Latest

Stanford University Confirms Democratic Election Fraud

Stanford University study confirms Democratic election fraud

A bombshell study released by Stanford University confirms evidence of election fraud during the 2016 Democratic Party primaries. 

According to a paper released this week entitled, “Are we witnessing a dishonest election?,” a state comparison based on the voting procedures used during the election reveals endemic election fraud within the system.

Given the stakes in the outcome of the American presidential elections, ensuring the integrity of the electoral process is of the utmost importance.

Are the results we are witnessing in the 2016 primary elections trustworthy? While Donald Trump enjoyed a clear and early edge over his Republican rivals, the Democratic contest between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernard Sanders has been far more competitive.

At present, Secretary Clinton enjoys an apparent advantage over Sanders. Is this claimed advantage legitimate?

We contend that it is not, and suggest an explanation for the advantage: States that are at risk for election fraud in 2016 systematically and overwhelmingly favor Secretary Clinton. We provide converging evidence for this claim.

First, we show that it is possible to detect irregularities in the 2016 Democratic Primaries by comparing the states that have hard paper evidence of all the placed votes to states that do not have this hard paper evidence. Second, we compare the final results in 2016 to the discrepant exit polls.

Furthermore, we show that no such irregularities occurred in the 2008 competitive election cycle involving Secretary Clinton against President Obama.

As such, we find that in states wherein voting fraud has the highest potential to occur, systematic efforts may have taken place to provide Secretary Clinton with an exaggerated margin of support.

Full report: Are we witnessing a dishonest election?

  • Beth Aaron
    • http://www.myspace.com/geoco115 Bagfoot

      These are some of the healthiest, cleanest, most well-fed “war-ravaged” kids I have ever seen, not a cut or a bandage on them. Very articulate as well.

      • pittssherron@gmail.com

        Stick your head in a gas oven. Dying doesn’t always leave cuts and bruises.

        • http://www.myspace.com/geoco115 Bagfoot

          As I said before, I detest the staged mockery of a reality that’s “made for effect” not the reality, a reality *always* that shows the degradation of the human body, and yes, even a “gas oven” will show evidence of bodily degradation.

      • Dianne Stanley

        Seen a lot of war ravaged kids have you? Was that when you were volunteer to help?

      • Concerned Citizen

        You honestly disgust me. To look at death and suffering like this and try to make it less than what it is. If there is a God I home he can forgive you.

        • http://www.myspace.com/geoco115 Bagfoot

          My concern is not with “God” and being “forgiven”, it is with the mockery a staged video perpetrates on the reality. If someone cares to show compelling images of “death and suffering” let them show that exactly as it is, with all the putrid, grotesque horror of the reality itself, not a mock-up that cheapens a much uglier, sickening truth.

        • http://www.myspace.com/geoco115 Bagfoot

          As I said, I am not concerned with “God” or “forgiveness” I detest the mockery of “death and suffering” by the way it cheapens the reality of the truth of “death and suffering” by making it less gruesome and horrifying — just softened to be palatable for our computers and TVs and have the desired effect without making it *too* grizzly and sickening to witness.
          Who is really “trying to make it less than it is”?

    • Patrick Greene

      You’re interesting enough to reply to, keep your head on straight, remember to sort through the weeds well – to not get lost in the field.

  • Tina Andres

    And water is wet.

  • Elizabeth

    I pray to GOd that Sanders doesnt win. He will have all the prices raised and he isnot for anyone else even tho he would like you to believe he is. I definitely am for Hillary and have been since the 90s SHe will make a great president and knows what is in store. SHe is the the one with experience. I really dont know anyone who likes Sanders. HE is a sore loser and cant think of anything better theen this instead of working together he wants to make it so the Democrats lose this election> I am not at all for him. Come On Hillary!!!! I am for you all the way and will rally in every way I can will alot of others. She will do it

    • Ron Haynes

      – You …, are an idiot.
      … And this is the sum of time that I’ll waste upon you.

      • Theryl McCoy

        I could barely waste enough time upon her to give you a thumbs up for your comment.

    • http://www.organiclifestylemagazine.com jMichaelEdwards

      So do you get paid per post, or hourly, or what?

      • https://twitter.com/EricDoriean Eric Doriean

        Either that or completely devoid of any sense of right or wrong. Reads an article on report about fraud and then supports the person responsible. Smells fishy to me too

      • Stephen Vickers

        With all the errors in this letter, I can’t imagine someone paying her, unless her parents are paying her!!

    • Deborah Dietz

      Rambling, lying degenerate….. I am SO tired of irrational poorly informed mobsters and thugs running their vicious mouths.

    • Kevin Schmidt

      Gee, it’s another propaganda parrot, mindlessly repeating the failed propaganda that does nothing to discredit Bernie Sanders’ outstanding 35 year record.

    • Jim Morgan

      What Hillary will “do” is sit in a courtroom during her espionage trial. After that, they will usher her into another courtroom with Bill for their Clinton foundation money laundering and racketeering trial. When those are over, Bernie should have been sworn in as president and she can beg him for a pardon. Hillary Clinton is a corrupt, unethical, lying criminal. Everybody knows that. The problem is, her supporters don’t care. But that’s not MY problem.

    • anonymous

      Are you old enough to register for the draft that she supports women to register for? smh

    • David Hewitt

      Think about how difficult it is for you to string words together and make intelligent conversation. Now imagine you have about the same amount of skill in judging political candidates. You’re welcome.

    • Jesse

      With all your spelling and grammar errors, I have to wonder if you even understand the contextual intention of this article? Regarding your knowledge of what HRC stands for and the criminal activity she is accused of, I highly doubt you would be doing Hillary any favors by supporting or campaigning for her? Researching her history before you post online is usually helpful for someone, when defending her vulgaris behavior? Ignorance is Bliss!

    • Tony Page

      I think that before you post a commentary, you should take some English and writing lessons. It seems to me that your brain is as sharp as your writing skills. Experience?? As what?? First Lady for eight years, Senator from New York, also for two terms. Politically, what did she do as the First Lady? The same thing applies during her tenure in the Senate for the State of New York. Then the clincher: Secretary of State. The ONLY thing that she accomplished was traveling to 117 countries, to glad-hand and photo op with leaders. She is the one that annihilated Libya, caused the death of four brave Americans in Benghazi, and don’t forget, she was inundated in the middle of an enemy gunfight in Croatia and was the one that brokered the Iran deal. What a deal!!!! Just ask her. Oh forgot, according to her she “twisted the arms” of the Chinese regarding a Trade deal!!! She’ll do as much about annihilating ISIS, as Obama…..Mr. “No Balls”!!!!!!

    • JMichaelPiper

      I see, so you want a liar, criminal, sneaky (not releasing her transcripts of her speeches with Wall Street Criminal Bankers, so what does she have to hide?), jeopardizer (running classified material on an unsecured server just puts the entire nation at risk for more terrorism)…That’s someone you want to be our President? Get the FUCK out of my country bitch!

    • Mike Meagher

      The 1% thanks you. Now get back to work, you lazy moocher!

  • Kevin Schmidt

    Actually, there was election fraud in 2008. It happened in New Hampshire. Obama won all paper ballot precincts, while Hillary won all electronic voting machine precincts by flipped numbers. I’m surprised they missed this, which makes me suspect of their competency.

    • Real Michaud

      Hillary couldn’t cheat Obama but she almost did

  • Alicia Amorfo
  • Jim Morgan

    Hillary Clinton has been in politics for over 40 years.
    That;s one hell of a crime spree.

    • Cake_or_Death

      Donald Trump has been in the Casino Business, Airline Business, Magazine Business, Vodka Business, Steak Business, and University Business for over 40 years….on wait…Well…that’s a different kind of “Spree’ in itself.

      • Alberto Muñoz

        A spree of failures, that is….

        • Nick Eberle

          Easy for you to say he is a billionaire and you are worth? Anyone who succeeds every time is a typically average at best.

          • Liquid_Grit

            Um, unless Alberto has a rich Daddy to “lend” him tens of millions of dollars of seed money, I don’t think there’s a comparison.

          • Nick Eberle

            there is a lot bigger difference between the couple million he got loaned and 8-9 billion then there is between 10 thousand and a few million. Far more fortunes are lost than gained in this world.

          • Dean Winchester

            Except that trump was bailed out in 1990 by the US gov’t and forced to hire advisers so that he wouldn’t go bankrupt again. How many main street mom and pop businesses got that same break, hmmm? Trump is a loser and a failure without merit.

          • Nick Eberle

            The government didn’t bail him out in 1990 it was his lenders. They took a 50% stake in his business when he defaulted. When you operate with a debt based currency a deal like that on a default would be categorized by most businessmen as a win.

          • Nick Eberle

            Anyone who makes it anywhere in business fails a lot and succeeds more, Trump is no exception to this. His character leaves much to be desired but this stupid argument about how he doesn’t know how to do business is just that stupid.

            Fred Trump divided his fortune among his kids. Trump is the only one of those children that has a net worth measured in billions.

      • Jim Morgan

        Donald Trump is a tool. A dull tool at that.

      • Jim Morgan

        And yet, he’s beating Clinton in national polls. Strange country we live in.
        #JILLSTEIN2016

    • Concerned Citizen

      Yes, it is.

    • yeomandroid

      Not surprising. Libertarian Party is calling for term limits in government. That’s a start in ending the corruption.

      • Jim Morgan

        Gary Johnson says he will end Social Security and offered nothing to replace it. Yes. He said he wants to take away everyone’s retirement. Good luck winning on THAT platform.

  • Magdalen

    Is it a “Stanford Study” just because one of the students who wrote it attended Stanford? Is it peer reviewed?

    • onewasjohnny

      It has pie charts.

      • PicoMania

        lol

      • Pendrag2k

        I like pie.

    • canucanoe2

      Are you implying that there have been NO election irregularities? Every primary election for the last 30 years has had exit polling. Why did the DNC and the media cancel the exit polling for the final eight contests? Because time after time the exit polls did not match the ballot counts that always favored Hillary, and exit polls are a leading indicator of election fraud. If one is benefiting from election fraud, the lack of exit polls will serve to help hide the fraud. Are you actually OK with this?

      • PicoMania

        I don’t think she is implying that at all. I think she raises a valid point about the validity of the study. Just because it validates our view or understanding or something, doesn’t mean that the study was done correctly. Hell, someone could write a study that proves God exists, I’m sure all the Christians would not question the finding, that doesn’t mean it is a valid study. Nothing wrong with being analytical, even if you agree with the outcome, and especially if you agree with the outcome.

      • Nancy Hall

        Exit polls are a rough suggestion, but not an solid indicator of how an election will turn out. One factor that may have skewed results toward Sanders in this case is that young people are more likely to consent to exit polls than are older people, perhaps because they take time. Exit polls are random and they’re done on less than half the people who vote at a particular location. If it’s a busy election, the number will be far less than half because of the numbers of people leaving at any give time.

        Also, they aren’t done at every location. I’ve been a pollworker for fourteen years. I’ve never had exit pollsters at any of my voting locations. I’ve been voting for 45 years and I’ve never been asked to participate in an exit poll.

        They are no more or less accurate than pre-election polling. By your logic. Bernie must have cheated in Michigan because Clinton was projected to win and she lost. He must have cheated anywhere he did better than projected, right?

        • N8SLC

          Polls taken before voting and exit poll taken during voting is completely different. Exit poll data should match within 2 points or fraud becomes suspect.

