FOR BEING “DISCREDITED!”
by Sharon Rondeau
(Nov. 25, 2012) — A website established after the November 6, 2012 “election” contends that Obama won because of voter fraud in four key swing states.
The creator, Dean Chambers, had launched a website entitled “Unskewed Polls” before the election, maintaining that polls reported by the major media were tilted toward an oversampling of Democrats and an Obama win. After the election, Chambers stated that his “unskewed” forecasts were “off the mark.” However, some of Chambers’s predictions materialized.
The Citizens Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and other organizations have stated that massive election fraud “won” the election for Obama. It is already well-known that his 2008 and 2012 campaigns accepted foreign donations in violation of federal campaign law. Eyewitnesses have come forward at great risk to say that Obama stole the caucuses from Hillary Clinton in 2008. Chambers suggests that the results of the 2012 election suggest “suppression and fraud.”
Despite The Blaze’s assistant editor, Mytheos Holt, having claimed that Chambers is “discredited,” Holt and others have given much of their arguably precious space to Chambers’s new effort to show voter fraud in Virginia, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, all states which the Romney campaign believed it could win.
Chambers has been interviewed since the election by Business Insider and Slate, and excerpts from those interviews have been published at The Washington Post, The Examiner, The Hill, and Glenn Beck’s “The Blaze.” There is a reported relationship between The Examiner and Chambers.
Chambers’s interview with BI or a link to it has been reposted at The Raw Story, Reddit, and Mother Jones. While Business Insider stated that Obama was polling ahead of Romney on September 27 and that Chambers was the “only pollster” reporting otherwise, many available polls published on the same day do not support BI’s claim.
On November 1, Chambers had reported a “likely” Romney victory based on several polls from major firms, although some showed Obama ahead. Gallup, which has been sued by the U.S. Justice Department, its employees reportedly intimidated by David Axelrod when the company’s data favored Romney last spring, and criticized by the Obama campaign for having been inaccurate, had shown Romney ahead just prior to the election, along with Rasmussen and pundits such as Dick Morris, Michael Barone and Karl Rove.
On November 19, Holt wrote an article explaining why, from his point of view, “There Won’t Be a Presidential Recount,” claiming that “conservatives” were experiencing the first stage of the grieving process, which is “denial.” On November 12, Holt related the now-widespread report that Romney received “zero” votes in many precincts in Ohio and Pennsylvania, something which Larry Sabato of the Center for Responsive Politics said was “worth looking into” on Sean Hannity’s show that evening.
Is the left concerned that perhaps Chambers and others are correct when they contend that Obama stole the election through fraud? With Rasmussen‘s accurate history of polling, why was he wrong about his prediction that Romney would win? With more than 50 years of experience, why was Gallup wrong?
Or were they?
Why did Obama win all of the swing states except North Carolina so “easily?”
Multiple accounts of voter fraud, especially in swing states and in regard to military votes, have been reported and relayed to Congress with a demand for an investigation. What would a forensic investigation of the touch-screen voting machines show?
Is that what the left actually fears…that Chambers is right?