What happened in New Hampshire?

[helderheid]

I was watching a really great documentary about Obama on MSNBC and it reminded me that Obama was supposed to win NH by double digits, and did well where paper ballots were counted, not so much where Diebold was used. Are we going to have a repeat of this in November?

Edited to add I am not accusing Clinton of stealing these votes.

ETA again: Going through this: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5538 (links at site)

Index of Notable BRAD BLOG Coverage...

Counting voters' ballots. What a nice new idea for American democracy...
# 1/8/08 - 'Problems' with Paper Ballots in State Inaccurately Reported by National Mainstream Media
# 1/8/08 - Pre-Election Polls Wildly Different Than Results Announced for Clinton/Obama

# 1/9/08 - Tribune Media: MSM Failed to Note 'Hackable Diebold Red Flags' in NH Primary Results
# 1/9/08 - New Docs: Exec at NH's Diebold Vote Counting Firm Convicted of Narcotics Trafficking
# 1/9/08 - 7 Point Swing for Clinton Over Obama in NH's Diebold Precincts
# 1/9/08 - Chris Matthews: Raw EXIT POLL Data 'Indicated Significant Victory' for Obama in NH
# 1/10/08 - Brad Discussing Concerns on Stephanie Miller Show
# 1/10/08 - KUCINICH CALLS FOR 'RECOUNT' OF NEW HAMPSHIRE BALLOTS
# 1/11/08 - The REAL Question (for now) About New Hampshire
# 1/11/08 - MAHER: Diebold Only Ones Who Know What Went on in NH (VIDEO)
# 1/12/08 - Diebold Voting Machine Failures Reported Across State
# 1/14/08 - Eternal Vigilance: Not Just for Founding Fathers Anymore;
Or, Counting Voters Ballots in American Elections, and Other 'Conspiracy Theories'
# 1/15/08 - Election Contests Get Technical, Testy Before They Even Begin
# 1/15/08 - Kucinich Pays, Count to Begin; Republican Howard's Funds Bottlenecked at Bank Now Accepted by SoS!

DEMOCRATIC COUNT BEGINS...
# 1/16/08 - HAND COUNT BEGINS: DIEBOLD MISCOUNTED VOTES; MEMORY CARDS MISSING; MACHINES FAILURES; MORE...
# 1/17/08 - NH's WMUR Reports 'No Problems Found' in Hand Counts; Only Source: NH SoS
# 1/17/08 - Huge New Disparities Found in Manchester, Ward 5 During Hand Counts
# 1/21/08 - 7.5% Vote Count Discrepancy Found in Nashua, Ward 5
# 1/21/08 - (Butch & Hoppy) + Post-It Notes = NH's Chain of Custody
And Other Recent News from the Election Contests in New Hampshire...

[Skink]

1. Dean inexplicably lost in the Diebold counties also.

[MonkeyFunk]

14. No, it was very explicable

and in fact, was explained, immediately.

[blm]

65. No one really expected Dean to win NH. The only way would've been if he won Iowa big

and the momentum carried him.

The internal polls before Iowa showed losses for Dean in Iowa and NH, no matter what the corpmedia polls were trying to claim at the time.

[Tesha]

66. I was knocking on NH doors for Dean the weekends before he lost in NH...

and although I wouldn't have said so at the time,
there was no doubt at all in my mind that Dr. Dean
was going to lose NH; the responses I was getting,
even from people who should have been natural Dean
allies, were far too negative to ever expect him to
win.

With regard to what happened in this race, over the
years, Hillary has built very strong relationships
with much of the NH Democratic machine and she
benefitted from those long-standing relationships
in the primary results. By comparison, in January,
Obama was the "new kid on the block" with no such
long-standing basis for automatic support. All things
considered, he did *REMARKABLY WELL*.

I was an Edwards voter this time around, but now,
looking back at how things played out, if the NH
Primary were re-run today, I'd certainly cast *MY*
vote for Obama.

Tesha

[blm]

Funny how the media can twist perception, even here at DU with those who believe they're immune

to spin. I hear you reNH and the reality of the ground there - something corpmedia is too lazy to decipher.