          • Nancy Hall

            Exit polls are done to feed the media’s insatiable demand for information. It gives them something to talk about while they’re waiting for the actual results. You have to fill up that 24 hour news cycle somehow. Nobody but an idiot would use exit polls to hold elections accountable. Thirty eight countries have bans or blackouts on polling close to an election. In some countries, this includes exit polling. Here’s an article discussing the idea of restrictions on polling in in the UK.

            http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35350419

          • Left of Eden

            Yes, but when exit polls are off, and always in the same direction, an investigation into potential voting irregularities is warranted. So, again, one has to ask why a standard used to help keep elections honest were abandoned. Another standard, a physical recount of ballots, has also been rendered impossible by the implementation of voting machines which leave no paper trail. Why are we taking the route of making the results of elections less, and not more, verifiable?

          • Nancy Hall

            Are they always off in the same direction? I’m not sure the authors have proven that. Where’s your analysis of the data?

          • Left of Eden

            I was making a general claim, not referring to this study specifically. In this instance a statistically significant standard is the threshold.

          • N8SLC

            You are correct. I was misinformed. They are typically used as a red flag for potential fraud, not for accountability.

          • Nancy Hall

            Seriously. They’re not reliable enough to signal potential fraud. They’re mostly used to gather demographic information. There’s no way they could be reliable. They’re not scientific. They’re done in a very limited number of locations with subjects chosen at random. There can be a number of variables that affect the outcome. One is that younger people are more likely than older people to participate in exit polls. In an election like this one, that was split along age lines, that could skew the results enough to misrepresent support for Sanders.

          • N8SLC

            I certainly wouldn’t go that far.

          • Nancy Hall

            Nope. You’re totally FOS. They’re not used to hold elections accountable in other countries, either. Some countries restrict or ban them within a certain period before or after an election. I’ve posted a bunch of links about the reliability of exit polls. Here’s another one.

            http://www.thenation.com/article/reminder-exit-poll-conspiracy-theories-are-totally-baseless/

        • Left of Eden

          By your logic. Bernie must have cheated in Michigan because Clinton was projected to win and she lost. He must have cheated anywhere he did better than projected, right?

          That depends on what the sd/margin of error were.

    • Cleogrrl

      Not a study, not peer reviewed, not a Stanford doc. A student paper.

    • Jarath Hemphill

      Appendices are great….
      “Statement on peer-review: We note that this article has not been officially peer-reviewed in a scientific journal yet. Doing so will take us several months. As such, given the timeliness of the topic, we decided to publish on the Bern Report after we received preliminary positive feedback from two professors (both experts in the quantitative social sciences). We plan on seeking peer-reviewed publication at a later time. As of now, we know there may be errors in some numbers (one has been identified and sent to us: it was a mislabeling). We encourage anyone to let us know if they find any other error. Our aim here truly is to understand the patterns of results, and to inspire others to engage with the electoral system.”

    • Nancy Hall

      It’s some undergraduate’s term paper. It was produced before the primaries were over. It’s dated June 7th, which is before the primaries from that date were completed much less certified. It’s looking at one parameter in a process with countless variables. How could it have been peer reviewed when it was “published” nine days ago?

      • intheend

        Yeah they should have waited until June 7th and then they could have added the CA debacle to the paper.

        • Nancy Hall

          You mean the debacle where they’re counting millions of paper ballots by hand and Hillary’s winning? What’s you’re explanation for that, Einstein?

      • Left of Eden

        It’s not an “undergraduate” term paper. The author is a Ph.D student at Stanford University, one of the most prestigious schools in the country. Besides, the validity of the study must stand or fall on its own merits, not solely, or even primarily, on the basis of who wrote it.

      • David Martin

        The rodhamites are soaking now with contempt and are foaming at the mouth to discredit anything that doesn’t lead to coronation of Hillary with total subjugation to their “historic event” narrative. Keep going guys! They want to defend the queen from the truth and from justice. They won’t accept ANY evidence to the contrary – they will work tirelessly to discredit with any manner of specious arguments.

    • Christopher Pare

      Actually, HBO did a documentary on this.

      http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/16/clinton-does-best-where-voting-machines-flunk-hacking-tests-hillary-clinton-vs-bernie-sanders-election-fraud-allegations/

      Research isn’t hard to do. Why don’t Hillary supporters do it?

    • Sport Barry

      Scopes say it is a paper. It has yet to be peer review – it is all in the notes. They say it will be a few months before they publish fully

  • MiaEli15

    LMAO!!!! Typical delusional Berniebots!

    • RedBearded T

      Stanford University is a one of the world’s leading and most prestigious research and teaching institutions. This has nothing to do Bernie supporters.

      • Taelon

        too bad this is not a stanford study hahaha. it is an unpublished paper written by a child psychologist at stanford in a phd program. and after this, i doubt he will be allowed near children again

    • Selah Taylor

      You are laughing at dead children? What the fuck is wrong with you?Oh and hiding behind a false name, trump or hillary for you.

      • http://www.myspace.com/geoco115 Bagfoot

        Where the fuck are the “dead ones”? “Dead children” never looked so unscathed by weaponry needed to kill them apart from a few quick still photos interpolated for effect.

  • Della Robinson-Melton

    Yes, the entire world is watching this 3-ring circus of an election.

    A viable candidate who is constantly cheated by rigged voting machines and corrupt party officials. attempting to change to a better political delegate system

    A woman screaming equal rights for women, but accepts contributions from countries that don’t even allow the girls to learn to read.! And an illegal server in her basement.

    A hot-headed billionaire who calls it as he sees it. With no tact and no grace.

    • Anoelg

      I will take no tact and no grace over deceit any day.

      • April Walters

        He’s a hot-headed con man. Yeah, I almost hope he does get elected. Because I want to see the world burn. :/

      • canucanoe2

        Well then, if you hate deceit, you should hate Donald Trump, now shouldn’t you?

        • Patricia C. Gilbert

          canucanoe2 – It is possible for a voter to have zero respect for Donald Trump and to dislike Hillary Clinton at the same time. If this person thinks that Bernie Sanders is the only one running who would make a fair and decent President, why would you possibly be upset with their choice.

          • Raziel Seraph

            Can’t stand Trump or Clinton.

            Your comment is dead on

          • Patricia C. Gilbert

            Raziel Seraph – Thanks…

          • Jenny Hildebrand

            Well said..

        • Anoelg

          Hate is a Liberal concept.

          • invincible64

            Hate is a common Conservative practice.

          • Floronius

            I don’t see any conservatives thuggishly burning down cities just because someone they disagree with is holding a rally there.

          • invincible64

            Thuggishly burning down cities is not the definition of hate.

          • Anoelg

            I see. Violence is not hate. Destruction of property is not hate – especially when a Black entrepreneur lost everything she worked for having her store ruined in Ferguson. Assaulting people is not hate. Blocking a road that goes to Trump’s rally (and TOTALLY coincidentally to a hospital as well) is not hate. So what is hate? If you are a registered Democrat then I guess killing 49 gay people and wounding another 50 might still does not qualify as hate. I know! Denying global warming .. uhm … climate change is hate! Inviting Donald Trump to speak at your school is hate! Pointing out facts to a Liberal is hate! For proof – see above.

          • invincible64

            So you’re assuming that the people who protested at Ferguson were liberal democrats? Sources? Oh and by the way, I thought you might find this helpful. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hate

          • Anoelg

            No, they were the victims of Liberal democrats. And overall good stand up people. Who else destructs and riots. Are you dense?

          • Anoelg

            Sorry, I was wrong. Bernie supporters beat up each other before they realize they are all Bernie supporters. My bad. It must have been them.

          • invincible64

            I accept your apology.

          • cascadian12

            The protests at the Trump rallies in California and New Mexico did NOT involve Sanders supporters. Another disgusting RW lie. The protests involved Latinos and gang-bangers who don’t like Trump’s racism. Progressives do not condone violence. Find any credible source that says these people were Sanders supporters. You can’t. I see that your MO is to lump every despicable act into the Party that you despise for your own personal reasons. Whatever. Don’t choke on your own bile.

          • Robin Lauriault

            How much do they pay you to write this tripe?

          • cascadian12

            Conservatives don’t need to. They’re running the criminal justice system. Protests and riots are the tools of the oppressed. See French Revolution.

          • Robin Lauriault

            Well you would if you cared to turn the pages of a history book, and you wouldn’t have to turn many.

          • Chris Rogers

            Hate is a human concept. As long as humans are afraid of something there will always be hate.

          • Floronius

            And is it really irrational to be afraid? Fear of heights stops us from jumping off cliffs. Fear of insects and snakes prevents us from getting poisoned. Fear is a survival mechanism, you just have to manage it well. If you reject it for some sappy purposes, you’ll find yourself dead, literally or figuratively.

          • No Disqus Account

            The knowledge that I’d die or get hurt is plenty to keep me from jumping off cliffs, I’m not an idiot. Fear is irrational because either you can do something about the situation to fix it and should, or can’t so worrying is useless and you’re better off starting to think now about how to recover.

          • freedom74

            This is probably one of the lest intelligent things I have ever seen posted. I am sure you have absolutely perfect control of all instinctual portions of your brain. Sure thing dude, your like that guy in Limitless and so superior to everyone!

          • Jenny Hildebrand

            those are built in fight or flight..Not like the guy on Ghost Hunters can’t fly, heights terrify him, bugs or any kind..It stops him from doing a lot..He created a heightened fear, exaggerated terror Funny ..You should fear getting in your car and driving..most dangerous thing you daily .yet no fears driving at 70 mph with a bunch of nuts on the road…remember “Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself” FDR

          • congressive

            Ironically, that’s a hateful thing to say.

          • Anoelg

            It is not hateful. It is true. Big difference.

          • Jeff Re

            No, it’s true. Concerned Citizen was correct but forgot to throw in the Democrats.

          • sugarpuddin

            Christians ?

          • congressive

            You mean like Timothy McVeigh’s libertarian affiliation? Oh that’s right. He just blew up men, women and children. He didn’t shoot anyone. My bad.

          • Concerned Citizen

            If I remember correctly the GOP as a party has supported segregation, white’s only hotels, restaurants, water fountains, back of the bus policy, dislike people of color, want guns on every person, always support wars, vote to support corporations over citizens, all concepts of love. NOT!

          • Anoelg

            Ku Klux Klan was the extension of the Democratic party – ask Sen. Byrd or since he is dead, ask his best friend Hillary Clinton who raved about him. You do not remember correctly. Your handle is a concerned citizen but I would highly recommend you change it to “clueless citizen”.

          • Kathy Ruth

            See my reply above–and go back and study history again, THIS time in a REAL school!

          • Anoelg

            Which Liberal brainwashing institution do you consider a “real school”? And my, aren’t you right. The Liberal Muslim Gay shooter that just committed the worst mass killing since Wounded Knee Massacre really demonstrates the values you mention. Maybe you should reconsider what you call a “real school” because it doesn’t seem you went to one.

          • cascadian12

            “Wounded Knee.” When did you get your talking points from ALEC or the NRA? Last week?

          • Anoelg
          • Douglas Mckeever

            If you define being ‘liberal’ as someone who hates gay people (himself included) to the point of committing mass murder, and who supports fundamentalist Islam…. then you have a very warped idea of the term ‘liberal’. That’s the very opposite of liberal. That is classic social conservatism.

          • Sirk

            Worst mass killing in US: Bath School Disaster. Killed 38 elementary school kids, six adults. Wounded lots more. You really need to use Google.

          • cascadian12

            Get out of here, hateful troll! This is a discussion about voter fraud committed by operatives in the Democratic Party. We don’t need you throwing shade at people posting here. It just makes you look petty and small.

