Was NH voting e-hacked? Brad and Paul supporters want to know!

Thursday, January 10, 2008 at 06:49 PM

According to e-voting critic Brad Friedman over at Bradblog, even the MSM is having problems "buying" into how exit poll data...and actual results..don't appear to match.

Are we looking at Ohio again, mmmm?

And here we go:
Even the Exit Polls showed that Obama should have won, according to Chris Matthews on Hardball today. It's the first specific indication that we've seen that the raw, unadjusted Exit Poll data, which only corporate mainstream media folks, not mere mortals, are allowed to see, confirmed all of the pre-election polling which predicted an Obama win.


"Why were the polls taken, of people coming out of the booth, so off?," Matthews tries to ask his guests again and again. And again.

All of them twisted and turned and contorted and grappled and speculated, coming up with every possible unverifiable, backwards-engineered explanation, save for the one that must not be named. The 600 lb. canary in the virtual living room...the fact that no human being has bothered to check what was actually on NH's vast majority of ballots (80%) which were "counted" by error-prone, hackable Diebold optical-scan machines, all controlled by one bad, horribly irresponsible private company, who has no business being anywhere near a public election...

Before you say, gee, that sounds weird, ask yourself, where did we hear that story before? Gee, 2004? Where Kerry was blistering Chimperor and yet All Hat won anyways?


It gets weirder, especially for the Ron Paul crowd: Despite actually getting votes....they weren't reported!!!

From Slashdot:

"Multiple indications of vote fraud are beginning to pop up regarding the New Hampshire primary elections. Roughly 80% of New Hampshire precincts use Diebold machines, while the remaining 20% are hand counted. A Black Box Voting contributor has compiled a chart of results from hand counted precincts vs. results from machine counted precincts. In machine counted precincts, Clinton beat Obama by almost 5%. In hand counted precincts, Obama beat Clinton by over 4%, which closely matches the scientific polls that were conducted leading up to the election. Another issue is the Republican results from Sutton precinct. The final results showed Ron Paul with 0 votes in Sutton. The next day a Ron Paul supporter came forward claiming that both she and several of her family members had voted for Ron Paul in Sutton. Black Box Voting reports that after being asked about the discrepancy Sutton officials decided that Ron Paul actually received 31 votes in Sutton, but they were left off of the tally sheet due to 'human error.'"
Human error or.....software manupulation?

Yeah, I know, time to reline my ball cap with more foil, right? Another election butchered by Diebold?

I still keep remembering what was said not that long ago, loosely: "How do we explain that the exit polls, traditionally so very accurate...were so terribly wrong?"

You do if someone messes with the data, of course.

Stalin would be so proud!


You REALLY didn't think they wouldn't, did you? They want someone with high negatives in the Democratic party matched up against someone in the Republican party that is NOT RON PAUL. Ron is of course his own man and cannot be bought or sold. That's why the 'leak' of papers that have been published since 1992 that were just 'discovered' the day of the election. Not to hurt the election (they couldn't in one day) but to provide a PRETEXT for the vote fraud that occurred later that day. People even if you HATE Ron Paul and Obama too, you OWE it to AMERICA to see that this does not stand. First off, please post VOTER FRAUD into every place that will accept a quote. Second, ask CNN why they're not reporting this (I have).

This is absolutely ridiculous, frightening, and heartbreaking at the same time. America risks losing the possibility of having an honest, straight-forward, common sense man for their president. All because of some untrustworty box that counts votes. Since when did a piece of machinery become more trustworthy than an actual human being? I believe all votes should be hand counted by 3 different people, the results notorized and filed for public record in county offices. That way, the ANYONE, (and not just the puppet media) can have the ability to see the results. I'm tired of the media telling me who will win, and who I should vote for. The American people deserve a chance to be able to distinguish who they will cast their vote for based upon non-biased, INFORMATIVE news, not slanderous articles or videos that have the amazing ability to harm a candidate. This "entertainment" aspect to news is making me sick. Luckily for me, I am not easily brainwashed by these puppets that dance around on TV saying what they are told to by their network's corporate owner. I am voting for Ron Paul, even if I have to write in his name at the November election.