Post NH was a crucial timeframe for Obama - it could have led to a solidifying around Clinton. I think that is why Obama camp timed for AFTER NH for Kerry to endorse, though many of us knew by early 2007 that Kerry was quietly using his resources and influence to help build a national network for Obama, along with Daschle and Durbin.

They had a solid plan together early on and they stuck with it. And won.

[Zynx]

77. Dean lead in New Hampshire for months and months before Iowa.

He collapsed post-Iowa and was expected to lose in that last week, but he did lead, mostly substantially, for the better part of five months.

[blm]

78. Corporate media polls certainly claimed so. Internals were always tighter.

.

[Zynx]

84. He did almost always have the lead though. Granted it probably wasn't quite 20-30 pts like

it sometimes appeared it was, but without Iowa I think he would have won New Hampshire.

[LakeSamish706]

2. I would say probably if we have Republicans manning the systems....

in the red states... The Dems have had over a year to fix this voting problem and have done virtually nothing.

[helderheid]

3. it makes my stomach hurt.

[Marrah_G]

4. The NH election was fair and accurate - stop accusing Clinton of cheating

They did do recounts. This isn't helping.

Yes, Diebold is the Devil- YES- OHio was stolen.

in NH there IS a paper trail. There was a recount.

But STP accusing a good Liberal Dem Senator of cheating- That hurts our party and labels a good woman for something she did not do.

[helderheid]

7. Oh Christ, I never accused Clinton of cheating. I accuse REPUBLICANS of rigging our votes.

[Marrah_G]

12. Look at your post. Anyone would look at that and think...

.....The OP thinks Obama was robbed and therefore thinks Hillary stole it.

I love you but.......your wording sucked on that one.

I am ALL for accountability. BUT, when we make accusations that are false and yell "cheat" everytime our guy loses then the whole issue becomes like the boy who cried wolf. When they DO cheat again (and they will try) people won't listen because there will have been to many false alarms.

[helderheid]

18. Marrah_G I love you too, however stating "when we make accusations that are false and yell "cheat" "

everytime our guy loses is a stretch. Re-read my OP. This is about NH, where he was predicted to win big, did well where paper ballots were counted and not where they weren't. This is hardly calling foul "everytime" our guy loses.

[Marrah_G]

21. But there was a paper trail and it was recounted

Nothing was found to be out of sorts. We can't do this unless we are really sure and when votes are recounted we need to put it to rest. Otherwise it hurts our cause.

What we should be doing is working on removing ANY machines that do not come with verifiable paper trails.

[helderheid]

24. I agree on removing these machines. I am just starting to look through this:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5538

[Marrah_G]

29. Just keep writing your reps.

Unless there is a paper trail there is no fair vote.

Also: Bradblog fucked up big time on this one. They are causing more harm then good in this particular event.

[helderheid]

33. How did BB fuck up?

[Marrah_G]

38. They went way over the top making cheating accusations

The recounts were done. No signifigant mistakes were found. Yet still they are digging, trying to insist the vote was false. They are making it so that when there is real fraud again, no one will believe them.

[helderheid]

40. I just got this email from Kathy Dopp:

Kathy runs http://electionarchive.org/

> Hey Kathy,
> >
> > Just wanted to check in with you about the New Hampshire recounts this
> > primary. The only reporting I can find post recount is on Brad Blog. What is
> > your opinion? Was the recount fair or compromised?

Good question but impossible to answer because NH has no publicly
verifiable ballot security procedures and one could argue no ballot
security procedures at all. So the ballots could have been tampered
with or substituted prior to the hand recount.

Citizens such as Black Box Voting who tried to follow the ballot
transport vehicle were deliberately lost by the transport vehicle
whose driver took evasive manuevers to evade citizen observors, the
ballots were never sealed - except in cardboard boxes without any
meaningful protection, and were not properly secured even at the
central locations, and who knows about the township security which
seems to be nonexistent as well. A statewide ballot reconciliation of
all printed ballots was also denied to Kucinich as I recall.

