If Tony Snow needed a concrete example of voter fraud on the tip of his tongue, he should have been ready with "Ann Coulter did it!"

I love the way Tony Snow chuckles at the idea that the GOP would rather face Clinton than Obama. (Ha --- as if the GOP wants to win the general election!)

I don't know if these stats have already been posted, but they seem to refute the big-city-small-town explanation for the discrepancies we're seeing. If the sample is limited just to towns with between 500-800 votes, the only two candidates on either side whose totals seem statistically anomalous are Clinton and Obama; the opti-scans seem to have given her a significant bump.

By the way, if there was vote fraud in this case, I hope it was a hacker; if it were, then presumably the paper ballots haven't been tampered with.

This is all so interesting. I wouldn't bet money on the recount producing a change in the results . . . but I almost want it to, so that sites like this, and the whole vote-counting issue, will start getting some attention.

Don't forget that swapping votes between 2 candidates could happen by a programming error. It's happened before. We aren't necessarily jumping to cracy conspiracy theories. If the software was programmed uniformly with the same mistake (Clinton = Obama, Obama = Clinton) and tabulated that way, it's not a conspiracy, just shoddy work by the voting machine company.

I hope we can get a hand count done of at least some precincts. The voters should be confident that their votes were counted correctly. A legitimate winner shouldn't have to deal with doubt about the integrity of the election.

Bill Marc and Catherine appear to be reading "the blog", they get it.
Good job guys destroying Snow.
See how Snow conflated the term "vote fraud" with "election fraud" ?, if people keep using that term it enables them to disenfranchise poor elderly voters.

And then Snow job says how crazy it sounds that the R's want to run against Hillary.
Of course they do, they will do anything to get her nominated, she is their get out the vote ticket

My idea of The Plan is if they get her nominated and a left indy comes in later on, we end up with Johnny pecker in the hand McCain.

And it wouldn't surprise me if he takes Lieberman as his running mate

I have one HARSH thing to say.

When the public finally gets it, finally understands, I have one thing to say to all those people that dis'd my ass.

REMEMBER ME MOTHERFUCKER!?
I TOLD YOU SO.

Bill M, Mark C, and Catherine C take a level headed position on this issue. Good.

It does, however, worry me when such "wisdom" is nothing more than the obvious.

Snow Job is so naked, where is Snottie?

phil . . exactly . . i was so distraught yesterday as to whether anyone else is thinking what we here are thinking that i could barely function at work, and when a client of mine inquired what was wrong, i laid it on her about the suspected election fraud in NH. It took me 20 minutes to give her the background history on the machines, the republicans SOP(cheating, stealing, lying etc) and after all my words, she said that she thought everything was as it seems, that the voters just sudenly changed their minds, lied to pollsters and that al the polls were wrong, and one could never trust polls but always trust those who count the votes. (!!!!!)

Bill Maher gets it, and it was great to hear a celebrity express exactly what I suspected on TV.

I have lost count on how many times I have said "I TOLD YOU"

why should anyone listen to us anyway, just because we pour hours and hours a day sifting through all the available data to get to the truth of our government .

New Hampshire is getting ready to prove that the Diebold machines were accurate. Then what are you silly conspiracy theorist going to say?

http://www.news.com/8301...9226-7.html?tag=nefd.top

{ED NOTE: Um, lessee... how about, "Thank you, Mr. Kucinich, for standing up for American democracy --- when folks like M.L. Cook were busy trying to undermine it --- in order to ensure the voters that their ballots were actually counted and counted accurately"? Does that work for ya? --BF}

Why are the dems. so sure that nothing will turn up after a recount. Alaska never showed the '04 election results to their dem. party..finally destroyed them. Ohio destroyed quite a bit of evidence too. ..as well as Fl. If there is nothing that is provable why break the law so obviously? Haven't seen Bill Mahr but KO did a decent show last night. I was just trying to get his email address to ask him to put Brad on. Why not have an expert? Wish you would post it Brad.I'm not a tech savvy.It isn't about you ..it is democracy.

{ED NOTE: The KO video you mention was already posted yesterday right here by Alan Breslauer --- BF}

Thanks for correcting me, it is not "voter fraud", but "election fraud". Way more serious in my opinion. I, too immediately thought something just was not right, but couldn't get any traction on the Obama website. But found you here and everyday it gets clearer and clearer.

