2010 general election

From CAVDEF
Revision as of 02:16, 7 November 2018 by Marionumber1 (talk | contribs) (Better explain competitive seat wins)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Republicans swept the 2010 elections at the national, state, and local levels. It was the biggest midterm loss for a president's party since the Great Depression. While political analysts pointed to backlash against Obama fueling a Tea Party wave, there is evidence of a pervasive red shift caused by electronic vote rigging. This suspect GOP landslide allowed the party to lock themselves into power for a decade, thanks to gerrymandering and new voter ID restrictions.

Signs of trouble

The 2010 general election was preceded by two others bearing signs of electronic rigging. First was the 2010 Massachusetts special election, in which Democrat Martha Coakley was defeated in a shocking upset. Coakley inexplicably did far worse on unobservable machine counts than transparent hand counts, a telltale sign of computerized vote theft. Next was the 2010 South Carolina Democratic primary, which had well-known favorite Vic Rawl, who posed a serious challenge to the Republican incumbent, lose in a landslide to Alvin Greene, a virtual unknown who never campaigned and didn't even enter the race himself. Aside from the obvious absurdity of the outcome, Rawl did much worse in unaccountable paperless DRE voting than in absentee ballots that left a paper trail.

While these two stolen elections sailed under nearly everyone's radar, they were an ominous sign of what was to come in November. Martha Coakley's loss, in particular, laid the political groundwork for explaining a Democratic loss, which came to be expected.

Pre-election polls

Exit polls

Fitting the trend of every biennial election since 2000, there was a pervasive red shift in the exit polls. 16 out of 18 competitive Senate races and 11 out of 13 gubernatorial races were red shifted. In the national aggregate for the House, the red shift amounted to nearly 2 million votes.[1]

Competitive seat wins

The number of House seats picked up by the GOP is highly consistent with the idea that competitive races were targeted. It is clear that the GOP's vote margins did not simply pad assured wins but actually led to flipped seats. A 9% GOP margin in the Generic Congressional Ballot poll translated into a 125-seat pickup. That stands in stark contrast to the official results of the 2006 election, where a 26% Democratic lead in that same poll led to only a 58-seat gain. Just as the 2006 election bore signs of electronic vote rigging targeted towards competitive elections, the Republican victory in 2010 may well have been designed for maximum gain in the House.[1]

Aftermath

Through their 2010 sweep, Republicans seized control of the political infrastructure across the nation. With that, they were able to gerrymander districts to their advantage and institute new voter suppression schemes, all of which tilted future elections towards them. A 2010 GOP landslide effectively solidified their power until at least 2020, and while some of it came down to political factors, much of their victory was the result of election theft.

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Jonathan Simon, "To The American Media: Time To Face The Reality Of Election Rigging", 2011/04/11 - discusses the 2010 red shifts

External links