In 59 of the urban, mostly-black voting divisions in Philadelphia Mitt Romney got zero votes, compared to Barack Obama’s 19,605.
But that’s not suspicious at all, right?
It’s one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.
These are the kind of numbers that send Republicans into paroxysms of voter-fraud angst, but such results may not be so startling after all.
“We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic,” said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. “It’s kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia.”
Most big cities are politically homogeneous, with 75 percent to 80 percent of voters identifying as Democrats.
Cities are not only bursting with Democrats: They are easier to organize than rural areas where people live far apart from one another, said Sasha Issenberg, author of The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns.
“One reason Democrats can maximize votes in Philadelphia is that it’s very easy to knock on every door,” Issenberg said.
Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?
This is hard to believe. Could these areas really be this ideologically homogeneous?
The article states there’s “little hard evidence” for fraud, but then we know that election officials don’t actually spend a lot of time trying to detect fraud either, so that’s a cold comfort.
To be clear, I don’t think fraud cost Mitt Romney the election. I think Obama won the argument, and won the most votes.
But instances like this one, as well as there being more ballots cast than eligible voters in some parts of Florida, indicate our dire need for election reforms.