Personally, I believe the Clinton "firewall" was burning down around them and President Clinton had to resort to his ace in the hole. These optical readers he knew would produce the results he wanted. Remember what he said, "I can't make her younger, I can't make her taller, and I can't make her male..." but, he could make her a winner! Think about it, this contract was let during his presidency and I would bet he has ties to the ex-convict drug dealer owner.

Just my 2 cents.

Rose colored glasses on:

Would that each Democratic candidate in the primary race take turns getting complete recounts done of each primary held with ballots. Likewise for the Republicans.

I can't think of a better way to get the message out about the state of our voting system and it would show each candidate cares about the most vital issue of representative democracy.

Share the burden, share the bad spin from the MSM, but share a conviction to do everything they can to make the primary as clean as possible.

Rose colored glasses off now.

Since exit polls are taken after the voter has voted, theories based on voters changing their minds don't hold water.

As bejammin075 suggested, there could have been a programming error. During the recount, all they'd need to do to rule out this theory is to hand count a few ballots and compare that count with the scanner's.

A manipulated count isn't only bad for Obama. It could work against Clinton in one of two ways.

First, it would indicate that the NH vote can be falsified. In the General Election, whoever gave the primary to Clinton could give it to the Republican candidate instead.

Second, if fraud is proven shortly after the Democratic convention, but the true perpetrators are not determined before Election Day, the Republicans could frame Clinton. Instead of having to manipulate the count in several states, which might be detected, they could simply convince enough voters that she's a cheat to win the election the old-fashioned way, slime.

If I were Hillary, I'd be demanding a full investigation right now, before the recount.

Hey Cook, I'm going to say it's still rigged no matter what they come up with.

Until they use the ballot scanners for the preliminary totals, then count ALL the ballots by hand and compare the two for the official totals it will always be rigged in my eyes.

evidently you haven't read this blog much

It was disheartening watching Snow take control of the conversation by bs'ing about those at on the show "not knowing enough about it to discuss it". Even Maher folded on that comment. If Snow can do this to someone like Maher on his own show, it sure makes it easy to understand how easy the public is manipulated.

Thanks to BradBlog, I immediately caught that snaky "voter fraud" fraud.

When Snow exclaimed, "None of us really knows what we're talking about!" ... well, gosh, that was a lightbulb moment. Especially for Snow, which he demonstrated by bringing voter ID cards into a discussion about electronic voting machines. Those Republicans are hellbent on keeping any substantive discussion on election fraud away from the actual perpetrators and on all those criminals lurking around precincts and voting multiple times and under aliases (except that there's so little evidence of this actually happening that it's absurd to bring it up!!!)

Why aren't Brad Friedman and Debra Bowen in on these discussions?! THEY know what they're talking about!!!

Brad, finally your dogged work with election fraud is reaping some rewards, and attention. It's been seven years since the topic was introduced to the internet readers by YOU (and Bev Harris ). Now if we can get you two to discuss this critical issue with Keith Olbermann for even half of Countdown's daily hour of news, America will begin to understand why we will lose our democracy if this election fraud is not fixed immediately. As long as republicans, and Americans in general, believe that Bush was ever elected, the farce of the last seven years will never be understood. The perps of crimes against US citizens will neither be prosecuted nor the policies reversed. You've done so much already, but this area in my opinion trumps all other areas candidates are running on, because it stands in the way of our ever being able to remove republican authoritarian rule. Thank you for everything!

Brad, if you and/or Bev Harris are successful at getting some primetime attention, I urge you to include Debra Bowen. She will absolutely cement all the work that you and Bev and all the others have been doing, in a way that I don't think anyone else could do.

She's an elected public official, extraordinarily intelligent, highly and visibly reputable, and to whom no other motives can be assigned, other than that she's a member of the Democratic Party, which I would just LOVE to have brought up, since THAT is what those swift-boating Republican Party operatives relish doing.

Ok, now I forgive Maher for telling me to take prozac because I don't believe the "official" story regarding 9/11.

Listening to Tony Snow reminded me of the lobbyists in "Thank You for Smoking". Their job was not to inform, but to disinform, confuse, diffuse the issues. Tony makes a great lobbyist for the Repugs. He is so in the right place with Faux News.

