7/07 Election Model: How much FRAUD will it take to steal it this time?

[tiptoe]

2008 ELECTION MODEL
A  Monte Carlo  Electoral  Vote  Simulation

TruthIsAll

Updated: July 7

?click">Chart   State Poll Aggregate + Projection Trend

?click">Chart   National 5-Poll Moving Average Projection

?click">Chart   State vs. National: Vote Share Projection Trends

?click">Chart   Battleground-State Polls

?click">Chart   Battleground-State Win Probability

?click">Chart   Obama Electoral Vote Simulation Frequency

?click">Chart   Electoral Vote + Win Probability Trend

?click">Chart   Electoral Vote + Projected Vote Share Trend

?click">Chart   Undecided Voter Allocation + Win Probability

?click">Chart   Monte Carlo Electoral Vote Simulation Trials

 2008 Election Model Fraud Analyzer 

Uncounted  &  Switched Votes

?click">Chart   Effect on Obama Projected Vote Share

?click">Chart   Effect on Obama Projected Electoral Vote

 

“I’m glad that TIA raises the questions. A Top 10 list.”  — Sancho

 

This
State
National
State
National
Monte  Carlo
Simulation

Update
Poll
5-Poll
2-party
2-party
Expected

7/7/2008
Aggregate
Average
Projection
Projection
ELECTORAL VOTE

Obama
McCain
 47.58 
 42.09 
 48.60 
 43.80 
53.78
46.22
53.16
46.84
339
199

    

15-Poll

Last Poll

Sample

 

NATIONAL MODEL

 

5-Poll Mov Avg

 

5-Poll MA, 2-party Proj

Poll MA

Project MA

Trend
                      
Gallup
Rasmussen
CNN
DemCorp
Time

Bloomberg
USA Today
Newsweek
FOX
Rasmussen

Gallup
ABC/WP
COOK/RT
Zogby
NBC/WSJ

Date
        
7/05
7/02
6/29
6/25
6/25

6/23
6/19
6/19
6/18
6/18

6/17
6/15
6/15
6/14
6/09

Size
              
2620 RV
3000 LV
906 RV
2000 RV
805 RV

1115 RV
1310 LV
896 RV
900 RV
3000 LV

2605 RV
--
880 RV
1113 LV
1000 RV

 

Obama
        
48
49
50
49
47

49
50
51
45
48

47
49
44
47
47

McCain
        
42
44
45
45
43

37
44
36
41
45

42
45
40
42
41

Spread
        
6
5
5
4
4

12
6
15
4
3

5
4
4
5
6

 

Obama
        
48.6
48.8
49.0
49.2
48.4

48.6
48.2
48.0
46.6
47.0

46.8
46.2
45.0
46.0
46.2

McCain
        
43.8
42.8
42.8
41.0
40.2

40.6
41.6
41.8
42.6
42.8

42.0
42.0
41.0
42.2
42.2

 

Obama
        
53.2
53.8
53.9
55.1
55.2

55.1
54.3
54.1
53.1
53.1

53.5
53.3
53.4
53.1
53.2

McCain
        
46.8
46.2
46.1
44.9
44.8

44.9
45.7
45.9
46.9
46.9

46.5
46.7
46.6
46.9
46.8

Diff
        
6.3
7.7
7.8
10.2
10.5

10.2
8.6
8.2
6.2
6.2

7.0
6.6
6.8
6.2
6.3

Win Prob
          
99.45
99.93
99.95
100.00
100.00

100.00
99.98
99.96
98.60
98.90

99.60
99.02
98.87
98.26
98.67

Win Prob
          
99.90
99.99
99.99
100.00
100.00

100.00
100.00
100.00
99.87
99.89

99.97
99.93
99.96
99.87
99.90

 

 

If a fraud-free election was held today, the model projects Obama as the winner with 339 electoral votes and 53.8% of the two-party vote.
But past is prologue: we would be foolish to assume a fraud-free election.

The Election Model includes two key fraud variable factors: uncounted and switched votes. These factors are never mentioned in
election forecasting models which permeate the media and the internet. It’s 2008 and nothing on fraud from professional pollsters,
political forecasters in academia, media pundits or liberal bloggers on their web sites. But then again, it’s understandable. Why should
any of these interested parties discuss fraud, when only a few Democratic politicians even dare to? No one wants to rock the boat. Unlike
impeachment, the dirty little secret of election fraud has always been off the table in Congress.