            BTW, the Dixiecrat Party is no more. It was replaced by Republicans who now run the South, which is why African Americans are overwhelmingly Democratic.

          • Anoelg

            Awe, did you forget about your favorite Amendment? The First Amendment to the constitution? I know as a good Liberal you would like to disregard the Second one but I am shocked that you would want to limit someone’s freedom of speech…. that can’t be…. Would you like me to point out what hate looks like? I can give you some really recent examples…. Or is that just a favorite blanket term you like to throw around when someone doesn’t agree with you? The Democratic party is a fraud in itself. It is a party for people who suffer from incurable mental disorder ran by people who are suffering from decent intellect but serious lack of character. Why would anyone think that putting the word “democratic” in front of socialism actually makes socialism a good thing? Even though it cost millions of lives throughout history. Why would anyone be so arrogant to assume that it was “implemented wrong” and they could do it “better” not that it had a serious flaw in its core? Why would anyone go down a self destructing road? That proves the mental illness. Would putting the word “compassionate” in front of slavery make slavery OK? I don’t think so. But then again, I don’t have a mental illness that prevents me from logically thinking.
            African Americans are overwhelmingly Democratic because if they are not, they are called most vile names by both other blacks and Liberal whites and targeted for destruction – just ask Dr. Carson, Herman Cain, Justice Clarence Thomas etc. Blacks are convinced by the ruling Liberal elites that they are victims who can’t do anything about their own fate, the racist America is so against them and as such need to be dependent on the Liberal elites’ goodness to take care of them. And of course, it is OK to call Republican/Conservative blacks names .. of course, that does not make you racist. Because you are good Liberals. You care! Just look how much you care in Chicago with the carnage every weekend. Not a conservative in sight and what a wonderful place Southside Chicago has been. Detroit? Anyone? Enter at your own risk. If the African Americans continue swallowing the “goodness” hook, line and sinker, well, refer to above.
            This is a discussion of voter fraud. The Democratic party is excellent at it. Why are you surprised that it happens “on the inside”. You condone it on the “outside”, don’t you? We will be dealing with it during the general elections – the Democrats will be conducting tours with busloads of illegals with no IDs to multiple voting locations – why else would they be so concerned about “oppression through identification”. After all, the ends justify the means!

          • invincible64

            “It is a party for people who suffer from incurable mental disorder ran
            by people who are suffering from decent intellect but serious lack of
            character.”
            Please do continue to educate us on hate, you seem to have it down to a science.

          • Anoelg

            Time to come up with a new word! It’s falling flat.

          • invincible64

            Although you may personally be of the opinion that hate is an inadequate descriptor of the quote above, I respectfully disagree.

          • Robin Lauriault

            THAT I agree with. Vive la Revolution!

          • Dean Winchester

            Guess what idiot, freedom of speech is only guaranteed when speaking/writing against the government, it does not guarantee to be a right on private forums when debating one another.

          • Sirk

            So, are you working for Hillary, trying to change the subject regarding vote fraud? She’ll stoop to anything, won’t she?

          • Drink-More-Die-Young

            cascadian, if you think your an Afriacan, maybe you should move back if you hate USA… either you’re an American or you are not.

          • Anon Ymous

            The democratic party totally flip flopped into what it is today. The south was entirely democrat (I had a great grandmother who said she would rather die than vote republican and look how the situation has changed today). Connecting the KKK to the present day Democratic party is just pulling at straws that aren’t even there.

          • Anoelg

            I had a grandmother too. She lived through WWII and Communism. Why don’t we ask her what she thinks of Bernie and his ideas and about a party willing to bring that plague on people again. Hey, nice “talking” to you. I came here looking for some reason (not really). I didn’t find any. But I found a lot of delusion as expected. Fraud in the Democratic party, haha. That is shocking, truly!

          • Anon Ymous

            If you think Bernie is Communist then there is no hope for you. He’s not even a socialist according to the brightest political minds in the world, he’s a social democrat. But lets attach our own preconceived notions before we look at the facts, as expected of most Republicans. And guess what, America is not a pure capitalist country and never has been. Pure capitalism can ruin economies and what we are is a regulated/mixed capitalist economy. Bernie just thinks some areas of our economy need a little more regulation just like previous US presidents thought when monopolies were detrimental to society and introduced legislation to regulate them, and he’s right. Having all of the American people’s wealth pooled into a handful of financial institutions is bad for everyone, as seen by the 2008 economic crisis. These firms make risky investments with your money and the government is forced to bail them out using taxpayer money. Otherwise many of us would literally lose everything we worked our entire lives for.

            Anyway, I agree, there is fraud in the Democratic Party when it comes to Hillary Clinton. It’s sickening. But Bernie actually wanted to change that system of under the table/backroom dealings and fight big money corruption in politics. If you’re going to hate Sanders, at least understand him for what he truly is before you spout off BS about communism this and communism that. Bernie is the furthest thing from Communism. America could never be Communist because Communism requires authoritarianism to work which our democracy undermines. The closest thing to an authoritarian leader in this race is Trump.

          • mona19595

            So what do YOU think about Bernie and his democratic socialist ideals. Get it straight DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST – Democratic socialism is a political ideology advocating a democratic political system alongside a socialist economic system.

          • Anoelg

            And that is completely incompatible! If you had any idea what socialism is, then you wouldn’t say or support such a stupidity. Socialism can only be executed through oppressive political system because it is based on principles that go against the human nature and as such has disastrous results every time and has to be forced on the population. I explained it in a comment above so go read it and educate yourself. As I mentioned before if you put “compassionate” in front of slavery, it will make it alright? Of course not. How stupid are you people?

          • sugarpuddin

            Forbes Mag. listed the top 20 countries to do business in. Denmark was #1 and Norway and Sweden close behind . The US was 18th. In their list of the happiest countries to live in, those same Democratic Socialists countries topped the list. The programs that have helped the people of this country the most are Socialists programs within a Democratic Government. Any public service is a Socialist program. If you are sick and call 911, do you ask if this is paid for by taxpayers for the general public and refuse it because you are AGAINST “Socialism”? And by the way, pure Socialism calls for ALL MEANS OF PRODUCTION TO BE OWNED BY THE STATE. Now look up Oligarchy. The next step from Lais’sez-faire Capitolism is Fascism

          • Dean Winchester

            I guess you’re too stupid to realize what true Socialism is then. Socialism has existed for millennia in pretty much every country in the world during all that time. It wasn’t until the mid 1800’s when capitalism came into being where people started getting screwed over, when robber barons came into power, the likes of Rockefeller, Carnegie, etc., when things started going downhill. If you look at the preamble of the US Constitution, you will see that even though our new, at the time it was written, our founding fathers embraced Socialism. True socialism is when we pay our fair share of taxes and tributes that our government in turn protects and takes care of us as a People. In reality, what’s really going on is a form of communism for the rich, we’re paying OUR taxes, while the rich do not, and in fact OUR tax dollars go them in the form of bailouts, and other “incentives.

          • Sirk
          • Anoelg

            No, I think Bernie is an idiot and so are his supporters. Just look at the posts here. The guy didn’t have a job until he was 40+. He is a lifelong politician! What the …? And I am sure it seems authoritarian for Trump to want people to adhere to laws! What a concept. We haven’t had it in awhile. Even Obama and his government feels it is OK to defy laws and judge’s orders. What would you expect from the rest of the Liberal population then. Obama leading by example. I know more about life in socialism and what communism is from actual life than you will ever read from your pamphlets. I also know about capitalist society (and how the US government is destroying it) and how one starts at nothing and actually gets somewhere without the help of the government. Socialism DOES require authoritarian government, you are absolutely right about that (so please tell that to the poster mona19595) but it isn’t ADVERTISED at the beginning. They don’t say – “hey, people, lets make our country socialist! You starve, have nothing, we the elites will keep everything and oppress you. Why don’t you put us in power!” ???? They promise all kinds of great things like “social justice” meaning they will take everything from the rich – aaaahhh, what a great concept for the envious salivating morons like the Bernie supporters and they believe it. They hand power to them and ALL people get stripped off their property in the name of public ownership and next thing you know government owns everything, borders are closed so that people can’t escape out (BTW, border walls work excellently for that purpose), there is no freedom of speech, people get thrown into uranium mines, store shelves are empty and so on and on. And it happens every time. So good luck with your speech.

          • cmrosko

            you are an idiot

          • sugarpuddin

            He is totally brainwashed by the people who own him

          • freedom74

            For knowing more about history and economics than you? God put your head back where you normally keep it, you know that dark place around the small of your back.

          • Raziel Seraph

            How did you come to this conclusion about Bernie.
            Do you get your news from FB?
            It’s bad enough this news site accepts non fact checked articles and have no beware of ignorant troll signs.

            There hasn’t been nearly enough news coverage for anyone to formulate an opinion on Bernie.

          • Sirk

            More than likely, from FOXnews, which spews anything but the truth.

          • Anon Ymous

            Unregulated capitalism has equally devastating consequences on wealth equality. Why do you think we have anti trust laws and highly regulate our businesses especially with all the lobbying done for corporate America? It didn’t start out that way. This regulation came about because there was a clear abuse of power and gaming the system going on by monopolistic enterprises at the vast majority of society’s expense. No one is proposing moving to a pure socialist system. We will always be a capitalist free market country. All Bernie is proposing is more regulation where the elite are taking advantage (perpetuated by unregulated capitalism). That’s great that you’ve lived in a socialist system and have first hand experience with corrupt leaders. Some political systems are much too fragile for any kind of fair/unbiased government regulation (looking at you, Latin America). Do you have any kind of professional/academic background in social economic systems? You’re wrong. Socialist economies do not require authoritarianism (look at Europe). Communism does, but they are not equal. Bernie is not trying to turn the US into a socialist country. He agrees with certain social principles and sees what is and isn’t working in Europe and thinks the US could benefit from what IS working. He’s more accurately described as a Social Democrat by scholars than a Democratic Socialist (it’s a shame he didn’t make the distinction himself). Internet tip: before you call people names/stupid, make sure you’re an expert on the subject or someone else will come along and shut you down. Stop spreading fear when you don’t even understand what you’re talking about, as it relates to the US.

          • strifekun

            Then I guess we already live in a socialist country because it sure as hell ain’t a democracy.

          • Dean Winchester

            i.e., FDR and even Teddy Roosevelt.

          • Della Robinson-Melton

            As compared to our present system where a person can purchase personal gain for a price? Be appointed to a post for a price? Gain political clout with major backing into a Foundation that functions as a washing machine?

            No thanks. I’ll pass and do a “write-in” if necessary.

          • cascadian12

            Poor Anoeig is lost in labels. He doesn’t even know the President of France – the world’s next-to-oldest democracy and first promoter of human rights – is a Socialist. He doesn’t even know that China is communist, or that Scandinavia is Social Democratic. All of these countries have powerful economies, and 2 out of 3 have more freedom than we do. He’s just another useless POS whose only purpose in life is to spread hate and ignorance.

          • Raziel Seraph

            Fraud with both parties
            Let’s call it as it is.

          • Dean Winchester

            Why don’t we ask your Grandmother what she thought of FDR, as Bernie is pretty much implementing ALL of his policies within his campaign, or even Teddy Roosevelt.

          • Anoelg

            You are some kind of stupid. I don’t think there was communism in the US even during FDR. When someone lives through something, it actually means they experience it first hand. It is not like the degenerate millennials live through Xbox or Facebook and then they know everything about everything. Good try though!