M.L. Cook #10 said, "New Hampshire is getting ready to prove that the Diebold machines were accurate. Then what are you silly conspiracy theorist going to say?"

I can't speak for any "silly conspiracy theorist," but I'll be happy that they made sure the votes were counted correctly and that an extremely unlikely outcome was investigated.

On a side note, you're certainly entitled to your unreasonable faith in the machines, but you aren't proving any points by calling names.

GWN, I'm glad he's on the right side of this issue, but I'm not forgiving him until he apologizes.

WHHHooOOOHHHeeeandHHHEEEHOOOooEY~! Oh, my dear BRAD! I was so invigorated by this clip--FINALLY this info reaching an UNPRECEDENTED MASS AUDIENCE on HBO; championed WELL and so RATIONALLY by Bill Maher--can't BELIEVE I just watched SNOW FREAK OUT and 'show' his 'tells' like that!! (gulping/ nervously sipping from his mug o' lies/ going on the attack using VOTER FRAUD as a sick ploy).
What happened to his award-winning, smug n' puckered, squirrely lil'poker face? HMMMMmmm? I've watched this clip twice just for the pure joy of watching it unravel, right before my very weary, teary eyes.

Thrilling to see "hand counted paper ballots" get and APPLAUSE BREAK!~! WHHHOOOOOW--so excited I jumped up and down without my bra on and almost gave myself a black eye. Oh! yes...THIS is beginning to resemble the great country I remember.

Oh, my Uber-wonderful, Super-creative, Fiesty, Constitution-lovin', Brave Statiticians/ Analysts/ Whistleblowers, my wonderful BRADBLOG BROTHERS AND SISTERS--this NH issue is exploding (slowly, I know) maybe 'seeping' is a better word, into the national consciousness. Our efforts here may help guide this processs in a way we have always HOPED it might, but have not seen play out. MORE PEOPLE THAN EVER ARE WATCHING THEM, NOW!

I mentioned this before, but so many WORTHWHILE posts have ballooned here in recent days it might be worth re-examining:

We here all know we have no answers for our course of action beyond CATCHING them cheating, which we've already done many, many times. It doesn't seem to matter. They have many ways around LAWSUITS/ AUDITS/ and RECOUNTS, and Congress is utterly flacid.

Those very real concerns aside, (and thank GOD we have the likes of a BEV HARRIS and a NANCY TOBI to help us navigate this tricky, sicky, loaded game) still, I am VERY curious to see what happens when they try this shit with SO MANY OF US WATCHING THEM???...That is the only possible scenario in all their evil scheming I bet they didn't count on or prepare for.

TWO MORE THINGS:
re: KUCINICH/ HOWARD N.H.recount efforts. Disturbing report in the AP this morning, that no one HERE will be surprised by:
"...Both candidates agreed in writing late Friday to pay the full cost of the re-counts, Secretary of State William Gardner said. Both could back out when they get the estimates, expected next week. Candidates who finish more than 3 percentage points behind the winner must pay the estimated full cost of a re-count before it can begin. The cost is refunded if the requester wins or is shown to be within 1 percentage point of the winner..."

So, once again, it looks to me like their first way of blocking this effort, or buying more time to get their FAKE BALLOTS in place, is going to be inflating the cost. Again, no shocker to a BRAD BLOG reader.

I suggest we give as graciously as we can to BOTH CANDIDATES (although if you have reasons for just giving to ONE, I get it) and to BRAD. The link for the GRANNY WARRIOR FUND, which has been posted here several times, I think, is here:
http://grannywarrior.chipin.com/recount

They have already collected 32,000.oo dollars, with the EXPECTED cost/ goal being 65,000.oo.(I'm not sure how to give to KUCINICH--does anyone know if they have a link up, yet?...)As for me, I'm giving a donation to all three/ as I happen to think it's the best money I'll ever spend and it's not nearly enough.

Also this: BRAD is going to get increased traffic here/ his workload this year will pick up dramatically (already has). I have been referring all my contacts to BRAD in the last few weeks; many of them know very little about ELECTION FRAUD. (In fact, many of them still mistakenly referring to it as "vote fraud"/ gently reminding them there is a BIG distinction.)