The Election Model calculates projected vote shares and the electoral vote over a range of 36 uncounted and switched vote scenarios. The
scenarios range from the True Vote (zero votes uncounted, zero switched) to Massive Fraud (5% uncounted, 5% switched). This sensitivity
analysis tool enables one to view the effects of various combinations of uncounted and switched vote rates. Historical evidence shows that
the vast majority of uncounted ballots are found in heavily Democratic minority precincts. Therefore, it is assumed that Obama will win
75% of uncounted votes.

The base case projection (339 EV; 53.8% 2-party vote share) assumes zero fraud. But if 4% of total votes cast are uncounted and there is
no vote switching, the model projects that Obama will have 312 EV and 52.9%. McCain would need at least 4% of Obama's votes switched to
his column to win with 270 EV. The only way he can win is to emulate Bush in 2004: significant vote-switching on touch screen DREs and
optical scanners. Is it just coincidental that Karl Rove is advising McCain?

These graphs display the effects of uncounted and switched votes on Obama's projected EV and 2-party vote share.
?click">Effect of uncounted and switched votes on the projected vote share
?click">Effect of uncounted and switched votes on the electoral vote

Electoral vote:  339 – 199  EV.

Popular vote share projection:
53.8%  State model (aggregate average)
53.2%  National model (5-poll average)

Win probability:
State
100.0% — electoral vote (Monte Carlo simulation)
99.99% — popular vote (2.0% MoE)
99.32% — popular vote (3.0% MoE)

National
99.90% — popular vote (2.0% MoE)

Latest poll averages:
Obama 47.6 - McCain 42.1 (state aggregate)
Obama 48.6 - McCain 43.8 (latest 5 national polls)

Data source: http://www.electoral-vote.com/ and http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

Undecided voter allocation (UVA) sensitivity analysis

• UVA scenarios: 50, 55, 60, 65, 70% to Obama
  
• Worst case (50%)
  52.8%, 314 EV, 99.6% EV win probability
  
• Best case (70%)
  54.8%, 370 EV, 100% EV win probability
  
  The complete state and national polls and projections are shown below.

In a true democracy, this would be a slam dunk for Obama:
McCain supports the most unpopular president in history with 25% approval.

But there’s a catch: It’s called Election Fraud.

The Democratic True Vote is always greater than the Recorded Vote.
A massive new voter registration and GOTV effort is required to overcome the fraud.

• Approximately 3–4 million Obama votes will be uncounted.
  
• Vote counts on DREs and central tabulators are unverifiable.

On Election Day 2004, Bush had a 48% approval rating.
The Final 2004 Election Model projected that Kerry would win 337-201 EV with 51.8%.
Preliminary State and National exit polls also indicated that Kerry won.

But Bush was the official winner by 50.7- 48.3% with 286 EV.
And so the Final National Exit poll was forced to match the fraudulent recorded vote.
The final state and national polls/projections are shown below.

Calculation of Win Probabilities
Electoral Vote - based on a 5000 election trial Monte Carlo simulation:

• The EV win probability is the number of winning election trials/5000.
  The expected electoral vote is the average of the 5000 election trials.

Popular Vote I - based on the State aggregate vote share projection:

• The win probability is calculated using the Excel normal distribution function.
  
• It is calculated for both a 2% and 3% margin of error (MoE).
  
• If Obama’s projected vote share =V, his popular vote win probability is calculated by
  the Excel formula: = NORMDIST (V, .50, .02/1.96, true) assuming a 2.0% MoE.

Popular Vote II - based on the latest 5 National poll average vote share projection:

• The win probability is calculated using the Excel normal distribution function.
  
• A 2.5% MoE is assumed for the projected 5-poll moving average (MA).
  The Excel formula: = NORMDIST (MA, .50, .025/1.96, true).

Obama’s win probability in each state is also calculated by the normal distribution.
The probabilities are based on 4% margin of error and the projected state vote share.

• For example, assume that Obama is tied with McCain in the latest polls at 45%.
  With 60% of the undecided vote, he is projected to win the 2-party vote by 51-49%.
  His probability of winning is 69%: =NORMDIST (.51, .50, .04/1.96, TRUE)

The 2008 Election Calculator
This model determined that Obama will win the True Vote by 71 – 59m (54 - 45%).
The True Vote is calculated based on applying vote shares to returning 2004 and new voters:

• 2004 recorded vote, mortality, uncounted votes, 2004 voter turnout in 2008 and estimated vote shares.