          • Dean Winchester

            Actually my Grandpa LIVED through the depression and used to tell me how things were like back then, and how the Socialist policies of FDR helped the poor and hungry, how his Socialist program called the Civilian Conservation Corps put millions of young men at work building all sorts of infrastructure. FDR put America back to work and is responsible for helping to create the middle class over a period of time, he rebuilt America that the repubs and wall street almost destroyed. Socialism build our roads, our hydroelectric dams and skyscrapers. Socialism is what made the America that neocons are constantly bitching they want to go back to. Grow up and pick up a history book some time, it’s obviously that was your worst subject in school, that is if you did indeed go to a public school at all while growing up.

          • Anoelg

            You have no idea what socialism is so if I were you, I would stop embarrassing myself, and shut up right now. Putting social programs in place and owning means of production are two completely different things. Socialism killed millions and millions of people around the world. Let me give you a mini lesson about what socialism is – it is public ownership of resources and production acquired by stripping private property from ALL people not just rich, people don’t own any business property or any businesses, jobs are mandatory and not having a job is punishable by jail, borders are closed and people trying to leave the country across them without permission (which is only available to the elites) are shot or captured and imprisoned, since jobs are mandatory and everyone has to get one and gets paid the same, everyone works the least they can to the lowest common denominator, making quality or production directly correlated to that type of effort. Communism is the term for the countries of the Eastern block, however, Communism was never achieved in the world as it is the last ultimate stage following socialism, and socialism didn’t work to start with let alone to get to the communist stage. Communism works on a principle that everyone works to their best ability and takes only according to their needs and there is no currency necessary – yeah, like that would every happen. Just ask Bernie, he didn’t have a job until he was 41, and all of you, Bernie’s supporters, would fail communism from the start. There is no such thing as democratic socialism possible because socialism can ONLY be executed through force. It is 100% incompatible with any sort of democracy. If it was so great and so possible, why ALL of the countries that have ever attempted it USSR, the Eastern Block, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea etc were all poor and oppressive? I guess a smart person would get it. A tool like you obviously not. I lived in a country like that for 20 years you moron! Your liberal school might be teaching you fables but reality remains the same. And if you have any brain whatsoever, which I know you don’t , you would not be tempting fate.

          • Dean Winchester

            Wrong, quit drinking the faux noise koolaid Cleetus. What you don’t seem to understand is that the so-called “socialism and communism” you’re going on is based on Marxism and Hitlerite Fascism, totally completely opposite of what you have been brainwashed with LOL

          • Anoelg

            So actually living in a communist country experiencing it first hand is “brainwashing”? That’s a good one. You would tell a black person that slavery wasn’t that bad, right? You Liberals are unbelievable. All socialism is based on Marxism. Your sentence makes no sentence whatsoever – go ask granpa and Bernie how it goes again…. If you daydream of “socialism” like Sweden and Denmark have, I can hook you up with my Swedish friend that can educate you in reality. A, not socialist countries ..they are capitalist countries with limited sectors owned by government and B/ it is really not working out anyway despite the “limited” part. But keep your wet dream alive. It may come true one day and we’ll see how you like it.

          • Sirk

            Top 10 socialist countries in the world: China, Denmark, Finland, Netherlands, Canada, Sweden, Norway, Ireland, New Zealand, Belgium. Source: http://blog.peerform.com/top-ten-most-socialist-countries-in-the-world/

          • Dean Winchester

            But if you want to put the “killed millions and millions of people” analogy into perspective, well then maybe you should abhor christianity as well, since it’s responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths going back roughly 1,800 years, ever think of that, hmmm?

          • Anoelg

            Hey Winchester, millions of people killed is not an analogy. It’s a fact. And I feel for you, you have to go back 1800 years to find something to lean on. Reaching, aren’t you? Failed Socialism/communism was around as late as 1989/90 and in some countries it is still around. But wait, you would have to be smart to see that, which is actually not the case. Obvious to anyone.

          • Dean Winchester

            As for jobs, here’s a variety that he had after graduating college in the 60’s

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders#Early_career

            Work history
            After graduating from college, Sanders returned to New York City, where he initially worked at a variety of jobs, including Head Start teacher, psychiatric aide, and carpenter.[30] In 1968, Sanders moved to Vermont because he had been “captivated by rural life.” After his arrival there he worked as a carpenter,[32] filmmaker, and writer[44] who created and sold “radical film strips” and other educational materials to schools.[45] He also wrote several articles for the alternative publication The Vermont Freeman.[46]

          • Anoelg

            Haha. And Elizabeth Warren is a native American! Good one. Wikipedia! No wonder you are so freaking ignorant. Radical filmmaker…writer… some credentials to run the country!

          • Sirk

            Public libraries? Police and fire departments? Public school? All socialist entities. Please stop equating Soviet communism with socialism. They are decidedly different.

          • Sirk

            Sigh… “Communist Party USA. Founded in 1919; Peaked in 1930s and 1940s; Last fielded presidential candidate in 1984.” Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26126325

            You do know how to use a search engine, don’t you?

          • Sirk

            Your grandmother lived in Sweden? Bernie is a Democratic Socialist – like the Scandinavian governments who believe in supporting the population, cradle to grave, and that laws should be written to protect people, not corporations. It is more likely that your grandmother lived under a Communist government, which economist Richard Wolff describes as “state-sponsored capitalism.” Communism is not at all the same thing as democratic socialism.

          • freedom74

            But it’s ok to connect the KKK to the Republican party, who wasn’t involved in that history at all, except as the opposition? See how that works? Critical thinking cuts both ways, too bad you aren’t that smart.

          • Anon Ymous

            LOL what? When did I once connect the KKK to the Republican party? I said that connecting the KKK to present day Dem party is asinine. Critical thinking is pretty difficult when you can’t even read. See how that works? Stop embarrassing yourself.

          • Rastervision

            Nope, democrats continued to be the party of oppression through LBJ.
            http://clashdaily.com/2014/03/allen-west-lbj-ill-nggers-voting-democratic-next-200-years/

          • Concerned Citizen

            First, I don’t support Clinton. You’re right about byrd and other southern racists who were democrats. But you can’t believe there are/were more democratic racists during that time or today. Be real. But look how the republican party has worked for corporate american, look at all the laws passed to hurt labor, look at the laws that are being passed to protect corporate, look at what a shitty job the GOP has done for our vets. They’re quick to send them to war but somehow there’s never enough money to support them when they return, guess which party has been trying to keep fracking going and creating roadblocks in from of alternative energy, check out what the GOP has for a presidential candidate (before you go there Clinton isn’t any better). The republican party has been on the wrong side of every important issue in the last 50 years. I will say the GOP hasn’t sold their soul only to corporate america, they shared it with the religious right. Imaging these talking head religion types now supporting Trump. Now there’s a christian value.

          • Della Robinson-Melton

            NAFTA. Created by Republicans and signed by Democratic President Slick Willy.

            NAFTA created wealth for manufactured industry when it allowed corporations to pull the red, white and blue rug right out from under the feet of the American worker and relocate abroad for lower paid wages.

            The cats grew fat while the workers scrambled for employment elsewhere only to lose again when industry after industry followed suit and took our economic survival and gave it to Mexico, Guatemala, Ecuador, and others.

            Economic loss within a household creates depression, frustration and desperation. Wage earners feel useless and undermined by their company as well as their Nations’ leaders that allowed and enact such a bill as NAFTA to create such economic distress.

          • ncfnorcalrep8

            Thank you Della. But NAFTA was not only signed by Bill Clinton but supported and pushed for by both Bill and Hillary Clinton. Secretary Clinton has supported most all of the free trade agreements over the years including the TPP until she “changed her mind” during the primary. Ted Kennedy also voted for NAFTA if I am not mistaken. No, contrary to a lot of posters here, the Democrats have been selling out “labor” and the American workers to corporate “globalization” for over 20+ years now.

          • Raziel Seraph

            Wrong, KKK votes either way.
            Republican or Democrat isn’t their basis of voting.

            Another person that needs a history lesson.

          • Kathy Ruth

            To be ABSOLUTEY correct you should say the CONSERVATIVES have “supported segregation, white’s only hotels, restaurants, water fountains, back of the bus policy, dislike people of color, want guns on every person, always support wars, vote to support corporations over citizens, all concepts of love.”
            During the first half or so of the 20th century the parties switched ideologies–the Democratic Party became the liberal party and the Republican Party became the CONSERVATIVE one, starting with the aftermath of the Civil war and culminating with the passage of the Civil Rights Act.

          • Marck1022

            You inserted “republican” and “democrat” into that statement. Conservatives, regardless of party, were responsible for the worst oppression plaguing the nation in most periods of American history.

          • Christopher Dorner

            Exactly

          • freedom74

            Interesting statement. I would draw from your stance that anything you deem negative was somehow done by someone “conservative” and anything positive was done by someone “liberal”? You sound very much like someone who has a form of paranoid delusions.

          • EIBRAN

            Hi Kathy Ruth – that’s not quite right. The Democratic Party was, and still is but a little less so, the more ‘left’ party focusing on worker’s interests. The Republican Party was, and still is at the “establishment’ level, the more ‘right’ party focusing on corporate interests. The difference is that “workers” then, as embraced by the Democrats and the establishment as a whole, were [pretty exclusively white men. And, the KKK and similar organizations tended to be made up of lower or middle income white men – Democrats. During the ’60s, the Democratic Party began expanding it’s conception of workers to include women and minorities (though they simultaneously shifted their focus away from lower income workers on onto “the middle class”). Consequently the Republican Party, particularly through the campaigns of Nixon and Reagan, succeeded in attracting racist whites away from the Democratic Party, leaving us with the strange spectacle of a bunch of angry poor white guys voting against their interests because they’d rather do that than convene with minorities and women.

          • Christopher Dorner

            Exactly. So crazy.

          • David Nelsen

            There was no switch. Under Hoover, Republicans were conservative small government types that voted for civil rights. Under Roosevelt, Democrats were racist big government types still. There was a big migration of people from North to South and to the West that changed regional demographics greatly after the 1950s. Hell, the Democrat That brought a lot of Northern Republicans to the South for manufacturing jobs. The South didn’t go Republican until the 1990s when all the old racist Democrats started to die off. It was Republicans that brought guns from the North to arm Southern Blacks against the Klan.

          • freedom74

            Don’t talk about history with liberals, you’re completely wasting your time.

          • freedom74

            Prove it. I have followed politics and history ever since I could read and I can intelligently talk about history for about the last 3000 years and I have seen absolutely no proof of this particular talking point. To be honest I can’t stand the Republican party from the 1980s to now, but it’s not because I believe in this silly “switched platforms” garbage.

          • Are You Kidding?

            OMG who programmed you with that crap? DEMOCRATS created and pushed Jim Crowe laws while Republicans fought for The Civil Rights Act and integration. For God’s sake MLK was a Republican Lincoln was father of the Republican party and guided the abolition movement, and led the Civil War to free the slaves. Sore loser DEMOCRATS started the KKK to keep the blacks down after they lost the war. DEMOCRAT Lyndon Johnson said “I’ll get those naggers on welfare and have ’em voting democrat for 200 years.” Likewise, Women’s Suffrage (right to vote) ALSO Republican (look up A.A. Sargent). DEMOCRATS fought AGAINST women voting for FORTY years. Really, where did you learn everything backward?

          • David Nelsen

            Those were all Democrat policies. The Republican Party forced desegregation of schools under Eisenhower. He sent in the 101st Airborne Infantry unit to protect the black students. It was Democrats such as Al Gore Sr. that voted against civil rights. It was Democrats that consistently won the South until the 1990s, when all the old racist Democrats finally died off.

          • Christopher Dorner

            Actually that was democrats. Most of the south were democrats until the 60s.

          • annefarrelly

            You are so wrong — it was the Dems that promoted discrimination for centuries. No Republicans in KKK either. Learn some history , the Dems started war with Vietnam Nam and lost it. Chicago is ruled by Dems who outlawed gun stores there, the murder capital of the country! You probably think the AR-15 is a machine gun. Democrats — It’s the party of stupid and depends on stupid voters who never studied history. Dems are now socialists, and many follow Alinskyite tactics for gaining power while conservatives want to conserve constitutionally protected freedoms. The choice is clearer than ever this election year, and more vital to our freedoms. If you like Chicago, vote for Clinton.

          • Sirk

            I call B.S. Repubs want to follow Milton Friedman. Read The Shock Doctrine.

          • annefarrelly

            Naomi Klein is a socialist who does not respect the constitution and the freedoms it protects. She focuses on corporatism’s crony capitalism which conflicts with the laws on the books in order to promote socialism and apparently does a good job on swaying you. I bet you never read anything by Milron Friedman! Or you would not be taken in so easily like your fellow Liberals.

          • Sirk

            Tell that to all the millions of people whose lives were ruined by the Chicago Boys and their perverted version of disaster capitalism. Tell that to the families of those killed in Chile under Pinochet. The evil perpetrator of this anti-human endeavor is MILTON Friedmand (not Milron).

          • freedom74

            Well, you need to crack a book then, because you are completely wrong. nice to know you have the average education of the typical liberal.

          • Anon Ymous

            That makes zero sense given given the history of the United States and how conservatives are defined by looking to the past for guidance.

          • mona19595

            According to what liberal? Go on back to Hill and let her know everyone here is just fine!

          • Mel Pratt

            You should be drowned in a filthy Chinese squat toilet, you case of anencephaly! Eugenics is the only answer to rid the world of low-capacity hominids like you.

          • Raziel Seraph

            Hate existed as a concept long before any political or voting system.

            Get a history book perhaps

        • nb

          Trump, unlike the politicians, has not deceived on anything nor rigged votes in the election. I’d say he’s the only honest vote.

        • Canucanoe2 is a dumbass

          You better pray Trump wins sperm burper or the muzzies are gonna cut of your head hahahahha

      • Della Robinson-Melton

        There are other choices as well as other Party Affiliations if you’ll consider their qualifications. Our media seems blindly fascinated with Trump’s outbursts and Hillary’s evasive maneuvers, that it takes the spotlight and coverage away from several other viable candidates.

      • Della Robinson-Melton

        You need not be reduced to choosing the lessor of two evils. This is unacceptable because there are other political choices out there. Do not be led around by the nose because a candidate is a presumptive nominee.

        Stop being lazy and accepting. Seek what info you want you need to make an inforned decision. Stop following the trail and create your own path.

      • yeomandroid

        I would take honesty and real concern over no grace and deceit any day. That is why I’m voting for Gary Johnson/Bill Weld. The other two parties have really lost their minds.

    • Diana Egielski

      You forgot to add, for the last part, that when he calls it like he sees it, he apparently doesn’t see very well, or like, anything at all.

      • nb

        He sees very well, he sets the issues, the conversation and he nails it every time.

        • Yudhishthira

          ? Really? He is nailing his own coffin shut with his remarks on Orlando. He has offended about 85-90% of the population at one point or another.

          • freedom74

            If people are voting by whether or not they find a candidate “offensive” we (not Republicans, AMERICANS) have already lost. This current election cycle is just pointing out the obvious, that winning a popularity contest in no way shape or form qualifies you to run the lives of 325million people.

          • Yudhishthira

            That’s true, it’s not a popularity contest. But knowing how to deal with different cultures is a PotUS prerequisite that Trump does not meet.

        • Diana Egielski

          I suppose you’re right. He sees his voters as the gullible, racist, bigoted, paranoid, violent, xenophobic and selfish neaderthal fools that they are, and he plays them accordingly, working them into fits of hysteria over nonexistent bogeymen so that he can prosper and profit off their lack of intelligence, and it’s working.

    • Classy Owl

      Don’t forget all the purged voters, the voters given inaccurate polling information, the closed polling locations, etc.

      • nb

        I was one of those voters, my registration went missing and had to vote using a provisionary ballot !!

        • pamelina

          NB did you report that experience?? Do you realize a provisional ballot is generally not counted? They’re called “placebo ballots” by election experts.

    • yeomandroid

      Thank God I switched over to the Libertarian Party – They may be a little nuts but at least they have principles. I’m happy we have Gary Johnson/Bill Weld on the ticket. Real proven leaders with 16 years of being successful governors in their states. Heck yeah! They may not be the most purist of Libertarians but I feel good about them.

  • Rachman Cantrell

    Why is it that all the states she is ‘winning’ have voter irregularities, purges and suppression that always seem to benefit her campaign but never Bernie’s? Strange time we are living in! If Hillary is the nominee Trump is likely to become president. She has too many flaws that he can use against her and they are both equally unpopular. Bernie is the only real chance we have to keep Trump out of the White House! Hillary cannot do it! Independents are roughly about 40% of the population. The rest is split between Democrats and Republicans. Independents get to vote in a general election but have been excluded in many of the primaries. They overwhelmingly prefer Bernie to Hillary! Bernie also has a percentage of unhappy Republicans who do not want Trump. Bernie can easily win in a general election whereas Clinton most likely will lose to Trump. The way to avoid a Trump presidency is to vote for Bernie and persuade the super delegates to do the same! Super delegates have a serious decision to make. Vote for Hillary with the liklihood of a Trump presidency and a drastically shrinking party or vote for Bernie with an assured victory and open the doors to millions of new Democratic voters with a revitalized and growing party! It will be interesting to see what they decide!

  • iberoguy01 .

    No surprise here. We are reluctant to think that voting fraud could happen in USA…it is something that happens in 3rd world countries, never in USA. Wake up America….we are no better than those so called 3rd world country. From the start I suggested to some people that the USA needed to call the UN to supervise our election process and bingo….if it walk like a duck and quack like a duck, it is a duck. I still smell a rat.

    • Anoelg

      UN? Oh yeah. That is a guarantee of honest election. Dear God.

      • NayChan

        A whole lot more honest than the US. Something has to be done.

        • Anoelg

          Yeah, Democrats should be banned.

          • Aldo InSf

            Do you have anything intelligent to add to this discussion Anoelg?

          • Anoelg

            I already did. If you want to ban what the mass killers have in common it is guns and their political affiliation. How is that not clear or intelligent to you? I guess if you are in or from SF that would explain your lack of grasp of reality.

          • Aldo InSf

            I will point out to you that one of the highest concentration of PHD in the United State reside in the Bay Area….That is my reality, If you don’t live here it will be hard to grasp as a concept of reality. But also, when your rhetoric is….Yeah, democrat should be banned or that “hate is a liberal concept”… obviously you are not capable of intelligent discussion….But again if you live under a rock somewhere….this will be very difficult for you to understand.

          • Anoelg

            So pointing out PhD concentration is some sort of proof of “grasp of reality”? PhD in Underwater Basket Weaving or Female Orgasm do not count in real life. And have you never heard the saying “those, who can’t do, teach?” In your smug academic lounges you have no trouble typecasting people and calling Conservatives all kinds of vile terms and accusing them of “rhetoric”. But if I provide you with a fact of “concentration of violent behavior” based on recent shootings and the shooters’ political affiliation you accuse me of living under a rock. You want to eliminate mass shootings? They used guns and were Democrats. The first is a tool the other is the cause. You should revisit “analyzing facts” class in your PhD program. But then again, we know what the Liberal universities teach – garbage. Not analytical thinking. Well, I don’t live under a rock, I have a Masters degree in a usable employable field, speak three languages and have a professional licensure. I don’t need a PhD because I actually DO for a living. Trump U is accused of scamming people but how is that different from Ivy League and other schools that milk 100s of thousands out of their students while sitting on million/billion dollar endowments only to provide them with useless Bachelor of Arts in Medieval Literature degrees? I wouldn’t be proud of the PhD concentration.

          • Aldo InSf

            My niece spoke 6 languages before being 6….you are not impressing me with your 3 languages….I have the same credential, French, Italian and to a certain degree….English…For someone with a master, your eloquence is very limited….Ciao Bello!

          • Anoelg

            I have no interest in impressing you or getting in a pissing contest with you. I was responding to your “under a rock” typecasting comment. Go have a glass of brandy and a cigar and talk about “redneck conservatives” with your know-everything but cannot-do-anything fellow PhDs. You will feel better.

          • Aldo InSf

            Ok, let me tell you that I have been very civilized during this exchange….ok, the “living under a rock” comment was in reference to your statement about “hate being a liberal concept” and I take it back.

            Also will point out to you that I never claim to be a PhD graduate but reply to your comments about how unrealistic Bay Area resident can be…….Well, Tesla, Facebook, Apple just to name a few comes from here. And they do know everything, and end up doing a lot for the human cause…Contrary to the conservative who insist on having assault riffle available for all… I believe there is a republican senator who is giving AK-47 as a entrance prize…actually it’s 2 AK-47. Go figure…

          • Anoelg

            Oh he is giving away TWO AK-47s to voters subject to their Constitutionally guaranteed 2nd amendment rights? Obama’s Fast and Furious allowed as much as 2,000 weapons straight into criminal Mexican drug cartels hands! Which one is of the two scenarios is a greater danger to the US population or a greater transgression? In addition, I’ve never seen an AK-47 kill anyone. I don’t think there is a single reported case of AK-47 getting off the rack by itself and going on a shooting spree. It is not the type of gun that matter, it is the person possessing the gun and their intentions that matter. The most recent mass shootings/terrorist acts in the US were done by immigrants (“carefully screened” by the Obama government), registered Democrats and … wait for it …. an elite neuroscience PhD student James Holmes (sorry, not a Tea Party member James Holmes despite the media’s efforts)! Maybe you should focus on who it is that is doing the shooting rather than your antiquated prejudiced notion that it is the gun’s fault. McVeigh didn’t use a single bullet and killed 160+ people. All that mattered in his case was “WHO” he was and “WHAT” he represented. Why doesn’t it work the same way now? Facebook is great. It has done a lot for humanity. The latest shooter liked it so much that he had the need to use is during his massacre. Or maybe you forgot Twitter – really great and effective! #bringbackourgirls …. Are they back yet?

          • cascadian12

            Written word diarrhea.

          • Anoelg

            Enjoy it!

          • Dean Winchester

            You realize that is was Bush that started Fast and Furious, right?

          • Klem Keely

            Wow, you have an serious case of Ph.D. envy. Must be all that beer, Xanax, and Fox News.

          • Anoelg

            Oh yeah, I am turning all green with envy – not. Envy is something worthless Liberals do – ask Occupy Wall Street or Bernie (who hasn’t held a job until he was 40+). Apparently, you have a serious case of reading deficiency and lack of comprehension. Lay off the dope.

          • Emme

            You probably already know your argument is flawed, but maybe you haven’t thought this through. If you’d like to ban the common factor of mass killers that would be the people with XY chromosomes. Unreasonable, you say? But I’m only blaming a massive group of people for the actions of a tiny subgroup. Please.

        • Christopher Pare

          The only thing that would fix our issues is a revolution. A real revolution not just voting in Bernie to fight all the corporate politicians.

          If the people actually get off their couch and work on getting every crooked government official out of office and replacing them, our nation may start succeeding again.

          I can tell you one thing, neither Hillary or Trump is the answer to our problems. Both of them will ruin this country.