Let us continue to be good citizens/ above the political frey. They will be looking to the people here, already are, to make informed decisions. They could do no better.

In fact, that is exactly what I prayed for every night before descending into fretfull nightmares. That, and TONY SNOW having a meltdown on HBO under the quick and caustic wit of BILL MAHER...

...maybe we should all give BILL a call/ write him on behalf of BRAD/ move mountains to get BRAD on the show.

...does anyone here know if this is a state-wide recount, or just a random audit percentage? Who determines that?...
and:
Could it/ is it possible for them to pre-load/ rig the recount with phony ballots if it IS state-wide? That's a lot of math. And money. Money leaves a verifyable paper-stink, even if the ballots don't.

I know they have the resources, but do they have the TIME?...I guess that's what they're doing right now?...Who do we have on the ground in NH, Bev/ besides the amazing Mrs. Tobi, who I'm sure is working her tail off right now? Anybody up there willing to do some dumpster digging at their local elections office?...NOW WOULD BE THE TIME FOR THAT, if the time for that has not already passed; and get your FOIA stamina up, N.H.!

Jeannie (and anyone else), if you'd like to donate to the Kucinich effort, try here: http://www.dennis4presid...ty-of-our-voting-system/

BEJAMMIN075 said:

Don't forget that swapping votes between 2 candidates could happen by a programming error. It's happened before. We aren't necessarily jumping to cracy conspiracy theories. If the software was programmed uniformly with the same mistake (Clinton = Obama, Obama = Clinton) and tabulated that way, it's not a conspiracy, just shoddy work by the voting machine company.

See, this is what doesn’t make any sense. I wonder how many banks have contracted with Diebold for their ATM machines? How many complaints have the Diebold ATMs (other than usage fees) generated by users and the banks themselves? If Diebold has been successful in creating secure, reliable, accurate ATM machines, then what the hell happened with the voting machines? If Diebold knew how to program secure banking transactions in ATM machines, they have absolutely no excuse whatsoever for shoddy, poorly constructed, easily hackable voting machines. Did they hire a team of monkeys to design and program them? I’d like to know who from Diebold programmed ATMs and who programmed the voting machines. Was it the same people or different teams?

On a happier note, watch Tony Snow get confronted with the impeachment question (since no one from the lamestream media ever would, except when it came to Bill Clinton—then they LOVED, LOVED, LOVED IT):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjKomnvxuQA

- Tom

The election eve story Brad wrote described a sizeable number of other states giving exclusivity to the same privatized counting company. I wonder if Brad has time to write about these other states before their primaries, so, if there is a 'greengrocer finger on the scale' we might sketch an advance picture of the amount of disingenuous "counting" it will take to shift the winner to the partymachine candidate.

We also know of recent Republican organized giving to third party candidates as a way to prevent the strongest Democratic party favorites from reaching the final election, or as a way to spoil the margin of victory.

PartyMachine deception is as old as the voting process; and gear that has the potential for actually registering the votes as cast likely is going to be a target of the backroom pols, whoever they are. While we seem to be in the early dawn of the election integrity initiative, well designed electronics soon will strengthen this central process of democracy, and will reshape the political parties, as well.

And, as OffTopic as the digression into voter ID was, we might recall how the Crawford-Rokita case argument this past week proceeded at the US SupremeCourt; AssociateJusticeScalia interrupted the plaintiff's counsel during his very first opening sentence; it is a sorry transcript to peruse, but worth understanding; this Supreme Court appears to be champing at the bit to do to the 2008 electoral process what it did in Y2K.

John Gideon of votersunite.org and blogs here, has 20 pages(pdf) showing optical scanner problems with Diebold, ES&S etc.

http://www.votersunite.o...e-Switchinginthenews.pdf

I don't think that we should be all that surprised by Tony Snowe's response. Look who he was working for, and specifically, *with*. He worked with Rove, who was probably behind a lot of this in the past three elections, so of course Snowe would try to divert it to "voter fraud" and "Real ID". If Maher had REALLY been courageous, he would have brought that up.