In projecting uncounted votes and voter turnout based on actual historical data, the model
considers several components of fraud which are never addressed by political forecasters
in academia, the media or on so-called liberal democratic websites.

      2008 True Vote Election Calculator  Forecast
                                     Estimated vote share (see National  Exit Poll)
      2004       Turnout      Votes         Mix      Obama      McCain      Other 
      DNV         -           17.2         13.1%      59%         40%         1%
      Kerry       95%         60.5         46.2%      89%         10%         1%
      Bush        95%         51.6         39.4%      11%         88%         1%
      Other       95%         1.6           1.2%      70%         11%         19%
      Total       113.7       130.9       100.0%     54.1%       44.7%       1.2%
                                          130.9      70.8        58.5        1.6  

2004 Election Model Review
The model produced a startling confirmation of the State and National models.

• Both projected Kerry the winner with 51.8% of the two-party vote.
  The final national 5-poll moving average projection was 51.8%.
  The final national 18-poll moving average projection was 51.6%.
  
• The Monte Carlo simulation gave Kerry an expected 337 electoral votes in the base case.
  
• In the base case scenario Kerry was assumed to win 75% of the undecided vote (UVA base case scenario).

The Election Model projections were based on state and national Pre-election polls and UVA.
Kerry’s projected vote share was within 2.0% of his exit poll share in 23 states.
Kerry’s aggregate projected vote share (51.0%) was within 0.8% of his unadjusted exit poll share (51.8%).
The 12:22am Preliminary National Exit Poll indicated that Kerry won by 51 – 48%.

Exit Pollsters Edison-Mitofsky released their 2004 Evaluation report in Jan 2005:
The state Within Precinct Error (WPE) is the average deviation between the unadjusted exit poll and the vote.
It is more appropriately called Within Precinct Discrepancy (WPD).

Kerry won the unadjusted (WPD) aggregate state exit poll by 51.8 – 47.2%.

• The average WPD exceeded 4.0 in 34 states for Bush and just 2 states for Kerry.
  
• The WPD was under 2.0 in 8 heavily Republican states (AR, ID, IN, KS, KY, MT, OK, TN).
  
• It was under 2.0 in just one Democratic state: OR is the only state which votes exclusively by paper ballot.

The   1:25pm FINAL National Exit Poll indicated that  Kerry lost by 48 – 51%.

• All FINAL National Exit Polls are 'forced' to match the Recorded Vote.
  
• The 'forcing' of the 2004 Exit Poll numbers resulted in IMPOSSIBLE demographics.

Either all state and national projected Pre-election polls and preliminary Exit polls were wrong, or the Recorded Vote was fraudulent.

The Election Calculator Model used 12:22am NEP vote shares applied to returning and new voters.
It determined that Kerry won a 67–57 million landslide, 53.2 - 45.4%.

2004 Calculated True Vote
                              12:22am NEP vote share
  
2000  Turnout  Voted    Mix     Kerry   Bush   Other
                                                 
DNV       -     25.6   20.4%     57%     41%     2%
Gore      95%   49.7   39.5%     91%      8%     1%
Bush      95%   46.6   37.1%     10%     90%     0%
Other     95%    3.8    3.0%     64%     17%    19%
  
Total   100.1  125.7    100%    53.2%   45.4%   1.4%
Votes cast             125.7    66.9    57.1    1.7
  
Recorded Vote (actual) 122.3    59.0    62.0    1.2
                                48.3%   50.7%   1.0%
  
  
Unadjusted Exit Poll            51.9%   47.1%   1.0%
Deviation from True Vote        -1.3%   +1.7%  -0.4%

Election Forecasting Methodology
Two basic methods are used to forecast presidential elections:

1. Vote share projections based on the latest state and national polls
   
   In the Election Model, state and national projections are based on the latest polls.
   Both state and national models allocate undecided voters to project the two-party vote.
   The state model uses Monte Carlo simulation to determine the expected electoral vote.
   The Election Model assumes the election is held on the latest poll date.
   
