Google accidentally released Maine election results early!, page 6

reply to post by Eurisko2012

---

of course those dirty tricks are not acceptable!



HOWEVER, like I said this isn't even an "election" this a nominational process yo!

So the truth is people should be complaining to the RNC for not assuring the supporters a clean and uncorrupted nomination process! The members of RNC should be outraged.

Originally posted by truthinfact
reply to post by Eurisko2012

---

of course those dirty tricks are not acceptable!



HOWEVER, like I said this isn't even an "election" this a nominational process yo!

So the truth is people should be complaining to the RNC for not assuring the supporters a clean and uncorrupted nomination process! The members of RNC should be outraged.

You think that just maybe the powers that be were looking the other way on purpose?

Now we have the video how it is done. It is so easy.

Lets see if it gets fixed.

You know it seems to me that the technology exists to identify and then - remove -

dead people from that list. If they did that then even a fake ID wouldn't work.

How hard could it be? - read the obituaries - make a list then --- delete ---

Maybe Team Obama would declare that dead people are being disenfranchised.

reply to post by The_Zomar

---

Do you have a link to share? I would like to see how things are going so far, but I have not been able to find any info.

Thanks!

reply to post by Furbs

---

If the results were real time and being updated constantly then I'd say that a glitch was likely, but since results were posted and date stamped for today (02/11/12) when they were actually posted yesterday, I'm calling bs on the glitch theory. Someone fumbled the ball here. We all know voter fraud happens all the time in every election, we all know mega corps keep politicians in their pockets to push legislation through; why is it so hard to believe that some underhanded tactics were uncovered here?

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul
reply to post by Furbs

---

If the results were real time and being updated constantly then I'd say that a glitch was likely, but since results were posted and date stamped for today (02/11/12) when they were actually posted yesterday, I'm calling bs on the glitch theory. Someone fumbled the ball here. We all know voter fraud happens all the time in every election, we all know mega corps keep politicians in their pockets to push legislation through; why is it so hard to believe that some underhanded tactics were uncovered here?

edit on 11-2-2012 by FugitiveSoul because: (no reason given)

Do you have information that others do not on how the real time updates by Google are handled? Because I would love to better understand the process so that I can make a more informed opinion. Right now, as someone that has done web-based IT work as recently as yesterday, my opinion is that someone ported a page early, and information from another database filled a bunch of fields that it wasn't supposed to fill.

Again, which is more likely?

One mistake, or multiple acts of urgency?

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul
reply to post by Furbs

---

If the results were real time and being updated constantly then I'd say that a glitch was likely, but since results were posted and date stamped for today (02/11/12) when they were actually posted yesterday, I'm calling bs on the glitch theory. Someone fumbled the ball here. We all know voter fraud happens all the time in every election, we all know mega corps keep politicians in their pockets to push legislation through; why is it so hard to believe that some underhanded tactics were uncovered here?

edit on 11-2-2012 by FugitiveSoul because: (no reason given)

Do you have information that others do not on how the real time updates by Google are handled? Because I would love to better understand the process so that I can make a more informed opinion. Right now, as someone that has done web-based IT work as recently as yesterday, my opinion is that someone ported a page early, and information from another database filled a bunch of fields that it wasn't supposed to fill.

Again, which is more likely?

One mistake, or multiple acts of urgency?

this is what has & is happening..



predetermined outcome being matched to real time results..

obviously...

enough giving them the benefit of the doubt..

that should have ended in everyone's mind after the 2000 bush election fiasco in Florida..

reply to post by Furbs

---

What multiple acts of urgency? A single leak was plugged, but not before the puddle was seen. If they had results last night that were legit, why not keep them up, making changes as more info poured in?
Why, after more than 15 hours are there still no results if they had info last night?

Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

Dead people casting votes, people voting multiple times, voters having their ballots cast before they ever actually get to the polls, and often times out of district, and sworn testimony about electronic voter fraud. You can call it an error. I'll place this leak in the column under "political b.s."

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul
reply to post by Furbs

---

What multiple acts of urgency? A single leak was plugged, but not before the puddle was seen. If they had results last night that were legit, why not keep them up, making changes as more info poured in?
Why, after more than 15 hours are there still no results if they had info last night?

Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

Dead people casting votes, people voting multiple times, voters having their ballots cast before they ever actually get to the polls, and often times out of district, and sworn testimony about electronic voter fraud. You can call it an error. I'll place this leak in the column under "political b.s."

edit on 11-2-2012 by FugitiveSoul because: (no reason given)

Multiple Acts of Urgency that would have needed to happen for Google to be involved in a conspiracy to produce an election results page.

1. An entity would have to have the idea.
2. Someone would have to create the data.
3. Someone would have to give the data to Google.
4. Someone at Google would have to import the data.

This is simplest list of things that would HAVE to happen, and it is still 4 steps.

Nothing in this list involves dead people voting, or any other type of fraud. This is simply about whether or not GOOGLE had anything to do with fraudulent voting outcomes.

Evidence that fraud exists in elections is not evidence that this was fraud.

reply to post by Furbs

---

Or the gov already has the polling data that they want to use, and passes it to the networks to report on....

its not that complicated,

And since google is THE search engine icon of the net, they would be included on that list....

Looks like to me someone just posted it before they were suppose to.......

Seems pretty damn simple to me

Ron Paul Won (Great Read) - Huffington Post
  Posted 13 days ago with 127 member flags

Texas GOP Mutiny - SC, VA, LA and Others May Join
  Posted 15 days ago with 83 member flags

*VID* Proof Romney and RNC is a sham causing potential Republican civil war.
  Posted 11 days ago with 77 member flags

FOX News and Others Take Ryan to the Woodshed for "Blatant Lies." ...Seriously, FOX News.
  Posted 12 days ago with 65 member flags

A Common Man\'s Guide to the Federal Budget.
  Posted 3 days ago with 51 member flags

Why the GOP Is Scared of Ron Paul and 4 Reasons He Might Still Get the 2012 Republican Nomination
  Posted 19 days ago with 45 member flags

Former RNC Chairman, Michael Steele criticizes Romney/RNC for the treatment of Ron Paul.
  Posted 11 days ago with 43 member flags

*VID* Ron Paul delegates speak out from RNC.
  Posted 8 days ago with 39 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: