Photo: Courtesy of Dean Chambers
The creator of the so-called “Unskewed” Polling site is now unskewing the actual votes.Last week, Dean Chambers — who admitted he was wrong about the polls shortly after the election — launched BarackOFraudo.com, which attempts to expose “how they stole the election.”
Its premise centres on the admittedly eye-popping fact that Republican Mitt Romney received sometimes as little as zero votes in certain precincts in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Chambers also alleges that there are “questions” with how votes were counted in Florida and Virginia.
You see where this is going — without those four states, President Barack Obama has only 250 electoral votes. With those four states, Romney wins the election.
Chambers stops short of saying this is an example of outright voter fraud. But he insists he is trying to simply raise the questions based on what he considers “reputable reports.”
“The challenge, of course, in dealing with any voter fraud issues is that the people that do this are good at covering their tracks,” Chambers told Business Insider on Tuesday. “In many instances, the evidence that is available is very circumstantial. But there are lopsided votes in a number of areas that suggest ballots could be stuffed.”
Of course, the flaw in Chambers’ argument is that he is singling out the most reliable Democratic counties in each of these four states.
In Ohio, it’s Cuyahoga County, where Obama beat Romney by a 68.8 per cent to 30.2 per cent margin. That was little difference from 2008, when he beat John McCain 68.5-30.4.
In Pennsylvania, it’s Philadelphia County, which contained 59 precincts that cast no votes for Romney. Still, in 2008, there were 57 that did not provide McCain with any votes. Obama’s margin in the county was about 2 points better (he got about 85.2 per cent this time) than it was in 2008.
In Florida, Broward County provided Obama with the exact same margin of victory as 2008.
What about Virginia? Here, Chambers points to a number of counties. He claims he was watching television and saw that with 97 per cent of the votes tallied, Romney still led in Virginia. The last 3 per cent, he says, swung the vote in Obama’s favour.
These numbers are not correct. But anyway, University of Virginia polling analyst Geoffrey Skelley explained on Election Night why Virginia was likely to swing Obama even as Romney held an early lead — because these counties still had yet to provide huge numbers of raw votes in big margins to Obama.
But to Chambers, this was cause for scepticism.
“At least when the returns were coming in, Obama was leading in Pennsylvania and Ohio,” Chambers said. “Earlier in the evening, Romney was leading big in Virginia. Suddenly, it went from Romney leading to Obama leading by 110,000. It seemed to me to be really suspicious.”
When asked why — after admitting he had erred on the “unskewing” of the polls — he was perpetrating another implausible theory, Chambers relented and wouldn’t go all-in with this theory. He promised that some emailers were sending him much more unbelievable evidence of fraud, examples which he refused to include in his new site.
But he said the final margin of victory in these four states — nearly 400,000 — was not giant, and it was important to examine if anything unnatural led to it.
“I’m raising more questions than conclusions,” he said. “I don’t have enough evidence to conclusively say that, yes, the election was stolen.
“I think it may have been. It may very well be possible that there’s a certain amount of voter fraud, and it wasn’t enough to make a difference. … But the purpose is to gather together the credible and legit information that raises questions.”
Business Insider Emails & Alerts
Site highlights each day to your inbox.