   
2. Projections based on historical time-series data (regression models).
   These models forecast vote-share only and are usually executed months in advance of the election.

Monte Carlo Electoral Vote Simulation Overview
The objective is to calculate the expected electoral vote and win probability.
The win probability for each state is calculated based on the current projection.

For each of 5000 election trials, the winner of a state is determined as follows:
Obama's state win probability is compared to a random number (RND) between zero and one.
If the probability is less than RND, Obama wins the state EV, else McCain.

The winner of the election trial is the candidate who has at least 270 electoral votes.
The EV win probability is simply the number of winning election trials divided by 5000.

2004 Registered Voter (RV) vs. Likely Voter (LV) Polls
The national pre-election RV polls were closer to the True Vote than likely voter LV polls.
The LV polls, after adjustments, matched the RVs — and the unadjusted exit polls.

Other links:
Latest 2008 Election Model

Confirmation of A Kerry Landslide
Election Fraud Analytics and Response to the TruthIsAll FAQ

Excel Models available for download:
The Election Calculator: 1988-2004
2004 Interactive Simulation Model
A Polling Simulation Model
2000-2004 County Vote Database

Aggregate State and National Polls and Projections
Undecided-Voter allocation effect on projected vote share, EV and win probability

THE 2008 ELECTION MODEL

Last
State
National
State
National
Monte  Carlo
Simulation

Update
Poll
5-Poll
2-party
2-party
Expected

7/7/2008
Aggregate
Average
Projection
Projection
EV

Obama
McCain
47.58
42.09
48.60
43.8 
53.78
46.22
53.16
46.84
339
199

 


Sensitivity Analysis

Undecided Voter Allocation Assumption
Obama
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%

 

State model:  Projected weighted average vote share
Obama
McCain
52.75
47.25
53.26
46.74
53.78
46.22
54.30
45.70
54.81
45.19

 

MoE	 Probability Obama wins popular vote  (normal distribution)
2.0 %
3.0 %
99.6 
96.4 
99.9 
98.3 
99.99
99.32
100  
99.7 
100  
99.9 

 

Monte Carlo   Probability Obama wins electoral vote (trial wins/ 5000)
Win
Probability
4958
99.2
4990
99.8
5000
100
4999
100
5000
100

 

Obama Average Electoral Vote
Average
Median
314
313
325
324
339
338
354
353
370
369

 

Maximum
Minimum
388
241
403
262
419
272
439
263
449
282

 

95% Confidence Level
Upper
Lower
355
274
367
284
382
295
399
308
418
321

 

States Won
26
26
27
29
32

 

 

2008 POLLING ANALYSIS AND PROJECTIONS

State Model

 
 
State Polls Pre-Undecided Voter Allocation
 
Projection
Win
Trial
Flip to
 
Total

AL
AK
AZ
AR
CA
       
CO
CT
DC
DE
FL
       
GA
HI
ID
IL
IN
       
IA
KS
KY
LA
ME
       
MD
MA
MI
MN
MS
       
MO
MT
NE
NV
NH
       
NJ
NM
NY
NC
ND
       
OH
OK
OR
PA
RI
       
SC
SD
TN
TX
UT
       
VT
VA
WA
WV
WI
WY
       
EV
 538 
       
9
3
10
6
55
       
9
7
3
3
27
       
15
4
4
21
11
       
7
6
8
9
4
       
10
12
17
10
6
       
11
3
5
5
4
       
15
5
31
15
3
       
20
7
7
21
4
       
8
3
11
34
5
       
3
13
11
5
10
3
       
Obama
 47.6 % 
       
36
41
34
40
56

46
55
90
50
44

44
61
39
60
48

47
37
35
36
55

52
53
48
51
44

43
48
36
42
50

49
48
59
43
38

47
38
48
48
53

39
34
36
39
31

63
46
55
37
50
40
 
McCain
 42.1 % 
       
51
45
44
47
36

43
35
9
41
47

50
31
52
31
47

42
47
51
52
33

39
37
40
42
50

47
43
52
45
39

33
43
33
45
44

43
52
45
40
25

48
51
51
48
55

29
48
40
45
40
53
      
Diff
 5.5 % 
      
(15)
(4)
(10)
(7)
20
 
3
20
81
9
(3)
 
(6)
30
(13)
29
1
 
5
(10)
(16)
(16)
22
 
13
16
8
9
(6)
 
