How Technology, Illegal Alien Votes, and Chicago Thug Tricks Won for Obama!

The article below by Jerome Corsi will delve into the technological aspects of the Obama election run.  What is worse, are the examples of Voter Fraud:
Prescott, Arizona once had a mayor with a Polish background!  His name is Daiton Rutkowski.  When he was running for re-election, a new resident from Chicago (also of Polish descent)  went up to Daiton after a campaign speech, saying, “I want to help you win.”
Daiton said “Great, we can always use volunteers! What can you do?”  The transplant from Chicago said, “In Chicago, our union bosses had us go from precinct to precinct by bus. At each stop, a union official would get on the bus and tell each one of us what name to use for voting at this location.”
With a shocked, nervous laugh Dayton answered, “No, we can’t do that here in Arizona.”
Then, of course, was the congresswomen from Southern California speaking to a group of Hispanics.  She was pointing out the need for everyone to get out an vote!  One man stood up and in broken English said, “How can I vote?  I’m not a citizen.”
She answered, “Don’t worry about that.  We will show you how to vote!”
There are many more anecdotal incidents, but those point above and the articles below will give more evidence!

I am incredibly steamed this Thanksgiving Holiday over what the Democrats are doing to my country.

Everybody by now knows – or should know – how readily Democrats conduct election fraud, and how determined they are to defend it. James O’Keefe and others have taken videos of paid Democratic operatives encouraging citizens to vote twice. O’Keefe was even able to claim Attorney General Eric Holder’s own ballot at a district polling place by claiming to be him, and then to vote in his place. Democrats have promoted Motor Voter laws and same day registration, and month-long election days to help them mobilize the votes of people who are so unconnected to the political process and so uninterested in the country’s future, and perhaps so incompetent to understand what voting entails that they require keepers to see that they get to the polls and then vote the “right” way.  In the election that put Al Franken in the Senate by a few hundred votes, more than a thousand felons voted illegally because of the loose laws that govern the polling booth – laws the Democrats want to make even looser. It is in fact the number one civil rights issue of the NAACP this year to give felons the right to vote. So we know that Democrats have little respect for the election process, and we should assume will attempt to pursue their victories by any means necessary.
But even knowing this, I was not prepared for a conversation I had at Thanksgiving dinner today with my brother-in-law, Henry, who has lived most of his life in a home for the mentally disabled, and though now in his forties has the intelligence level of a six-year-old.
“Obama saved me,” he said to me out of the blue.
“What do you mean?”
“I voted for him for president and now he’s saving me.”
I was taken aback by these words, since Henry had no idea who Obama was, or what a president might be, and would be unable to fill out a registration form let alone get to the polling place by himself. So I asked him how he knew that and how he had registered and cast his vote. In halting, impeded speech he told me that the people who take care of him at the home filled out “the papers” to register him to vote, told him how Obama cared for him, even taught him the Obama chants, and then took him to the polling place to vote. They did the same for all of the mentally disabled patients in their care, approximately sixty in all.
This is so appalling in its contempt for the voting process, which is the very foundation of our democracy, and in its cynical exploitation of my brother-in-law and the other patients in the home, many of whose mental capacities are even more limited than his that I am at a loss for words to express it. I hope poll-watching groups like “True the Vote” will comb the rolls of residents at other homes for the mentally disabled, and attempt to stop this particular abuse. I hope that people who care about our country will make electoral fraud a focus of their political efforts, and work to protect the integrity of the voting process.
author-image by Jerome R. Corsi Email | Archive

Jerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D., is a WND senior staff reporter. He has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers “The Obama Nation” and “Unfit for Command.” Corsi’s latest book is “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?”More ↓
  • Printer Friendly
  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger

A consensus is developing in the post-mortem analyses of the 2012 presidential election that technology, combined increasingly with behavioral science understanding of voting behavior, were decisive advantages that led Team Obama to victory.

As a result, the prognosis for all future elections is relatively simple: Here come the geeks!

“Smoke filled rooms” that in bygone days were the domain of ward bosses are about to be replaced with “computer caves” where the denizens are increasingly likely to be academics more comfortable with a computer keyboard who have never actually had an in-person conversation with a voter.

The emerging conclusion is that Obama beat Romney the minute the Chicago-based bosses who managed his campaign, including Jim Messina and David Plouffe, applied ward politics to the Internet age.

In a three-part series published by Technology Review in December, Sarah Issenberg, the author of the groundbreaking book “The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns,” concluded Obama’s data techniques will rule future elections.

“What [the Obama campaign analytics] gave us was the ability to run a national presidential campaign the way you’d do a local ward campaign,” Simas told Issenberg. “You know the people on your block. People have relationships with one another, and you leverage them so you know the way they talk about issues, what they’re discussing at the coffee shop.”

The Romney campaign placed emphasis on traditional techniques of presidential campaigning – messaging and mass media advertising, focusing largely on television.

By contrast, the Obama campaign focused on Internet profiling of voters to develop voter contact information that micromanaged campaign messaging to fit the voter profile, while concentrating on fund-raising and “ground-game” efforts to get out the vote, known in professional political circles by the acronym GOTV.

Senior Editor Alexis Madrigal, writing in the Atlantic 10 days after the election noted that on Oct. 21, the Obama campaign shock-tested Narwhal, the code name for the Obama campaign data platform, putting the technology through what geeks call “live action role playing,” or “LARPing,” to determine how the computer system would perform under every possible disaster situation.

Narwhal predictably crashed, providing Obama computer experts with the information the campaign’s tech team needed to build redundant systems and put fixes in place so the computer system worked under the stress of Election Day – when thousands of volunteers in the field would need to use it.

The Romney campaign had never bothered to beta-test its get-out-the-vote computer system, code-named “Orca.” Predictably, Orca crashed on Election Day, leaving thousands of Romney volunteers standing around unable to tell headquarters in Boston who had voted and to get instructions about which voters still needed to be brought to the polls.

A 93-page analysis, “Inside the Cave: An In-Depth Look at the Digital, Technology, and Analytic Operations of Obama for America,” produced by Engage, a Republican Party-oriented competitor in the field of technology-based political marketing, makes clear how computer technology, behavioral science analysis of voters and Internet sophistication gave Team Obama a decisive edge.

As detailed in the Engage report, the Obama campaign had 1,979 employees registered on, 4.4 million donors and a list of 16 million email addresses, compared to the Romney campaign’s 369 employees registered on, 1.1 million donors and 2 to 3 million email addresses.

Moreover, “Inside the Cave” makes clear the Obama team used experimental trials to test every aspect of the campaign before it was put to use, including testing multiple alternative designs of email fundraising campaigns before any fundraising emails were sent to see which version was likely to produce the most dollar returns in campaign contributions.

Patrick Ruffini, president of Engage, did not return multiple WND phone calls and emails asking for an interview about his firm billed as “a full-service interactive agency with a track record of winning the toughest battles in politics and public policy,” including holding “senior new media” roles with the Republican National Committee.

In employing experimental methodology, the Obama tech team took a page from the playbook of two Yale University political science professors, Donald P. Green and Alan S. Gerber, who broke new ground introducing rigorous scientific research methodology into the study of what motivates voters, a central GOTV question.

In their path-finding book “Get Out the Vote: How to Increase Voter Turnout,” now in its second edition, Green and Gerber come to startling conclusions, including the admonition that telephone calling by phone banks has a minimal effect on motivating voters to vote, especially compared with in-person techniques that emphasize pounding the pavement with precinct workers assigned to knock on doors and interview voters.

The Obama campaign took Green and Gerber one step further, making sure its Internet messages were tailored to match voter interests using the same methodologies Green and Gerber have identified to ensure canvassing a precinct are armed with messages likely to be received favorably.

“Experts, be they consultants, seasoned campaigners or purveyors of GOTV technology, rarely measure effectiveness,” wrote Green and Gerber, communicating a message Messina and Plouffe took to heart.

That the Democratic Party is leaps and bounds ahead of the Republican Party in applying voter technologies is clear, in part by the reluctance of Republican-oriented consultants to go on the record.

Another group that refused to respond to WND requests for an interview was St. Paul, Minnesota-based FLS Connect, a firm contracted by the Romney campaign that advertises its expertise in “cutting edge technologies” applied to fundraising, voter and constituent contact, and data management tools.

Writing for, Ben Howe lists FLS Connect as one of the consultants who “used the Romney campaign as a money making scheme, forcing employees to spin false data as truth in order to paint a rosy picture of a successful campaign as a form of job security.”

Tech editor Josh Peterson, writing for the Daily Caller, quoted Zac Moffatt, the Romney campaign’s digital director, as rejecting the notion that Republican-contract social media companies, including FLS Connect, should not be castigated with a broad brush as having run a “consultant con job.”

Peterson noted that Moffat resisted answering the question when the Daily Caller pressed to know what consultant firm was responsible for developing Project Orca.


Obama’s Dems have begun the CHEATING! Here’s how to Stop it!

Voting Corrections

Posted by Don Sipe on November 5, 2012 at 11:50pm in General, Town Hall
View Discussions

You’ve cast your vote page by page. You get to the summary of all your votes at the end of the electronic voting process. BUT YOU SEE THAT THE MACHINE HAS FLIPPED YOUR VOTES OR RECORDED THE WRONG VOTES!!!

1. Do not panic; it happens, especially if you’ve voted quickly (like typing too fast on Facebook).
2. Call for one of the poll workers to come over because your machine has made an error.
3. Show the poll worker what’s happened.
4. The poll worker will ask you to try again to see if the machine repeats the error.
5. If it does NOT repeat the error, press the “cast ballot” button and finish voting.
6. If it DOES repeat the error, insist on having the poll supervisor come over. With the original poll worker helper present explain what’s happened. Tell the supervisor you want this machine taken offline and you want to vote on a machine that’s working properly.
7. The poll supervisor will have to cancel your voting “booth” before doing anything else.
8. Then the supervisor will take the machine offline (disconnect it from the daisy chain of machines).
9. The poll supervisor will re-issue the code you need to vote.
10. Go through the process again.

DO NOT take a photo of the machine or of anything in the polling area. In almost every state this is ILLEGAL and can get you thrown out of the poll without being able to vote.

If the poll supervisor DOES NOT follow the above steps, insist that he/she call the county/municipal election authority and let you speak with them. (That’s your right as a voter.)

Get them to direct the poll supervisor to take the correct actions. If they won’t help, ask for the toll free number to your state Secretary of State. Call them and ask them to resolve the problem.

If they won’t help call 855-444-6100. That’s the True the Vote hotline.
But DON’T CALL that line until AFTER you’ve tried the county/municipal authority AND the Secretary of State. We have lawyers standing by to help.
Please only call if YOU are the person to whom this happens. NOBODY can take 2nd or 3rd hand reports and take action.