          Good luck America!

    • http://espn.go.com/mlb/ Bear Brinkman

      We ARE a third world country

    • Sport Barry

      Electoral fraud, not voter fraud

      • iberoguy01 .

        Thanks. You are right.

      • TeslaFan

        You’re right. An important clarification.

  • ESP podcast

    This is not peer-reviewed research. It’s two grad students offering an opinion.
    This kind of stuff is grossly misleading. They actually state that they skipped peer review bc it was more timely to put this out, but two “experts” reviewed it.

    The fact that the Bern Report knew this and posted it raises questions about their own journalism. You simply don’t publish this stuff wo at least getting a counter point. That’s journalism 101. I would take the findings with a grain of salt.

  • adawitchy2u aka deb em

    It’s great to have confirmation on something Bernie supporters have known for months but what will be done about it?

    • Christopher Pare

      Nothing! The only true checks and balances of these things are the people.

      We should be taking Iceland’s ways of dealing with these things as our own…

    • yeomandroid

      Libertarian Party also aware of the corruption and vow to not let it ever into the party. I can finally feel good about politics again. No corruption and people who are skeptics what is being said. I can’t recall when we didn’t have a leadership that was skeptical about everything… GO LIBERTARIANS!

  • Ellen Anderson

    Such BS ….. like this vague summation ….. “As such, we find that in states wherein voting fraud has the highest potential to occur, systematic efforts may have taken place to provide Secretary Clinton with an exaggerated margin of support.” They won’t say for a fact that this happened, nor will they state how it could happen. All they do is say that it *may have taken place* … well, heck …. just about anything *may have taken place* in any situation in any place!! Calling BS on this whole bogus study – apparently a couple of Stanford guys just wanted some internet attention and knew exactly how to make a splash for a day or two. SMH.

    • Dangus McFinghin

      It isn’t a study, it’s a paper by two students. It was never intended to be in depth. Most studies are inspired this way, but this is not the same thing as a study.

    • Nancy Hall

      The paper proves that exit polls are inaccurate and that’s about it.

  • http://www.balancedtrade.us Will Wilkin

    It is a disturbing analysis that sets an agenda for closer technical study of the specific state election processes. But I do not think an author’s matriculation at Stanford University thereby means the university in any way endorses the paper.

    • Nancy Hall

      How do you know he’s a matriculated student?

      • http://www.balancedtrade.us Will Wilkin

        According to an article in the Bern Report, linking to the study:

        About Rodolfo Cortes Barragan

        Rodollfo is a doctoral candidate in Psychology at Stanford University. His award-winning research has been featured in major outlets, such as the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America and the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

        http://thebernreport.com/have-we-witnessed-an-honest-primary-election/

        • Nancy Hall

          Yikes. Well that’s sad. Maybe he should have stuck with his subject area. Does he cite YouTube and TheBlaze in his psychology papers, I wonder?

  • Resist_Tyranny

    What did you expect? The Clinton crime cartel is the most notorious and deadly crime family in USA history. No mafia boss even comes close.

    • yeomandroid

      Exactly True. I feel bad for the Bernie supporters who were robbed of their votes. I hope they at least take a look at the Libertarian Party… It may not be perfect, but at least people like Gary Johnson/Bill Weld truly care about many issues facing America’s youth.

  • Patrick Greene

    Rigged as fuck, and everyone with a brain knows it by now.

  • David Newcomer

    Good thing the guys who kept Ohio being stolen for Mitt Romney in 2012 are on this, and they’re keeping the Democratic nomination from being stolen for Hillary Clinton. Trustvote.org

  • Victoria Bowman

    #neverhillary.

  • Jeff Burton

    Again a sensational headline with no corroborating text. The article is about another article published by Stanford University and offers NO PROOF to back up the Stanford article. How about this for a headline, ‘Read the Stanford University Article. It Says There Was Election Fraud’? Give me an F-ing break.

    • Jeff Burton

      And reading the Stanford ‘report’ which is rather sparse, they compare states ‘with a paper trail’ as opposed to ‘states without a paper trail’ saying the ones without a paper trail went by a higher vote count to Clinton WITHOUT TELLING WHAT STATES THEY WERE. Do you think if this was truly an investigative report, instead of some kid on Red Bull killing time between keggers, you would WANT TO KNOW THAT SMALL DETAIL? Give me an F-ing, Mother F-ing break. This is not analytical report. THIS IS NONSENSE.

      • Taelon

        its all the southern states they are frauds. authors are psychologist seeking a phd (students)

      • Nancy Hall

        They have some charts in the appendix. a few of which lists the states. A lot of the states, like mine (Wisconsin) are mixed. The municipalities or counties get to choose their own equipment. Most in WI have had a DRE alternative for people with vision or hearing problems, but these devices can be used by anyone. Many use a DRE exclusively. Some have gone to an optical scanner (which scans a paper ballot) with an electronic marker for people with disabilities. The scanners could be tampered with just as easily as the DRE devices. The only difference is that the ballots are stored in case there’s a challenge, which rarely happens.

  • Cleogrrl

    This is a paper by a student. It’s NOT a “study” which includes important peer review. It’s not a Stanford doc, again, it’s a student paper. Snopes has had its say about this as well.

    • Concerned Citizen

      As the authors have stated. Get over it and vote for HC if that’s who you think is the best candidate. Just stop trying to make a point out of something that’s already been addressed.

  • Steven K. Carter

    Our election process is no longer ours. It belongs to the Oligarchs that now control our lives through deception, deceit and pure corruption. Using false flag operations to keep us fearful and divided to rigged elections and government now almost totally populated by their minions and a media mainly controlled and manipulated the elites have stolen democracy and are rapidly rushing us to Fascism. As long as “we the people” remain relatively quiet about what’s happening the elites will continue to tighten their strangle hold. Bernie is the only hope I see of awakening the majority and leading us from the horror show we now live in. Unless he and his followers do so I see only one ultimate conclusion, collapse and chaos.

  • http://jamessssmith.com/2015/04/04/john-woodman-an-epilogue/ James Smith

    Oh really, I can thoroughly prima facie prove there has never been an honest election in America in 200 years. https://jamessssmith.com/2015/04/04/john-woodman-an-epilogue/

  • Tribalscribal

    Where does Stanford come in??

    • Amythist

      The first page on the report.

    • Nancy Hall

      One of these hacks attends Stanford.

  • W. Benson

    The Stanford author seems to be a grad student in psychology. He is not a specialist in the area of the report. This does not make the report false, only less trustworthy.

    • Nancy Hall

      Open the appendix and take a look at his “bibliography.” If he’s a graduate student, he should be ashamed of himself. When did YouTube get to be a scholarly resource?

  • HDbfly

    I think that this paper shows that voting irregularities *could* mean that there was vote tampering, it doesn’t prove that there actually was vote tampering. I’m a supporter of Sanders, and I think the discrepancies between the exit polls and the actual vote are strange but even that can be explained. I’m not saying that vote tampering didn’t happen I’m just saying that this study points to the possibility of it, not the actuality of it.

    • Nancy Hall

      Given that they found a discrepancy between exit polling and actual election results, the paper also suggests that exit polls are inaccurate, which seems to be a widely held opinion, even among pollsters. They sample a small number of voters at a small number of locations in a state. The information could be skewed for any number of reasons having nothing to do with the equipment.

  • Aldo InSf

    This doesn’t look at all as a Stanford paper….Who are the supposed data expert, never mentioned and as of this news page….not very trustworthy.

    • Cindy

      You can get more information here –
      https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SdmBLFW9gISaqOyyz_fATgaFupI2-n6vWx80XRGUVBo/edit?pref=2&pli=1
      This link is in the full report up above – maybe you missed it….lots of data and get a load of all those reference links at the end! A lot of good reading.

      Maybe you can email a question as there is a Stanford email you can use..cortes@stanford.edu

      • Nancy Hall

        I looked at their appendix. It’s all YouTube videos and articles posted in blogs and trash publications like Buzzfeed and The Blaze. There are no scholarly citations to support their central assumption, which is their claim that exit polls are accurate reflections of the final vote. The problem is that they don’t cite one shred of peer reviewed, fact checked research to back that up. That makes their paper pure conjecture. It’s worthless as research.

    • Christopher Pare

      This matter researched also in a documentary by HBO.

      We have too many scandals in our country. It’s pretty ridiculous.

      • Nancy Hall

        The HBO documentary has nothing to do with the data in this paper.

  • Christopher Pare

    Okay, plenty of people question the validity of this document and rightfully so. However, if you will just sit there and argue the results they are attempting to display without properly researching the matter, you’re not as intelligent as you try to sound.

    HBO did a documentary on this matter a while back.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/16/clinton-does-best-where-voting-machines-flunk-hacking-tests-hillary-clinton-vs-bernie-sanders-election-fraud-allegations/

    It’s quite awkward how Hillary is winning all the state’s that don’t pass the security checks on their voting machines.

    Of course you will refute this if you are a Hillary supporter and accept this if you are a Sanders supporter. But if you don’t research it yourself, then you just accept the candidate without proper knowledge. When it affects our future you can tell your children of your lack of research and how it helped ruin the country.

    • Taelon

      MY GOD YOU ARE STUPID YOU POISTED THIS 10X ITS GARBAGE

      • Christopher Pare

        I POISTED IT?

        You really should learn how to spell and learn to take the caps lock off.

        For someone who cannot spell to call someone else stupid is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

        Lastly, it’s not the same article genius. And if it’s garbage then why is it true?

        You Hillaridiots will eat up anything Hillary Robem Clinton says. At least I have the critical thinking skills to actually research the candidates. You’re nothing but a fool.

        WAS THAT A BETTER POIST?

        • Taelon

          you win prize for biggest idiot of the year X2 now when that is clearly not a spelling error and just keyboard mismatch.

          counterpunch has no journalistic integrity, conspiracy theory bs

          • Christopher Pare

            Says the Hillaridiot who has done no unbiased research whatsoever.

            “Biggest idiot of the year X2” is such a childish name. How old are you? Do you always try to multiply the names you call people by numbers? Geez if you just put biggest idiot without the X2, it wouldn’t have hurt me so bad…

            So you POIST something in all caps, multiply your names by numbers, cannot spell post, are a Hillaridiot, believe everything she says, and are too much of a fat little boy to do any format of unbiased research. No wonder why you sound like you’re the meaning of equal opportunity.

            Grow up little boy and stop wasting the intelligent grown up’s time.

          • Taelon

            such a cute lil bernie bot. still clinging to berniebotting even tho primary is long over!

            p.s. proving that a voting machine is susceptible to hacking in a youtube video is not the same thing as proving the democratic primary was hacked by team hillary rofl what a loony toons

            sometimes i wish i had such a low iq like you so i could live in these fantasy worlds, but then i remember how many thousands of dollars you bernouts donated to my bank account on election prediction markets 🙂 keep the dream alive! i can send another kid to college if yall keep this up!

  • Nancy Hall

    This piece begins with a lie. Stanford did not issue this study. It’s a paper done by a couple of students, one of whom claims to attend Stanford. My guess would be that they’re undergraduates. I can’t imagine a graduate student submitting something like this. It is not peer reviewed. There are no citations in the body of the paper. There are charts and graphs of various kinds in the appendix, most reflecting assumptions that support the hypothesis without examining alternative possibilities. Many were not created by the authors to support their research. They come from other sources.