(4)
5
(16)
(3)
11
 
16
5
26
(2)
(6)
 
4
(14)
3
8
28
 
(9)
(17)
(15)
(9)
(24)
 
34
(2)
15
(8)
10
(13) 
BO EV
 307 
       




55

9
7
3
3



4

21
11

7



4

10
12
17
10



3


4

15
5
31



20

7
21
4







3

11

10

 
































































         
Obama
 53.8 % 
       
43.8
49.4
47.2
47.8
60.8

52.6
61.0
55.4
90.6
49.4

47.6
65.8
44.4
65.4
51.0

53.6
46.6
43.4
43.2
62.2

57.4
59.0
55.2
55.2
47.6

49.0
53.4
43.2
49.8
56.6

59.8
53.4
63.8
50.2
48.8

53.0
44.0
52.2
55.2
66.2

46.8
43.0
43.8
46.8
39.4

67.8
49.6
58.0
47.8
56.0
44.2
 
Probability
 100.0 % 
       
0.1
38.2
8.1
13.6
100.0

90.3
100.0
99.7
100.0
38.2

11.5
100.0
0.3
100.0
69.1

96.4
4.5
0.0
0.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
99.5
99.5
11.5

30.9
95.5
0.0
46.0
100.0

100.0
95.5
100.0
54.0
27.4

93.3
0.1
86.4
99.5
100.0

5.5
0.0
0.1
5.5
0.0

100.0
42.1
100.0
13.6
99.9
0.2
       
EV
 339 





55

9
7
3
3



4

21
11

7



4

10
12
17
10



3


4

15
5
31
15


20

7
21
4







3

11

10

    
       
Obama
  7  







Obama









Obama

Obama












Obama





Obama

Obama


Obama

















    

        

AL
AK
AZ
AR
CA

CO
CT
DC
DE
FL

GA
HI
ID
IL
IN

IA
KS
KY
LA
ME

MD
MA
MI
MN
MS

MO
MT
NE
NV
NH

NJ
NM
NY
NC
ND

OH
OK
OR
PA
RI

SC
SD
TN
TX
UT

VT
VA
WA
WV
WI
WY

National Model

    

15-poll

Last Poll

Sample

 

NATIONAL MODEL

 

5-Poll Mov Avg

 

5-Poll MA, 2-party Proj

 

MoE: 2.0%

Trend
                      
Gallup
Rasmussen
CNN
DemCorp
Time

Bloomberg
USA Today
Newsweek
FOX
Rasmussen

Gallup
ABC/WP
COOK/RT
Zogby
NBC/WSJ

Date
        
7/05
7/02
6/29
6/25
6/25

6/23
6/19
6/19
6/18
6/18

6/17
6/15
6/15
6/14
6/09

Size
              
2620 RV
3000 LV
906 RV
2000 RV
805 RV

1115 RV
1310 LV
896 RV
900 RV
3000 LV

2605 RV
--
880 RV
1113 LV
1000 RV

 

Obama
        
48
49
50
49
47

49
50
51
45
48

47
49
44
47
47

McCain
        
42
44
45
45
43

37
44
36
41
45

42
45
40
42
41

Spread
        
6
5
5
4
4

12
6
15
4
3

5
4
4
5
6

 

Obama
        
48.6
48.8
49.0
49.2
48.4

48.6
48.2
48.0
46.6
47.0

46.8
46.2
45.0
46.0
46.2

McCain
        
43.8
42.8
42.8
41.0
40.2

40.6
41.6
41.8
42.6
42.8

42.0
42.0
41.0
42.2
42.2

 

Obama
        
53.2
53.8
53.9
55.1
55.2

55.1
54.3
54.1
53.1
53.1

53.5
53.3
53.4
53.1
53.2

McCain
        
46.8
46.2
46.1
44.9
44.8

44.9
45.7
45.9
46.9
46.9

46.5
46.7
46.6
46.9
46.8

Diff
        
6.3
7.7
7.8
10.2
10.5

10.2
8.6
8.2
6.2
6.2

7.0
6.6
6.8
6.2
6.3

Win Prob
          
99.45
99.93
99.95
100.00
100.00

100.00
99.98
99.96
98.60
98.90

99.60
99.02
98.87
98.26
98.67

Win Prob
          
99.90
99.99
99.99
100.00
100.00

100.00
100.00
100.00
99.87
99.89

99.97
99.93
99.96
99.87
99.90

 

 

 

 

[Alexander]

1. Obama will win by such a landslide that the Republicans won't be able to steal it this time.

They can only get away with stealing close elections, and only sometimes (New Hampshire phone-jamming scandal, anyone?). If they try to steal a landslide election, it becomes obvious the process is a farce.