Cheers,

Kathy

[Marrah_G]

41. They really are trying to make something out of nothing.

No matter how many things were disproved they just keep moving the goalposts. They were wrong this time. Continuing to try and make an issue out of this just helps those who will try to commit fraud in the future.

[helderheid]

42. I just don't know.

[Marrah_G]

43. It's tough- after Ohio and FL it is so easy to see it everywhere you look

I do not think any of these people are malicious. I believe they truly think they are doing the right thing. But they need to know when to stop and when their actions begin to do more harm then good.

Just my humble opinion.

[EFerrari]

46. You have no way of knowing what happened. Nobody does.

I have real differences with Brad and I agree that sometimes he is rash in his claims and that isn't helpful.

But it does no good to have paper ballots if you don't secure them. That's just asking for trouble.

It doesn't matter who won or lost. What matters is that in November, we need to raise this issue with election officials or all of this is a big fat waste of time.

[Tesha]

68. No recount was denied; Kuch recounted until he decided not to pay for any further recounts.

All this paranoia about NH is just that: Paranoia.

Tesha

[Tesha]

67. Not in New Hampshire.

We have a paper trail, we all know our election officials
and processes, and we do enough recounts to feel comfortable
that the system can't be systematically gamed.

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. They Did A Partial Recount At The Bequest Of Dennis Kucinich And Some Other Guy

When it was stopped Hillary Clinton was picking up votes.

[helderheid]

9. I never saw that. I need to do some googling

[panader0]

6. If the issue of the voting "irregularities" of the Diebold machines

is not raised to a roar by the media, we could be in trouble again. It's hard to believe that it's almost eight years since the haging chads debacle in Florida, and there have been many voting problems since then. This issue needs to be brought into the light so public outrage can get rid of it.

[TexasObserver]

8. ALL Dem candidates except Hillary lost votes in the Diebold counties.

And Hillary GAINED votes in every Diebold county, taking some from each and every one of the other candidates.

Things that make you go HMMMMMMMMMMMM.

[MonkeyFunk]

16. No, it doesn't make you go "hmmmm"...

it has to do with WHERE machines are used to count, and how they correlate with different demographics.

Remember, there was a recount and Clinton GAINED votes.

[TexasObserver]

17. votes were stolen from other Dems and given to Hillary.

Since you seem unable to understand that without someone saying it.

NH Republicans stole Dem votes to help Hillary.

Is this the first time you've found that out?

[MonkeyFunk]

56. That's a blatant lie

just a flat-out lie.

[TexasObserver]

71. It's the truth, and you know it;.

Enjoy your last two days slamming our nominee.

[MonkeyFunk]

73. I dont' slam Obama

I don't slam any democrats. You're the one using this site to destroy democrats. How you've lasted this long is a mystery.

But you're just flat-out lying about New Hampshire. Nothing indicates there was anything wrong with the election. You're just doing what you do - spreading yet another lie to trash Clinton.

[TexasObserver]

75. Yes, the stats do support my statements.

You clearly have a problem doing the math, or even understanding it, but those who have even average intelligence understand it.

So you're supporting Obama now?

[MonkeyFunk]

90. What math?

There's NO evidence whatsoever that there was anything suspicious in the New Hampshire vote. None.

Claiming there is is just a big fucking lie.

And as to who I support? Fuck you! That's who I support. You obviously haven't read anything I've posted here for months, and just make shit up in your weak little mind.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

58. 100% Deluded.

Get a grip please.

[TexasObserver]

72. It's the truth, and you know it;.

Enjoy your last two days rejecting the nominee.

[MonkeyFunk]

74. It's not rejecting the nominee

to point out your lies.

[TexasObserver]

76. Two days and counting, hater.

[MonkeyFunk]

91. Go find

one thread where I attack Obama. Go find it, liar, or shut the fuck up.

You've been on my troll list for months - you're obviously here to disrupt, and I can't believe you've gotten away with it this long.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

79. The Truth Is That It's 100% Delusional.

:crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat: :crazy: :tinfoilhat:

[TexasObserver]

82. the truth is you can't handle the truth

Thank God we've got Obama to lead us.