It really needs to be addressed now, because, how ever the primaries (or the general election) turn out, it's a done deal, as we have seen.
One idea would be to set up parallel voting outside of the precincts that have a history of ending up with questionable results. Apparently, parallel voting, previously tried out in San Diego, proved to be successful.
Any other ideas for 'in the field' action, as opposed to internet blogging, that hopefully could be implemented before the primaries progress much further????

"I am voting for Ron Paul, even if I have to write in his name at the November election."

That, then, would appear to be one method to kicking down the barn door to E-hacking the vote, visitors. Then, we sit back and bitch like festering sores on America's ass if, as with the Sutton thing I mentioned, it is not counted.

That Chris is upset impresses me. Lovely. The more this gets around, the better. Maybe someone out there, like yourselves, will get the idea: Diebold systems are prone to hacking, and whoever does this hacking is guilty of treason, IMNSHO.

The first step to ensuring that the vote announced at the end of the day reflects the votes cast during the day is to have some form of hard copy record of each vote.

Once you have that, there are any number of methods that might track down evidence of fraud. The simplest would be to wait until all the votes are tabulated and announced, then spring selective hand recounts in a healthy chunk of randonly chosen precincts (chosen only after the initial vote is announced), conducted by several people of different political persuasions (like recounts are conducted in most states).

Two authors had a more elaborate idea that was written up in a NY Times Op Ed a week or so ago. Every vote produces a coded written receipt, which does not identify the voter but does have a unique identifier. The final vote tallies from the machines are listed online, with every single coded vote listed separately, showing the code and who the anonymous voter voted for.

A random selection of the soded receipts are handed out to other voters, who take them home. These people check the written receipt vote against the online vote and bring any discrepencies to light.

There are other ways to doublecheck fraud, also.

Now how do we get the current crop of politicians to require a trustworthy system?

Stalin would be so proud!


"It's not who votes that counts
It's who counts the votes"

~Joey Stalin.

Diebold changed their name to Premier but like the fabled leopard could not change their spots. While the vast majority of votes in NH were indeed written ballots over 80 percent of them were read by an opti-scan device made by Diebold/Premier and easily hackable according to some. Not only that but there are apparently issues over the integrity of the chain of custody of sed ballots.

My guess is the powers that be realised that the corporately corrupted MSM would not dare touch the story and that any aspect of blogworld that picked up on it could be written off as malcontent cranks replete with tinfoil beanies.

Also the fact that the race was thrown to Hillary might raise a few eyebrows in disbelief. Suddenly Diebold is a fan of the Clintons? Critics might ask. Yes, yes they are. Hillary Clinton and John McCain are THE corporately pre-approved candidates in this race. Obama and Huckaberry are the two remaining populists.

Hell they didn't even finish counting the votes in Washington State before giving the state to McCain over der Huckster. I hate Huckaberry with a passion but realise that if they don't count the votes properly democracy is all but over.

As an aside I'm sure everybody by now has seen the Dipdive Will I Am music vid "Yes, We can" for Barack Obama. Prolly the best campaign ad this election season. The worst ad possibly EVAR is the new Hillary Shreds vid in which she has been been PSed into a VS1 parody.

In an attempt to seem hip and with it she reveals herself to be out of touch and past it. Too funny. Too true.

Here's a crumb folks. The FUNNIEST and most RIGHT ON anti ad EVAR!


Seriously, do yerself a favor and check it out.

Let's get viral, people!

08ama '08.

Be Well.

Seems suspicious that a very senior white house adviser recently left the white house to "spend more time with his family"....or was it to test various means of manipulating the votes in preparation for the next big one.
While the MSM wondered how they could have gotten their predictions so wrong for NH....they were so ignorant as to deny the legitimacy of the exit polling...."why didn't the voters tell how they really voted ...they were afraid of what their neighbors might think". Without any investigation into the validity of the situation...they tripped blindly on to their next assignment.
I believe NH was an experiment that paid off big time...they've shown again they can manipulate an election and no one will notice or care...except for conspiracy theorists...