, were highly confident in their projections of a significant Romney win in the swing states. The inference was the race, at worst would have been a close, but still comfortable, win, and in addition, coattails would have helped senate and congressional candidates run.
4. Finally, the exit polls, which had been described as close between Romney and Obama (and I'm certain among other downticket candidates), actually favored Romney because the exit polls were actually specialized to poll ONLY states that Obama took against McCain, and specifically most of the states that McCain won against Obama, with a few insignificant exceptions.
With that setup, with the observations in place, if I were a scientist, I would have only one rational explanation: Romney and conservatives would win handily. OK, maybe not ALL senators and representatives, but at least those that weren't targeted like Alan West and the "rape" senators. It would maybe not be as decisive as 2010, but it would at least have been a comfortable wire to wire win with no real cliffhangers in the swing states, or at least cumulatively.
And finally... with all the enthusiasm, and all the incredible turnouts by the GOP both at venues and in every conservative voting precinct, where only conservatives seemed to wait in long lines while urban poll centers were relatively sparse... the race was close.
Now, I watched the votes come in. And you all know what happened, Obama won. Not big, though. The popular vote was relatively close, which was irrelevant, but what was interesting was not just how the votes were close, but in the way the vote spreads wavered.
It seemed that the votes came in way too evenly. Usually, there are spurts when they get several precincts at once, or have to wait awhile. But the vote seemed to ALWAYS show Obama in the lead, by a little. It was almost...ALMOST!.. as if the actual Obama votes were coming in, and the Romney votes were being suppressed, never allowing to get too close to Obama's vote count, yet never increasing its difference.
This was highly noticed in Ohio, Florida, and Virginia: the FLOHVA trio that pundits predicted the election. It was eerie, very eerie.
Other states seemed to have that same phenomenon. I realize there is a fine line between actuality and fraud, and of course it is not determinate from my view, but in watching how the returns came in was very telling.
OK, I don't have anything more at this point. My contention is uncertain, but mathematically it makes more sense to suppress Romney / Rep votes than to add to Obama / Dem votes, simply because my interpretations of the strong anecdotals. I will now christen the thread the official BULLSHIT thread, and will consider this thread for entertainment purposes only. But mainly, I wanted to know if anyone else got the feeling that "somethin' ain't right, Lucy."