This administration and the Justice Department (the current one) are up to their armpits in this, and to not challenge the spokesman for this, was, well, disappointing. But this is not the first time, and it won't be the last. I wonder if the White House press corps will grow balls if we get a Democratic President? Somehow I doubt it rational to hold my breath on that one.

I'm glad Bill Brought it up though, and I'm really glad he had Crier on... who apparently is the town crier about this issue on Court TV.

Brad, we need you, Catharine and Mark Crispin Miller to be on the TV together about this issue!

Keep it lit!

The spirit of democracy at work. Kudos for all in the on going process of bring light to the dark merky world of election counting. Finally, taking the offensive, no longer in fear of failure. Its the system stupid!!! It not who wins, it how they won!

MAHER: We have so much debate, and there's so much interest in this election…but it all comes to naught if we can't trust what the result is.

I can't believe he has the gall to say this in '08. I mean Ohio '04 wasn't enough? Great, I guess we'll discuss the issues 5 years after the fact. Maher showed his hand(disinfo) with 9/11, what was that quote from Joseph Cannon. "Journalism delayed=journalism denied." The right side of the issue is in front of the problem, Maher is nothing more than late night comment, 5 years too late.

If this country had a chance, Bill would have Brad, Sibel, and Tom Feeney on the show.

NBC is excluding Dennis Kucinich from upcoming JAN. 15th NEVADA DEBATE:

http://www.dennis4presid...rom-presidential-debate/

{ED NOTE: Um, lessee... how about, "Thank you, Mr. Kucinich, for standing up for American democracy --- when folks like M.L. Cook were busy trying to undermine it --- in order to ensure the voters that their ballots were actually counted and counted accurately"? Does that work for ya? --BF}

ROFLMOA "undermine it". Is that the best that you can do???

You are confused, I am not trying to undermine Democracy, I am calling you on your silly conspiracy theory.

The fact is that I have been lobbing my Congressman and Senator to get NATIONAL Legislation passed for voter marked paper ballots.

Here we are 7 years removed from the 2000 election, and neither party is willing to pass such legislation. After all the whining and crying that we have had from the Democrats, you would think that this would have been high on their agenda.

In Ohio 2004, we had a chance to manually recount every Diebold machine in the state because EVERY machine used a voter marked paper ballot. Where were you? Did you call for a manual recount of those ballots? Where was John Kerry and the Democrat party? No where to be found. Where was the media? Again, no where to be found.

There were complains that voter marked ballots were used to steal Florida from Kerry in 2004, but a hand count by the Miami Herald found otherwise.

My bet that that New Hampshire will find that the totals are going to be within the margin of error for a hand count. They won't find "vote switching" or machines that were rigged.

Again, what are people like you going to say when Diebold in cleared in New Hampshire? Are you going to make up new conspiracy theories to cover you butts? OR are you going to man/woman enough to admit that voter marked paper ballots are the way to run an election?

Hey! Davis Fleetwood has something for us to do to help Dennis Kucinich. I admit that Davis makes me swoon, but it's really only because he's so wonderful....

Fantastic video, 99~! You're ACES! Thanks~I'm on it. In fact, I may just punch redial tonight thru Monday...

My boyfriend, a big Kucinich supporter, just fired this off to CHRIS TODD @
chuck.todd@nbcuni.com

"...Kucinich has been successfully written off and discredited and even castrated by media outlets and, subsequently, by the populous who depends on the media to inform them...JOURNALISTS should not make it their business to decide who the population should endow with credibility. Further, the press should make every reasonable effort to see to it that all views are given exposure and consideration...

"...Now, if it is true what I hear, that the mainstream media is motivated exclusively by business interests and that journalistic integrity has gone the way of the dodo, then I have another card to play: I urge you to contact your colleagues at Fox News and ask them what sort of fiscal hit they took from discluding Ron Paul in New Hampshire. Clearly, logistics came to play. And I can assure you that your entire organization (including, to my chagrin, Olbermann) will lose viewers if you do not reconsider. I , personally, will seek to dissuade your viewership and can realistically strip NBC of at least five hundred viewers. The chain reaction would depend on the ferocity of those five hundred. But I can guarantee five hundred. I hate to resort to blackmail, truly. But as your integrity slips, so does mine. And with the writer's strike still going strong I don't see how NBC can afford to take any chances with one of its only cash cows, right?...

"Thank you for your great coverage thus far. I hope this issue can be resolved so I can continue to look to you for my news..."

Thanks again, 99. I'll circulate this to everyone I know. We'll barrage them.

(And yes, your man DAVIS is a pepper-pot! LOVE the line re: RUSSERT's new buisiness cards: "WAR PIG." HA! Let's have some printed up and ready to go, just in case.)

#20

I think he said "Paxil" and I think he needs some now that he is an official "conspiracy theory" nut case tinfoil hat wearing goober. What? Could somebody not be telling the truth about our election system? I'm surprised that you hate America so much Bill. Think of the hurt you will bring Hillary. Think of Chelsea for God's sake. Quit helping Al-CIA-DUH.

M.L. Cook #34 --- WTF, dude!?!

Apparently you just decided to drive by without bothering to read anything on this site. Or if you did, you didn't understand it.

For one thing, it's great that you are in favor of hand-marked paper ballots. Guess what? So is pretty much everyone who is a regular visitor here. So you're barking up the wrong tree, pal.

If you want to be dickish about it, hey, knock yourself out. But be aware that it does make you look rather silly to pull the self-righteous attitude because everything you complain about has been covered by Brad and others here in depth --- yes, since the 2004 election.

If you'd taken the time to look around here, you'd know that Brad has not alleged fraud or rigging or a conspiracy at all, only that electronic voting systems are crappy and hackable and can't be trusted.

If the NH recount shows that the results were accurate, that's great! Hopefully they will realize that this outcry for transparency is going to dog them in every election until they pass the bill currently in the NH state legislature to require random audits of their op-scans. That doesn't go far enough, IMO, but it's a start.

Verifying the accuracy of any election is good thing, don't you think?

So, to answer your question, we'll be delighted that democracy was well-served, regardless of the outcome, because election results should always be verified.

twoofer!

nice one Pat, I hate those ficking CT nutcases.

BTW - do you think that Hillary's tears will be real when she begs the American people for forgiveness after being indicted by multiple grand juries?

Or do you think she will just stage the whole thing as another photo opportunity to precede her stealing yet another election for Rockefeller?

I often wonder if Billl will be by her side at that moment or will just say "screw it, I better protect my own butt from multiple investigations: "Why I turned down multiple opportunities to extradite Bin Laden.

"How I supported Greenspan's plan to pump and dump all wealth from the American people and create our current recession.

"How I bombed and genocided innocent children in Iraq and Bosnia.

"How I started the use of depleating the Social Security coffers.

"How I traded millions of Acres of America's land to the UN for their help in deceiving citizens into believing the economy was fabulous."

Your thoughts?

BTW - it is more important to track the criminals doing the chain of command for the recount. Their current lies and cover ups are going to really expedite Hillary's exposure for this serious slew of felonies. I really hope they keep planning more cover ups. The cover up is what got the Ohio guys in jail and forced Nixon to resign.

Cover Ups are awesome.

Hillary could have come out and totally supported the recount, but by not she is just like that officer that killed 2 of his wifes. Blowing off reality with laughs and hubris.

...right. And that's only scratching the surface. Maybe if Mitt gets elected he can ask Hillary if it's OK to go to war without a declaration of war from congress, since she is a lawyer.

correction: Mitt gets s/elected

Tony Snow and all these arrogant slimy scumbags should, at the very least. be courteous while they rape America.
Lose the condescending elitist shtick and maybe the mobs will give you an extra year or 2 before it's all over.

RON PAUL VS MEDIA WHORES VS CROSSDRESSING WARMONGERS

Pat, thanks for the correction, thought I was losing you there.

I mean what is wrong with checking the NAFTA agreements with lawyers prior to obeying the constitution? If NAFTA/UN/CFR says Bomb, we bomb! Some people is so ignant! Rockefeller is America and to disobey his orders, you hate America. Case closed!

Gosh darn it, it would just be nice to have some honest and fearless leaders tell us when they smell poo. Look! There's some poo there...and over there! Or if they stepped in the poo, or were pushed into the poo, want to wipe their shoes and tell us the twoof. That would be swell.029d

I'm glad they didn't hold back on Tony just because he has cancer. Four to one was fine with me too. These right wing parrots deserve everything that's coming at them.