Thank God we'll soon be rid of those who won't support him.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

85. 100% Deluded.

Almost scary...

[TexasObserver]

86. 100% IGNORED

No one takes you seriously, for good reason.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

88. Dellllllllluuuuuuuuudeddddd

[SoxFan]

95. I've tried to explain this, but they won't listen

The few towns that use hand count paper ballots tend to be clustered along the Connecticut River and in northern Carroll County. in both areas, the Democratic electorate is more upscale, Unitarian, UCC, highly educated, etc, in other words, it's an Obama-friendly demographic. The southern part of the state has greater concentrations of Hillary-friendly voters, e.g., Catholics, working-middle class, etc. The same towns where Obama did well are the same towns where other maverick liberals (Bill Bradley, Carol Shea-Porter, Mark Fernald) have done well in the last decade.

[cbc5g]

10. It was probably the calculated "crying" moment

Or the paid actors at her events telling her to go home and bake cookies and subsequently being thrown out so she could talk about how sexism is still rampant and shes in it to fight it. She did some really devious shit to play on womens fears and empathy.

[rodeodance]

19. firing up the Hillary Hate machine again I see

[cbc5g]

20. She asked what happened...thats what happened, it wasn't RW diebold machines

It was politically calculated moves brought to us by her horrible campaign. And it did work to give her NH. But you can't do that in every state because it loses its effectiveness. It was used to give her a fighting chance because if Obama won NH this would have been over a long long time ago.

[seaglass]

11. Obama was counting on college students and they were on winter

break during the primary.

NH also gets MA media and Obama was too much like Deval Patrick who is not the most popular of Governors. (the MA media also helped Kerry over Dean, Dean did better near the VT border).

Hillary Clinton got brutalized by Chris Matthews right before the primary and there was backlash.

The paper vs diebold was analyzed during the Dean/Kerry primary and was found to have no impact.

[goclark]

70. I get it Deval is AA and Obama is AA and they are friends

so they must be twins in politics.


Hopefully, they will keep their State politics and their National politics in different pockets.

[Marrah_G]

80. It is not the color of their skin

It is the words in their speeches and slogans crafted by the same man, almost identical messages in some cases, identical speeches. It was glaringly obvious to anyone in Mass who followed the campaigns.

But go ahead, try and make it about race.

[goclark]

96. I'm not hardly making it about Race

They happen to be friends and both happen to be African American.

And now you are telling me that Alexrod crafted the speeches for both of them.
That's new news to me because I don't have a clue about Mass.

I don't live in Mass. I live in CA so I have not followed the issues in Mass.

If some say that Patrick is not doing a good job and therefore Obama may not do a good job,it's a stretch but I'm OK with it.

[Marrah_G]

97. Let me try and explain a little

Gov Patrick ran a campaign extremely similar to Obama's. Even the slogans were almost identical. Together we can became Yes we can. The very same message "hope and change". Then Obama starts giving almost identical speeches. People in Mass started to notice.

Gov Patrick is someone I backed 200% I fell for every line. I bought the whole sales pitch. I thought he would be president someday. I felt like I did while listening to Bill Clinton so many years ago. Then he was elected and has proven to be a mediocre and pretty naive Governor. I have hopes that it will change for the better. But right now many Mass folks feel let down.

On the day his casino bill, the one he had been pushing and talking up for so long, went to a vote, he was in NYC pitching his book to a publisher. This type of thing truly left many disillusioned.

THEN along comes Obama. Same pitch, same man behind the curtain, same slogans.......Yet we are asked to believe there will be a different result. Many of us feel as though we already bought what Axelrod was selling and his candidate fell short of the promises.

Since Obama is our nominee I hope to hell that if elected he proves to be far more prepared for the job then Gov Patrick has been.

yes we can.....together we can..... they are meaningless words. They sound great, but in the end, meaningless to me.

I hope that clears it up some.

[seaglass]

93. No, it was Axelrod running both their campaigns with the same

message - if you remember it's why some accused Obama of plagiarizing Patrick (I did not). In any case Patrick has not had a lot of success since he has become Governor for a number of reasons (not all of his making) and NH residents, at least Southern NH see it.

[MonkeyFunk]

13. Oh for god's sake, not this stupid shit again

You guys tried this in 2004, too!

[Marrah_G]

15. Errrrr.... in 2004 you didnt find a problem with Ohio?

MF we are almost always on the same page, but I gotta say... look at your post.. who is "you guys" and what exactly do you think happened in 2004?

[PBS Poll-435]

45. There was a recount in 2004 in New Hampshire because of the vast difference

between the exit polls and the final tally. The recount showed similar results to the election night numbers.

Maybe that is what MF is talking about.

[seaglass]

55. No they tried it in the NH primaries in 2004 between Dean and Kerry

and there wasn't a stolen primary then either.

[MonkeyFunk]

57. no, I'm talking about New Hampshire democratic primary in 2004

Dean people complained that it was stolen for Kerry - ignoring that the areas that had the diebold machines were the areas along the border and in the same media market as massachusetts, and the places that tended to count by hand were near Vermont.

Thus Kerry did better in areas that used machines to count - but there was a perfectly rational explanation for that.

[Marrah_G]

59. Ohhhhhhhhhhhh okay- I was confused about your post

[EFerrari]

22. We can't know because the ballot chain of custody was not clear.

The recount didn't show significant discrepancies but unfortunately, because of the security issue, that results can't really be seen as conclusive. That's what I recall, anyway.

[helderheid]

23. Thanks - I am just now sifting through this:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5538

[EFerrari]

26. Mark Crispin Miller has an email list for breaking stories that is great.

Very few stories don't show up there first. :)

[Marie26]

25. They had a recount which totally backed up the primary vote.

Massive fail from Bradblog.

[EFerrari]

28. You can't have a good recount if the ballot chain of custody

is screwed up. Someone could stack the ballots and no one would know.

That's exactly how they tried to rig the Ohio recount and two people went to jail for that.

[helderheid]

30. Thank you

[Marie26]

32. That's shifting goalposts.

First people claimed that the votes were wrong, then NH dragged out the ballots for a recount & Clinton actually ended up picking up votes. Then it became, oh, well, there wasn't chain of custody. IMO, if New Hampshire showed the chain of custody of every single vote, then some people would still say that it wasn't valid because the official in charge of chain of custody was biased etc. They were hoping for a big turnaround in the recount & they didn't get it. I don't see similar cries about all the other states that candidates suprisingly won. Clinton won New Hampshire fair & square, & there's nothing to suggest any fraud beyond the speculations of some blogs w/an incentive. Just my personal opinion, but Bradblog was asking for a lot of donations in fueling this story. I think when the recount exploded one conspiracy theory, they shifted to another to explain the results, avoid looking like they were wrong, & above all keep the donations flowing. Just IMO.

[EFerrari]

34. It's not really shifting the goal posts, it's just a fact. And, Brad aside,

some election reform activists in NH didn't even want the recount for the very reason that it was tainted before it happened.

[Marie26]

36. Yeah it is

Election reform is a valid issue, but activists do it a disservice w/stuff like this. Just because your guy lost, doesn't automatically mean it was voter fraud. People made alot of noise about NH, demanded a recount, only to have that recount back up the vote. And there was no reason to believe that there was fraud in the first place except that Clinton did better than the media predicted. It made it look like the "election reform" movement was crying wolf, protesting a result just cause they didn't like the outcome & that hurts the movement overall.

Obama won NC by more than predicted. I could start a blog hinting at election fraud, get a bunch of donations from Hillary supporters, & demand a recount of NC. Then I could go photograph every ballot box, pointing out that "wow, the tape is coming off this box!" "wow, five officials have keys to the warehouse, there's no chain of custody!1" "the recount is invalid!!1" None of this has to make sense, except that it still leaves a hint of doubt even when the recount bears out the results. And it's impossible to prove a negative, so I can still make suggestive hints that someone COULD have thrown out votes. No state's procedure is absolutely perfect, no state uses criminal chain-of-custody for each & every vote. It's a waste of everyone's time to dwell the NH election after a recount showed that the internet speculation was just wrong.

