Selwyn Duke asks the difficult questions at American Thinker:
How could Romney lose, especially by such a wide electoral margin?
Maybe he didn’t
At least not legitimately.
When IÂ predicted Obama’s re-election, I stated that, despite our country’s inexorable leftist slide, Romney would still win on Election Day were it not for vote fraud. I explained that the Democrats could steal more than enough votes in crucial swing states to turn the election. And I still believe what I did then: electoral criminality put Obama over the top.
At the time, we heard stories aboutÂ electronic-machine “glitches”Â switching Romney votes to Obama ones. And Patrick Moran, son of Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA), wasÂ caught on tapeÂ facilitating vote fraud while Bridgeport, CT mayor Bill Finch essentiallyÂ promisedÂ to commit same for a political partner in crime.
Since then, the indications of electoral criminality have been overwhelming. First there are the anecdotes, such as the court-appointed Republican poll watchers illegally expelled from 13 Philadelphia polling places in wards that, in most cases, went 99 percent for Obama; the poll observers who noted what they considered vote fraud but were powerless to stop; and the Democrats who actuallyÂ bragged aboutÂ voting more than once.
Then there are the statistics, such asÂ thisÂ staggering fact: in 59 Philadelphia districts, Romney failed to getÂ even one vote. Final Obama-Romney tally: 19,605 to 0.
Huh? Not even oneÂ personÂ voted GOP accidentally? I mean, there even was a Washington, D.C. councilman who inadvertently voted to approve faux marriage,Â sayingÂ that he didn’t know what he was voting for (that would be Marion Barry).
Next, considerÂ this reportÂ fromÂ The Columbus Dispatch:
More than one out of every five registered Ohio voters is probably ineligible to vote.
In two counties, the number of registered voters actually exceeds the voting-age population: Northwestern Ohio’s Wood County shows 109 registered voters for every 100 eligible, while in Lawrence County along the Ohio River it’s a mere 104 registered per 100 eligible.
Another 31 counties showÂ registrationsÂ at more than 90 percent of those eligible, a rate regarded as unrealistic by most voting experts. The national average is a little more than 70 percent.
[…]Of the Buckeye State’s 7.8 million registered voters, nearly 1.6â€‰million are regarded as “inactive.”
Understand the significance. Years ago I wasÂ contactedÂ by a Washington, D.C. community leader (who’ll remain anonymous) who told me that he had “done some computer work for several candidates over the years in DC” and had conducted his own study of urban vote fraud. He said that inner cities’ great transiency ensures that any given large metropolis will have a great number of voters who no longer live in their precinct of registration. These areas also have Democrat operatives known by the get-out-the-vote term “block captains” or “apartment captains,” people who know the lay of the land and thus what registered voters have left town. So all they need do then is vote for these people or have others do so. This is very easy, too, with few voter-ID laws. And this is why Democrats oppose these laws so vehemently.
Now consider that Obama “won” Ohio by 100,000 votes. This means that to flip the state, Democrat surrogates had to illegally “activate” onlyÂ 6.25 percentÂ of its 1.6 million inactive voters.
Note also that Ohio secretary of state Jon Husted did ask Eric Holder’s DOJ for help negotiating conflicting federal laws pertaining to the purging ineligible voters from the rolls. The DOJ’s ultimate response? “No comment.”
Yet a voter doesn’t even have to be inactive, just disengaged. For example, when the aforementioned Patrick Moran offered advice on surrogate voting, he told an undercover reporter to masquerade as a pollster and call a targeted individual to make sure he wasn’t planning to vote. And this is nothing new. In fact, liberal leg-thriller Chris Matthews himselfÂ admittedÂ that it has been going on for years.
Sadly, it doesn’t appear that Romney is willing to challenge any of these shenanigans. Â He prefers to play the nice loser.