Tony said nobody here knows what they're talking about to try and turn this subject into something complex. It's not and has never been complex. You should never put votes on privatized computers. Simple and easy.

I'd just love to see Brad on with John Fund. He's the right wing point guy on "voter" fraud, but he doesn't have the guts. Do you John?

... bejammin075 said on 1/12/2008 @ 12:57 am PT...

"Don't forget that swapping votes between 2 candidates could happen by a programming error. It's happened before. We aren't necessarily jumping to cracy conspiracy theories. If the software was programmed uniformly with the same mistake (Clinton = Obama, Obama = Clinton) and tabulated that way, it's not a conspiracy, just shoddy work by the voting machine company."
---------

Maybe the programming for those machines was done back when Clinton was presumed to be the leader and so they might've wanted all of Clinton's votes to go to Obama to make HIM the winner. But, since she fell after Iowa the whole thing was turned upside down and instead it made Obama the loser.

Crazier things have happened.

Zogby, the pollster, has published a preliminary theory about why their prediction was wrong. It could explain many of the oddities observed.

I've been making this point since the primary results came in: even if the Diebold results are verified in the hand-recount, New Hampshire's lax same-day registration requirements (see here) make it possible for out-of-staters to drive into New Hampshire, vote, and drive back to their home state. Yes, identification is requested at the polls, but it is not required to submit a vote. (Votes submitted without an ID are followed up on weeks after the polls close, but because the results are reported the same day, the momentum of the campaigns has already been affected and the damage to the election has been done.)

It is entirely possible that the New Hampshire primary was decided by over-zealous out-of-staters who decided to give their candidate a little bump.

The legality of these votes that the electronic scanning machines are counting (or not counting) need to be verified before we simply recount all the possibly illegal ballots cast.

Please look into this.

Reply to DES, #38

"If you'd taken the time to look around here, you'd know that Brad has not alleged fraud or rigging or a conspiracy at all, only that electronic voting systems are crappy and hackable and can't be trusted."

I have taken the time to look around here. In fact, I have corrected Brad on his facts. Of course, when I do, he make the claim that my statements are "dubious". When I provide links to the real facts, I never heard from him.

Further, only electronic voting systems??? Clearly YOU haven't taken the time to look around here. The New Hampshire recount is NOT of electronic voting machines, it a recount of VOTER MARKED PAPER BALLOTS.

New Hampshire banned electronic voting machines in 1994. Are you stating that Brad is making the false claim that those machines were used in this primary race??

The point here is history is on MY SIDE. In 2004, Ralph Nader asked for a manual recount of New Hampshire, the results found that these machines that used VOTER MARKED PAPER BALLOTS were accurate.

The same was found in Florida 2004 and their VOTER MARKED PAPER BALLOTS. The conspiracy theorist on the internet claimed these fundamentalist Christians, who were registered Democrats, would vote for Kerry. What a laugh. They hadn't supported national Democrats for several elections. But now all of a sudden, these Pro-Lifers were going to ignore their religion and voter of a Yankee Pro-Choice candidate.

The Miami Herald recount found that these machines that used VOTER MARKED PAPER BALLOTS were accurate.

Again, my bet is that this recount will show that the VOTER MARKED PAPER BALLOT machines were accurate.

Posting this on all applicable threads...

PLEASE NOTE:

This is not about Candidate A winning or Candidate B losing. This is solely about the hackable, unsecure voting machines (optical scan in NH) that have been investigated and proven to be crap and yet are still deployed to count the majority of elections in this country.

Whenever and wherever there is a discrepancy with electronic voting machines involved --- no matter how big or small the race, no matter if it's Repub or Dem --- Voting Integrity advocates look into it. It's what they do.

Please do not assume or assign motives, intentions or conclusions to anyone here that are not EXPLICITLY stated. Brad makes crystal clear that he doesn't care who won or lost, just that the results are ACCURATE. Period.

The site owner is not responsible for the opinions of commenters in this open forum. No endorsement of commenters' opinions is either intended or implied.

In addition, please note that The Brad Blog does not allege that fraud (or "rigging") has actually occurred --- only that the results of any contest that incorporates electronic voting systems should be subject to exacting scrutiny and independent verification prior to certification.

Thank you.