[helderheid]

37. For the record, Edwards was "my guy" at the time. I just got this email:

> Hey Kathy,
> >
> > Just wanted to check in with you about the New Hampshire recounts this
> > primary. The only reporting I can find post recount is on Brad Blog. What is
> > your opinion? Was the recount fair or compromised?

Good question but impossible to answer because NH has no publicly
verifiable ballot security procedures and one could argue no ballot
security procedures at all. So the ballots could have been tampered
with or substituted prior to the hand recount.

Citizens such as Black Box Voting who tried to follow the ballot
transport vehicle were deliberately lost by the transport vehicle
whose driver took evasive manuevers to evade citizen observors, the
ballots were never sealed - except in cardboard boxes without any
meaningful protection, and were not properly secured even at the
central locations, and who knows about the township security which
seems to be nonexistent as well. A statewide ballot reconciliation of
all printed ballots was also denied to Kucinich as I recall.

Cheers,

Kathy

(this is Kathy Dopp of http://electionarchive.org/)

[EFerrari]

39. Marie26, explain to me how you can have a clean recount

without ballot chain of custody? You can't. This has nothing to do with candidates but with transparency.

And, I wasn't backing Obama or Clinton at that time, fyi You can search for the threads in the Election Reform forum.

[Marie26]

44. It's a good issue

Chain of custody is important, in general. Claiming that NH somehow stole thousands of votes from Obama, then managed to throw away thousands of votes before the recount, all to get Clinton a win, is ridiculous IMO. The only reason people even brought up chain of custody in NH is because they had a recount that reinforced the primary. I bet NC doesn't have perfect chain of custody either, but no one knows because the results weren't challenged. I KNOW Obama stole NC - prove me wrong.

[helderheid]

47. I don't remember - was Clinton polling ahead there and expected to win?

[Marie26]

50. Obama won by more than the polls expected

Very fishy, if you ask me. And they had Diebold machines!! And if they have a recount & it backs up the vote, I'll still think it was stolen because they can't show the chain of custody of every single vote. Maybe the Sec. of State ordered votes to be thrown away - you can't prove he didn't. So I KNOW Obama stole votes in NC & you can't prove me wrong. It's POSSIBLE they did flip more votes for Obama, so I'll take that as fact.

[helderheid]

52. For the record, I'm accusing Republicans of messing with our votes, not Clinton

Do you honestly think Obama stole votes from Clinton?

You make a REALLY good point. I can't prove you wrong. Doesn't it suck that we can't prove who won anything with these go$%^$%^$&med machines?

[Marie26]

83. Nope.

Do you honestly think that New Hampshire officials risked their jobs, reputations, etc. to first rob Obama of votes, and then perfectly match the recount to match the faked votes? That they broke into the warehouses & threw away enough paper ballots to match the first, falsified, count exactly? And no one ever said a word? And you believe this convoluted theory simply because Clinton did better in NH than expected, even though a rise in turnout among women also explains that?

Come on. Actually, based on the recount results, Hillary actually picked up some votes, so there's even more basis to accuse NH officials of suppressing the number of Clinton votes, if you want to go there. What I'm saying is that you could just as easily accuse Obama of robbing votes in NC, or PA Republicans robbing Obama of votes in PA, & no one could prove you wrong. You can accuse anyone of anything, but you've got to have some positive evidence to back up those accusations, or it's just crying wolf. And if election activists cry wolf too often, it makes the entire movement look less credible.

[EFerrari]

87. You don't have to prove conspiracy.

It's enough to know there is no reason to trust the process.

And NC as well as PA's process is every bit as flawed. Ask Kelvin Mace and demodonkey.

This isn't about Obama or Clinton. And it's not about crying "wolf!" either.

Take SC, for example. Their state constitution forbids the very kinds of unverifiable elections they are running now. And, there is no way at ALL to verify their vote. If I point that out, is that also crying "wolf!"?

No. It's just a fact.

[EFerrari]

48. Kelvin Mace works election reform in NC. He could give you.

a much better account of what happened there than I can because he followed that race and I didn't.

You know, the people who were calling for a recount in NH didn't even know about the chain of custody issue until activists in NH brought it up. That can also be tracked in the ER threads in the night and day after the election.

[Marie26]

53. Right, they didn't know

because that wasn't an issue until after the recount showed the same exact results. Then they cast around for another reason that would not involve them being wrong. There's a word for that psychological reaction, I can't remember what it is. About how people will change the facts to fit their preconceived opinion, rather than acknowledging that the opinion was mistaken.


Edit: Now I remember - it's called "confirmation bias". "In psychology and cognitive science, confirmation bias is a tendency to search for or interpret new information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions and avoids information and interpretations which contradict prior beliefs."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

[EFerrari]

54. Not exactly. The NH activists brought it up BEFORE the recount.

So, those of us watching long distance did know before the recount that it would be inconclusive.

But you're right insofar as there are always people with an agenda that spin the facts to their benefit.

The good that did come out of the NH partial recount is we know to keep a sharper eye on ballot custody there in the Fall.

[bunnies]

27. A teary moment the day before we voted.

And Bills "sorry I cant make her younger..." comment. Thats what happened in NH.

[Recursion]

31. Same thing with Florida in '04

Poor, rural counties tended to use Diebold more. Poor, rural counties tended to favor Clinton (or Bush in Florida in '04)

[wowimthere]

35. IT was RIGGED. Some of you think voting in Ohio in 04 and Florida in 00 was legit

When Republicans are in charge of voting the chances of vote tampering go way up. New Hampshire was ripe. Clinton's internal polling and Obama's internal polling had Obama winning by double digits but in using Diebold machines the Republicans made sure there was no way of really proving the markings of a stolen election. Think about it. If you could prove election tampering then no one would do it.

[MonkeyFunk]

92. No it wasn't

stop lying.

[Emit]

49. I posted on the topic a while back, after reading these articles from the election reform forum

You might be interested in the articles at these links, helderheid :hi:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5016722

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5012530&mesg_id=5012530

edit typo

[helderheid]

51. Thanks for the links!

:hi:

[goclark]

60. SKINNER: This is why we need a GOTV Forum at DU

I hope the Mods are listening.

It would help to put all of us on a positive message.
We could learn more about the voting systems in each state and share our knowledge with others.

We could develop strategies that work to GOTV... even simple things like ALWAYS wear an Obama T-Shirt or a Obama Pin.

We could gain knowledge in understanding Voter Suppression and what we can do to stop it before it's too late. :patriot:

[helderheid]

61. You do hang in the ER forum, right?

:hi:

[EFerrari]

64. Here, goclark.

We post election reform news every other day or so.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=203

[goclark]

69. Thanks ~ then it needs to be a Major Forum for this election

I'll check it out however ~ txs.

[Emit]

62. Do you recall having read these articles before, helderheid?

(you might have come across them in the ER forum)

I am curious what others think about them, so if you get a chance, let us know your opinion on the matter. :hi:


edit for clarity, I think, lol

[helderheid]

63. I don't recall - I need to take time to really read them. Thanks!

[ieoeja]

81. Consistent with Iowa and Nevada.

In the first three primaries, Obama dominated the rural areas while Hillary won in the large population centers.

In each of these first three states, Hillary's campaign followed the same pattern as her national campaign. She concentrated her efforts where the voters were most concentrated. So while Obama was stumping all over the state, Hillary stuck to the cities.

In Nevada, for instance, Hillary did not win a single county outside of Las Vegas. She got enough votes in one city to slightly edge out Obama for the popular vote. But in the process ceded all but one congressional district, and the DNC delegate attached to each district, to Obama allowing him to win a majority of the Nevada delegation.

Since rural areas have such small population, they don't bother with machines. The cities do. So Hillary won where Hillary campaigned while Obama won where Obama campaigned.

[moondust]

89. Was she running for the popular vote way back then?

Did her whiz kid Mark Penn still think Democratic primaries were winner-take-all?

[SoxFan]

94. Debunked. Repeatedly.

[EFerrari]

98. You might want to read up on that partial recount

in the ER forum.