OntheWilderSide

From the web-site: Legitgov

http://www.legitgov.org/nh_machine_vs_paper.html

Where Paper Prevailed, Different Results By Lori Price
09 Jan 2008

2008 New Hampshire Democratic Primary Results

Total Democratic Votes: 287,580
Machine vs Hand (RonRox.com) 09 Jan 2008

Hillary Clinton – Diebold Accuvote optical scan: 40.121%
Hillary Clinton – Hand Counted Paper Ballots: 34.703%

Barack Obama – Diebold Accuvote optical scan: 35.756%
Barack Obama – Hand Counted Paper Ballots: 38.785%

Machine vs Hand:
Clinton: 5.419% (15,584 votes)
Obama: -3.029% (-8,711 votes)

The difference between results from hand-counting and machine-counting do not necessarily signify that the machine-counting is wrong. Other factors may be involved. For example, voting machines may have been used in wealthier, more moderate neighborhoods. There may not be a causal connection between machine-counted ballots and differing totals. One cannot assume that machines are necessarily wrong while hand-counting is necessarily right. –Michael Rectenwald

–
Wild speculation and musings from Kimberly: What I find the most interesting about this, is to speculate about “if” it were true that someone messed with the results of the Diebold machines in New Hampshire to favor Hillary Clinton over Obama, then who would it have been and why?

So, what follows is all just silliness, but, it makes you think…Diebold has conflicts because it is connected to Republicans in some way…so why would anyone at Diebold want to make Hillary Clinton win over Obama?

Could it be because the Republicans want Clinton to be their opponent in the regular race (they think they can beat her)?; or could it be because the Republicans were afraid if Obama won, he would become president and be a progressive president?; or it could be because someone among the Republicans, or at the Diebold company itself wanted Obama to lose simply because they don’t want an African-American candidate out front?; or, could it be that we only just assume that because the Republican-influenced vote machine company stole the election for Bush, that that means the Democrats didn’t “like or agree” to that outcome?–maybe someone in the Democrats is in cahoots with the Republicans who steal elections? (In fact, Gore did not fight the 2000 election results enough, and Kerry barely challenged the 2004 results at all. (The Libertarians and Greens cared more about a re-count.)

Maybe it is all such a charade and the most powerful Dems and Reps in the shadow government choose the outcome of every election? This is all horrible speculation and conspiracy imaginings. But, I just wanted to think it out…why might something like this happen?

More importantly, regular people and electoral activists should realize the importance of poll-watching. And, also, someone should make sure that there are “exit polls” held in 2008, that are run by various independent media and researchers. Those kind of projects should be considered now: poll-watching programs and exit polling.

Filed under: presidential race, US Politics