There it was, on the front page of The Philadelphia Inquirer:
Miriam Hill, Andrew Seidman, and John Duchneskie, Inquirer Staff Writers
Posted: Monday, November 12, 2012, 5:30 AM
It’s one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.
These are the kind of numbers that send Republicans into paroxysms of voter-fraud angst, but such results may not be so startling after all.
“We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic,” said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. “It’s kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia.”
Most big cities are politically homogeneous, with 75 percent to 80 percent of voters identifying as Democrats.
Cities are not only bursting with Democrats: They are easier to organize than rural areas where people live far apart from one another, said Sasha Issenberg, author of The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns.
“One reason Democrats can maximize votes in Philadelphia is that it’s very easy to knock on every door,” Issenberg said.
Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?
The unanimous support for Obama in these Philadelphia neighborhoods — clustered in almost exclusively black sections of West and North Philadelphia — fertilizes fears of fraud, despite little hard evidence.
Despite little hard evidence, huh? Even Josef Stalin and Fidel Castro didn’t rack up vote totals of 19,605 to 0. Those totals constitute evidence in themselves.
What kind of other evidence could there be? The votes were completely skewed for the Democratic candidate, in a city run entirely by the Democrats, where virtually every official is a Democrat, and where the District Attorney, the man who’d have to investigate and prosecute allegations of Democratic voter fraud is himself an elected Democrat. This is a city where the Republicans had to go to court because the Republican poll watchers, which the party is allowed, by law, to have, were either denied entry or forcibly removed, and the Democrats didn’t even care about the law. From Breitbart:
On Tuesday, November 6, 2012. Election officials in Philadelphia’s 20th Ward, 1st Division attempted to prevent court-appointed Republican minority inspectors (regarding minority party) from doing their job to monitor elections.
GOP Inspector: These guys have a court order. They have to be able to sit here.
Dem Inspector: They not sitting here. They can sit in here, but they not sitting at this board. They not running this. I run this!
GOP Inspector: Well, they’re the minority inspectors, ma’am.
Dem Inspector: I don’t care. I don’t care!
GOP Inspector: That’s what the law says.
Dem Inspector: I don’t care what the law says, I say! I’m not turning them away… they aren’t sitting here at this board.
GOP Inspector: I’m going to call the legal division.
Dem Inspector: I don’t care, call ‘em!
It would have been better if they had recorded the name of the lovely-sounding woman on the tape.
The story about the unbelievable vote totals did not come from a conservatively-oriented site. The Philadelphia Inquirer at least attempts to portray itself as an objective journalistic source, abd, in fact, the editors endorsed and supported the re-election of President Obama. The story cannot (reasonably) be just dismissed.
However, while the total Democratic control over the City of Brotherly Love means that no charges will ever be brought against anyone, and no criminal investigation concerning whether and how the voting machines might have been tampered with, it actually is possible to build a prima facie case of voter fraud.
There were 59 voting districts in which Mitt Romney was recorded as having received zero votes. In Pennsylvania, the voter registration rolls are public information. What needs to be done is obvious:
- The voter registration rolls for the 59 districts need to be examined, to find out how many, if any, voters have registered as Republicans;
- The actual voting books from those 59 districts need to be examined to see how many of the registered Republicans in those 59 districts actually voted; and
- Those people registered as Republicans should be canvassed and asked for whom they voted.
In the districts in question, the Inquirer has noted that the population is very heavily black, and that blacks gave, nationwide, well over 90% of their votes to President Obama specifically, and Democrats in general. But black voters are not 100% Democratic, and black voters did not vote exclusively for President Obama. A sharp investigative team could easily discover whether any Republicans voted in those districts, and if any of them voted for Mitt Romney.
If you read the entire Inquirer article, you’ll see that they have done some of the research, and that Republicans really are rare in those districts. But it only takes one Republican found, who voted for Mitt Romney, in one of those 59 districts to prove that the reported vote totals are false. The Inquirer story said that they had checked some of the wards, but never stated that they had checked them all; sounds like a mission for Breitbart to me!