    The most glaring problem with the paper is the central, flawed assumption that exit polls are accurate. They list lots of references for their central assumption, none of which (among the ones I checked) are scholarly articles. One, in fact, was a rebuttal to a piece written by Nate Silver about how inaccurate exit polls are. Another glaring problem with the paper is that their data suggests an alternate conclusion to their suggestion that there was fraud in the states that don’t use paper ballots. The data also suggests that exit polls are inaccurate predictors of election results.

    Among the sources they cite are YouTube, Alternet, The Blaze, Buzzfeed, and a bunch of blogs I’ve never heard of. They also cite The Atlantic and Mother Jones among other publications more likely to be fact checked, but these aren’t scholarly journals. A lot of their graphs are from the NY Times. I looked, especially, at the list of references they use to support the assumption that exit polls are accurate and found not one fact checked, peer reviewed, scholarly publication.

    Here are a couple of articles on exit polls:

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ten-reasons-why-you-should-ignore-exit/

    • Nancy Hall
      • Christopher Pare

        And here’s a link about the DNC election fraud and a lawsuit that’s being filed because of it.

        You claimed exit polls are not accurate yet some fairly well-established folks on here disagree. Especially when the exit polls are extremely inaccurate and in a large number of states.

        Face it, you’re a blind Hillary supporter who eats up every word she says. You ignore the common logic in front of you stating how corrupt she is (i.e. criminal investigation and her failure to cooperate, her lying about the investigation, her former friends who claim she is crooked and violent, etc…)

        http://thefreethoughtproject.com/election-fraud-rico-lawsuit-alleging-widespread-e-vote-rigging-dnc-primaries-derail-clinton-nomination/

        Try opening your eyes for once. Your children’s children depend on it.

        • Nancy Hall

          “Well established?” According to whom? Themselves? That’s hilarious. I posted opinions from people who actually are well established, like Nate Silver. I see that the blogger posted them. You might want to try reading them

          • Christopher Pare

            For someone with such a big mouth you’d think you would’ve done more research.

            http://caucus99percent.com/content/election-fraud-study-authors-respond-critics

            This has a direct email from one of the authors showing plenty of sources from well-established individuals as I told you earlier. With that source and the one I cited in my last post it’s no wonder you got so defensive. You are this blind Hillary supporter who eats up anything she says and now when confronted with intelligent students who are questioning the honor of the voting system, you get completely defensive.

            Well, it must hold some water since the DNC is getting sued by the Institute for American Democracy and Election Integrity over election fraud in 11 states.

            But hey, keep on spewing you pro-Hillary bs. When your grandchildren see the mess you contributed to, I’m sure they’ll honor you in many ways.

            In case you were too busy fantasizing over your “Ready for Hillary” poster to see the other link, here you go grandma:

            http://thefreethoughtproject.com/election-fraud-rico-lawsuit-alleging-widespread-e-vote-rigging-dnc-primaries-derail-clinton-nomination/

          • Nancy Hall

            I already looked at their appendices full of bogus links. You’re way too gullible to be calling people names. It would be great if The Institute for American Democracy and Election Integrity spent millions on their worthless lawsuits, but they’ll get laughed out of court before that happens. Too bad.

          • Christopher Pare

            Now I know you’re getting desperate. The lawyers Arnebeck and Fitrakis are a lot more successful than you.

            Arnebeck got his J.D. from Havard and is the chair of Common Cause Ohio and Fitrakis is an election lawyer and a political science professor.

            IDEA is the American branch of IIDEA who has worked to strengthen democratic processes throughout many democratic countries. It’s amazing that you would denounce an institution working to benefit democratic nation’s and take the corrupt out of processes in democracies for Hillary Clinton.

            Initially, you came across as having some common sense and intelligence about you, however, it’s obvious that you don’t. The truly intelligent don’t just dismiss evidence without proper logic backing reasons to do so. It’s obvious you’re only a Hillaridiot who would do or say anything to back up that old hag. Is it because she is a woman or because she is old and not capable of cognitive dissonance like you? Or is it because you’re one of the paid morons that go on social media in a desperate attempt to convince people to back that crooked old hag?

            It’s funny how you had no response to the numerous sources th he author of the above paper listed in the source I posted either. Geez, once things don’t go your way you act quite desperate to act like you’re right. Just like a child…

            You’re a sad, sad excuse for a human. You’ll have to accept that you were complicit in allowing Hillary to ruin this nation. You feminists have no intelligence about you. Foolish people.

          • Nancy Hall

            There is no evidence. Lawyers are happy to take people’s money regardless of where they went to school. I opened your link and it’s just nonsense from some conspiracy theorist. I also looked up this HBO documentary that’s supposed to be about how Hillary cheated in the primaries and discovered that is was made in 2006, which is two years before her first presidential run. You don’t know what you’re talking about, which is par for the course in this discussion forum.

          • Christopher Pare

            Well, that’s not exactly true now is it?

            Guccifer 2.0 hacked the DNC (which the DNC acknowledged) and claimed he found evidence that the Democratic convention was rigged.

            Yes, the Stanford paper is backed by statistics and other expert opinions. But exit polls are used for a reason. Of course there will be those who dispute exit polls and those who support it. But your stance is that Hillary can do no wrong and everything has been completely fair which is pure ignorance.

            The fact is that the e-voting machines do not pass security checks in some states and those states happen to be led by Hillary even though exit polls show different. It’s convenient for you because it’s your candidate. This is why I pointed to Hacking Democracy. To show you that we have these issues. It’s quite a coincidence that Hillary is leading these states. However, I don’t find it to be.

            Look at all the rules the Clinton’s have broken, the lies Hillary has stated, the favoritism by the DNC, and the repressed Sanders supporters. Almost the entire group of super delegates supported Hillary before even knowing who was running against her. Lastly, she is just another corporate-owned politician looking to line her pockets.

            With all that, I would say you have no clue what you’re talking about since you support her. In addition, who are you to refute two intelligent students of Stanford who performed statistical analysis on the voting poll results? Are you a statistician? A renowned professor? How about a mathematician? I’m going with none of the above. I’d say you’re just a sad attempt at restoring her “amazing” reputation. But once the election fraud doesn’t favor your candidate, what will you say then? Just the fact that this democratic process is corrupt should make you just as angry as anybody else. Once again, what are you setting up for your grandchildren? Only a poor excuse for a person wouldn’t care about that. At least I do.

            Continue to spew your drivel, you will only convince the gullible and uneducated. The facts are definitely there. But numerous media sources support Hillary so it’s nm other easy to find. And senile fools, like yourself, deny and dismiss any knowledge you encounter as “conspiracy theories.”

            You are a ridiculous old fool. Good thing you won’t be around long.

    • Taelon

      sadly it is in fact a phd candidate at stanford in developmental psyuchology. THEY LET HIM NEAR CHILDREN AND DISABLED KIDS WHEN HES A NUTCASE. REPORT HIM LIKE ME!

      • Nancy Hall

        Wow. That’s disturbing. This paper is pure crap.

        Discus did boot my links, I guess. I posted links to the above referenced articles. They were all taken down. They’ll post a bogus paper that uses YouTube as a reference, but won’t post a link to Nate Silver’s blog, the WaPo, or to the NYT.

      • Christopher Pare

        I’d say you’re the only nutcase here. And not an intelligent one either.

        You’re attempting to degrade an educated person because you don’t agree with what they say. You’re completely ridiculous and a moron to boot.

    • Left of Eden

      Funny, it is undergoing peer review and has already received the endorsement of two professors who are experts in quantitative sciences. What are your credentials that we should believe you instead of them?

      About the author:

      Rodollfo is a doctoral candidate in Psychology at Stanford University. His award-winning research has been featured in major outlets, such as the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America and the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

  • Sumner Kagan

    funny how all this time democrats claimed that election/voter fraud claims by republicans was a “right wing myth”. But when it’s finally their own party doing it to their own voters, it’s suddenly real and a problem.

    Sad it took this to finally make them accept it.

  • gkr44

    and so it begins. The annexation of Trump by the real (backroom) GOP is nearing fruition and their ‘ghost candidate’ will soon be wheeled out by the freak show boffins. Meanwhile, the scandalising neutrons of Hillary’s energy fields continue to escalate in frequency. Sooner or later one of these neutrons will trigger a critical event chain reaction that will not be contained.At that point the GOPher ghost will be presented as the only mature, rational,qualified alternative for the voters. So the world hopes you will keep on keeping on,Bernie.

  • andy cooper

    Just sitting hear eating popcorn awaiting paid or unpaid hillary supporters to tell me they are smarter than Stanford’s statisticians.

    • Christopher Pare

      The old hag Nancy Hall is the one you’re looking for.

  • Whitney Goller

    I love the question “Are we witnessing a dishonest election” haha. Probably every single election since the first has been dishonest in most ways, shapes, and forms. Sigh. I hate being a pessimist, but I find myself shrugging a lot lately.

  • David Martin

    LOL @ Grandma Nancy Hall working overtime to do damage control. Wonder if she is part of correct the record. She wants this paper buried so we can get on to coronation like the good little followers they want us to be.

  • YOLO SWAGS

    I am bernie or bust you couldn’t pay me enough to vote for this trash. See you at #Phily

    • http://www.facebook.com/niggipoo Mr. Nick

      #StillSanders #Hill4Priz2016

    • yeomandroid

      Check out issidewith.com and see where your views align up compared to the other candidates. I was shocked that mine was over 89% with Gary Johnson and nearly 2% with Hillary Clinton.

  • Mike Bass

    Big fuck’in surprise. This this immoral, lying, cheating and all around fraud is claiming the Democratic nomination. I say to all Americans it is time to rise up and hit the streets to say “We are mad as hell and are not going to take it anymore”

    Can someone please come forward already and leak the email that will through the Clinton’s out of politics, forever. They are evil incarnate

  • Moakley

    I thought voting in Australia was a pain in the ass because its mandatory but holy shit the US system is behind the rest of the free world when it comes to voting and democracy.

  • http://bkswrites.com Barbara Kellam-Scott

    Stanford University did nothing of the sort. Two students, who have acknowledged http://www.snopes.com/stanford-study-proves-election-fraud-through-exit-poll-discrepancies/ that their paper has undergone no peer review, have published on line an incomplete analysis of extremely shaky statistics. Depending on the Stanford student’s discipline, he may have seriously endangered his career by exposing the university to association with this claim.

    • Christopher Pare
      • http://bkswrites.com Barbara Kellam-Scott

        And this blog is? I happened on the Snopes evaluation on my way (via google) to the Stanford directory. Later I went back there and found Barragan listed, but with no information available to those not affiliated. Googling on his name (in quotes), I found a limited-access directory listing with a psych-dept link and links to a couple of studies published in reputable journals in social psych.

        Let’s look for verifiable sources instead of jumping on and inflating every claim we come across. Whatever you think of the Snopes principals and their cat, the article I cited contains some compelling work to check the facts. It’s mostly a matter of whether or not we swallow whole what we want to believe (and I’m as disappointed as anyone in the outcome of the Demo primaries, if not surprised), and especially a matter of spreading rumors without verification.

        • Christopher Pare

          I already found a verifiable source as mentioned in my above comment.

          I can agree with what you stated.

          My issue is that we have had issues with this for a while.

          Anyways, look at my source above

    • Christopher Pare

      Here is a direct email from one of the authors who says absolutely nothing of “shaky statistics” and actually answers criticisms from others.

      He is pretty damn intelligent and has plenty of sources.