McCain has jack shit for organization, and Obama's playing mostly on Republican turf, since most blue states are going to stay blue this year.

There will be so many states in play that the Republicans won't know where to steal, and even if they do rig one big state like Florida, Obama could win so many more small states that it won't make a difference.

[tiptoe]

2. Obama's been making inroads even in AZ, McCain's home state. (Different spins on same poll)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/30/poll-obama-gaining-on-mcc_n_109965.html

In a new Rasmussen poll, McCain only leads by nine points in his home state. He trails Obama by six points with women.

A Cronkite/Eight poll last week found McCain was only ahead ten points in Arizona, with 34% of the electorate still undecided.

A few weeks ago McCain himself suggested that he could lose Arizona, calling his home a "swing state" even though it voted Republican in every presidential election but one since 1952.

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/arizona_electoral_college/

Abstract: (Angus Reid Global Monitor) - Republican John McCain is set to carry his home state of Arizona in this year’s United States presidential election, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports. 49 per cent of respondents in the Grand Canyon State would vote for their U.S. senator, while 40 per cent would back Democratic Illinois senator Barack Obama.

[harun]

3. I hope you are right. I think the media gives Repub's +3 and the

fraud gives them another +3 in every presidential election. So we have to win by 7. I think it will be a big enough landslide that the media and fraud won't mean jack.

[phrigndumass]

4. The swing states are currently trading at 56% to 44%

"As the swing states go, so goes the election"

Obama winning 54% to 45% is very believable. Hope it will be a theft-proof margin.

K/R, thanks tiptoe! :hi:

[tiptoe]

5. July 8 update: A Simple Precinct/PC/Spreadsheet Solution to Eliminate Election Fraud

Vote counts on touch screens are lost in cyberspace. States using mechanical levers (NY, CT, etc.) had the highest error rates: gears can be shaved and the votes cannot be verified. Optical scanners (FL, PA, NH, etc.) have a paper trail, but they are never fully inspected for recounts. The chain of custody is often broken (see the NH primary). And if all else fails, the central tabulators finish the job as necessary.

A simple solution would be for each precinct to install just ONE PC and spreadsheet software. Voters would fill out a paper ballot uniquely coded by precinct/voter ID. A copy is made available to the voter. The ballot is entered into the spreadsheet and cross-checked by three volunteers (Dem, Rep, Ind) as if it were a fully monitored recount.

The precinct spreadsheet file is uploaded to the internet for public access. Precinct files are consolidated for district, county and state totals. The files would enable each voter to confirm his vote online by entering his unique voter ID code. A spreadsheet user could download all the state precinct files to check the totals. The networks would no longer be the source of incoming, fraudulent votes. Exit polls would match the online totals to within 1%.

The solution is inexpensive, accurate and would serve the public interest. That is why it will never be implemented. There is no money in it. The voting machine manufacturers and corrupt election officials would fight it all the way. And of course, Congress would never do a cost/benefit analysis.

[Virginian]

8. Too many chances of data entry errors.

Who do you think runs the polling place? Some of those people don't type.

There are usually more than one contest on the ballot in a presidential year. In 2004 we had a senate race, congressional races, three bond issues and two changes to the state constitution.

We also have nearly 5,000 registered voters in our precinct. That's a lot of keystrokes for a half blind retired person to enter correctly.

Your county probably needs people to work the polls. Find out what you can do to help. The object of the poll worker should be to run a fair and honest election so that there is no doubt as to who is the real winner. IE. to win honestly.

[tiptoe]

9. Not as many "errors" as whn a FINAL EP is matched to recorded vote. Now THAT'S "Megascale" fraud. nt

[Laura PourMeADrink]

6. thanks! Tiptoe

[AtomicKitten]

7. Voter roll purging must be stopped!!!

Obama is lawyered up, but we need to hedge our bets by ensuring voters have access to vote without impediment. That vigilance starts now.