      I hope you’re not one of those Hillary supporters who will only research what benefits you…

      http://caucus99percent.com/content/election-fraud-study-authors-respond-critics

      • http://bkswrites.com Barbara Kellam-Scott

        So you took down your earlier reply (criticizing Snopes), and with it my reply? Nice. I’ll limit this response to saying Geijsel continues to call their unreviewed paper a “study,” which cannot be sustained by any standard. And I don’t know Geijsel’s academic discipline, but Barragan’s appears to be social psychology, and he appears to have published in well-enough-reputed journals to have some reputation and career at risk here. But please, let’s not go ad hominem at each other. There’s plenty to discuss about the paper at issue and the poor excuse for journalism that attributes it to Stanford because of one author’s affiliation.

        • Christopher Pare

          I have no clue what you’re talking about. I cannot take down a reply. Whether it yours or mine.

          As far as the paper goes, if you looked at the link I sent you you would’ve heard right from one of the authors mouth how he got his data, the fact that a statistician reviewed it, and it has numerous sources showing where he got his data and numerous other studies by professional statisticians who’s results corroborated with theirs.

          You don’t have to agree with the results that they got, look at all the state’s that have security issues with their e-voting machines. That’s easy to find, just Google it. Don’t you find it convenient that Hillary leads in those states.

          By the way you reject the paper in question, I’m certain you’re a Hillary supporter and of course no amount of evidence stating how corrupt she is will change your mind. People tend to make political decisions with their emotions attached, hence the horrible choice in presidential candidates we have now. It seems like you also fit this notion since you got all grouchy when I told you snopes isn’t the most reputable source. Then you accuse me of something ridiculous but anyways, it doesn’t matter. Close your eyes when confronted and lash out all you want. You cannot dispute facts.

          Scratch that, if you actually looked instead of jumping up and flapping off about the previous replies, you’d see they are actually below. You also have great attention skills. Good for you…

    • chuck farley

      You are arguing with a “sufferer ” of Oppositional Defiance Disorder. He will wear you down with persistence and beat you with experience every time., His only claim to the “Intelligence” and “Education” he frequently mentions is that he is not fond of either The Pantsuit or The Vt Gollum.

      • Christopher Pare

        Actually I am very fond of the “VT Gollum” Chris Farley’s brother.

        You come here for another interesting talk on Socialism or just to bust my balls in public?

        Either way it shows I must’ve got under you skin before.

        It is funny though that you never knew I favored Sanders.

        I expect nothing less but for you to follow me on every disqus blog from now on. I obviously appeal to you. Sadly for you, I am into girls. Sorry man… Don’t be too hard on yourself, you never had a chance.

  • Republackin

    Doesn’t it seem like some kind of study comes out like this during the past 3 or 4 presidential elections? It just like a bunch of babies finding ways to cry “NOT FAIR”. Whatever! This is the worst presidential candidate selections…EVER!!! No matter who wins in November America has already lost.

  • Nd2fixyourbrain

    The 2012 election was dishonest as hell also and everyone knows it.

    • Christopher Pare

      This one is shaping out to be the same way.

      It’s pretty damn sad. And if it favors a person then they have no issues with it. This should bother all Americans.

  • Troy Brooks

    Really, this “study” is only 4 pages long? and all it really showed was Clinton did better in states that have upgraded their voting systems after the Bush vs Gore fiasco.

    • Christopher Pare

      Actually,IDEA has filed a lawsuit against the DNC for electoral fraud. The “upgraded” e-voting machines still haven’t passed security tests either. Even if you favor Hillary, there may come a time where this affects your candidate of choice. It’s sad that it’s no problem when it doesn’t bother someone because it favors their candidate. This is an American election that is facing these issues. If we let them get away with it what will they get away with next?

  • TeslaFan

    No surprises here but it’s nice to see the truth exposed by such an esteemed institution. Can we expect to read about this in mainstream media?

  • Man on the street

    The sharia permits men to beat their wives and to burn homosexuals, yet the liberals who fight for women and homosexual rights are supporting sharia laws. Hillary who gets money from Saudi Arabia, which hates Jews and homosexuals is supported by Jews and Homosexual, so how is that of opportunistic lier?

  • Christie

    Another article on the fraud to elect Hillary. ((Very believable to me as I watch the Democratic primary state by state. California—with huge crowds of 20,000, 30,000, 40,0000 for Bernie, then a Hillary win with 2.5 million ballots shunted to provisional ballots and uncounted.))

    At present, Secretary Clinton enjoys an apparent advantage over Sanders. Is this claimed advantage legitimate?

    We contend that it is not, and suggest an explanation for the advantage: States that are at risk for election fraud in 2016 systematically and overwhelmingly favor Secretary Clinton. We provide converging evidence for this claim.

    First, we show that it is possible to detect irregularities in the 2016 Democratic Primaries by comparing the states that have hard paper evidence of all the placed votes to states that do not have this hard paper evidence. Second, we compare the final results in 2016 to the discrepant exit polls.

    Furthermore, we show that no such irregularities occurred in the 2008 competitive election cycle involving Secretary Clinton against President Obama.

    Stanford University Confirms Democratic Election Fraud | Your News Wire

    http://yournewswire.com/stanford-university-confirm-democratic-election-fraud/

  • RobinOfTheWest

    Everything you need to know to throw an election.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7W7rHxTsH0

  • Christopher Dorner

    I love this site.

  • DaftCorvid

    That is a student paper, and not an especially good one. It’s not “Stanford university” saying anything, and it’s not a bombshell paper – it’s a couple students repeating the same dubious ideas that have been going around the internet for weeks.

  • dianedraytonbuckland

    It’s the same filthy game in Australia – anyone still capable of clear thinking, rational thought processes is beginning to wake up – but Australia still has many dumb clucks who follow like sheep.

  • MercenaryMan

    Add the Provisional Ballots that were never counted or tossed, Ballots that couldnt even be filler BECAUSE THERE WERE NONE, and Fraud of Machines, Officials and Electoral college, Delegates and you have a recipe for DISASTER, Run and managed by the very people committing the fraud…

  • chrisfrommactown

    No way did she win Kentucky. Sanders was on an incredible roll and had to be stopped. Hence funny business with Kentucky vote count. Same with California.

  • yeomandroid

    At least the Libertarian Party didn’t have this level of corruption compared to the big parties. Yes, there were disagreements but that’s okay. I’m glad I registered from being a Republican to being a Libertarian. I feel good that my candidates are really discussing the issues that matter and I was able to vote for my VP too. Heck yeah!!

  • Dianne

    Corporate media has not mentioned this Standford study or the uncounted CA votes or any of the other states where the primary results are being questioned. I have just stopped watching any corporate media news…too many lies and diversions. If I want real news, I watch Democracy Now. I was a Delegate and volunteer at the Maine State Convention and even though Bernie won the state, I personally witnessed and was a victim of Clinton obstructionism and fraud. As a Delegate I proposed a type of amendment to the Democratic Party rules which requires a vote by the Delegates & Alternates attending the convention..i.e. convention floor. Part of the DP Rules regarding amendments specifically states a copy of every amendment is to be given to each Delegate at the state convention check-in (so they could read what they were voting on). The State Democratic Party Committee stated they were not in favor of my amendment an proceeded to ignore their own democratic party rule and did not give any of the state convention Delegates copies of the proposed Amendments so no one really knew what the language of the amendments so did not know if or what to vote for. Blatant obstructionism and cheating but who has the money to take them to court???

  • READY2SCRAP

    It’s a choice between a douche bag and a turd sandwhich
    I’ll take the turd sandwhich over the Horrid, nasty, scankey, sleaze ball, and Rank Poster child for Femenist…

  • Artisan3m

    Well, this must be the latest bullsh*t accusation to waste Clinton’s chances. Nothing else has worked……maybe we can get her for election fraud. At least this is not spelled “e-mail” or “Benghazi.” That’s refreshing.

  • believe

    PLEASE STOP TREATING PEOPLE LIKE THERE IGNORANT JUST BECAUSE HE KNEW THERE DEMOCRATS AND THERE THIS ONLY PEOPLE THAT ARE IDIOTS ABOUT IT. THEY VOTE FOR THE PARTY NOT A PERSONS OF INTEGRITY AND GOOD CHART ACTOR, AND HIGHER MORALS ,
    WERE NOT STUPID WE TRUSTED THE WRONG PEOPLE ,
    WAKE UP. TRY GOING BACK 39 YEARS WE HAVE NOT chosen our presidents .IF YOU INTERESTED FOR TRUTH< IF NOR YOUR NOT YOUR CHILDREN WILL PAY THE PRICE,LOSE ALL RIGHTS.
    THIS IS WHERE YOU BETTER START LISTENING YOUR GOING TO BE USING ALL LOSING ALL AMERICAN TIGHTS.
    STOP VOTING FOR A PARTY!!!! THE BOTH HAVE TRAITORS.VOTE FOR A M AN OF INTEGRITY, AND NOT A CAREER POLITICIAN. AND THE ONLY ONE RIGHT KNOW IS DONALD TRUMP.
    GO HERE TO SEE WHO HAS BEEN CHOOSING OUR PRESIDENTS AND STAFF.
    PLEASE I AM BEGGING YOU, WAKE UP TO THE TRUTH WHILE THERE IS TIME,
    http://rense.com/general58/suspre.htm

  • lennbob

    Yeah, just because one of the people who wrote the paper is from Stanford does not make it a Stanford University paper.
    http://www.snopes.com/stanford-study-proves-election-fraud-through-exit-poll-discrepancies/

  • bluedye33139

    Um, a student who has been a tireless Sanders campaign surrogate has typed up a paper with his opinions in it. Stanford University in no way is behind this, and Stanford University has not declared any electoral malfeasance or fraud whatsoever.

  • Doom Sternz

    Corruption and lying in the US government is endemic and while they fake elections there are no controls on what they do………..

    The Maidan demonstrations in early 2014, which led to the overthrow of the legally elected Ukrainian government witnessed an estimated 15,000 people marching in celebration of Stepan Bandera’s 105th birthday. The neo-Nazi Svoboda Party along with the Fatherland Party of Yulia Tymoshenko both supported this commemoration of the former Nazi ally and war criminal. In the late 1930s Stepan Bandera became the leader of the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) was the name of the Ukrainian partisan paramilitary force that arose from the OUN and fought Soviet armies in the 1940s. During World War II the OUN worked with the German occupation and participated in the massacre of Jews, Poles, and Russians.

    In 1943 Bandera’s followers massacred 70,000 Poles the majority of whom were unarmed men, women, and children. This mass killing took place in Volyn, Western Ukraine. In the spring and summer of 1943 peasants of Volyn under the leadership of the Galician intelligentsia using bullets, axes and other improvised means assassinated tens of thousands of Poles living in the villages and towns of the region. The political leadership of the OUN had suddenly realised that the Germans might lose the war. So because of the presence of the Polish population the political leadership had simply decided to get rid of that population to prevent Poland’s claim to Volyn. By 1945 the OUN had, in Eastern Galicia, killed 130,000. Many people had their eyes gouged out and were then hacked to death. After WWII the OUN kept fighting against the forces of the USSR and People’s Poland until 1949.

    From this historical reference in Volyn we can clearly see that Obama in Ukraine is using the supreme international crime (Genocide) as a means of preventing Russia’s claims to the Donbass.

  • Insight
  • robert franklin stroud

    Well duh?
    Democrats are dumb and easy to fool.
    Shame Bernie was bought off rather than going down fighting for his supporters in his last years.

  • rebeccagavin

    Ha ha ha ha. A student paper wriiten the day after the CA primary is not a Stanford Study.

  • Flem

    While I’m sure the “democratic” primary voting was surely rigged in Clinton’s favor. I cannot find a single person that actually voted for Hillary. This research paper was written by a Stanford student. And not peer reviewed.