Diebold From The Democratic Side

[nc4rp]

the labels perpetuate the "divisiveness"

id like a liberal dose of conservation of our resources. and id like to conserve the liberal amount of liberty a free society enjoys.

WTH does that make me? a fringe extremist moderate?

 

[Sir Rhino]

Bah ... sleep is overrated

Hi Sir Rhino,

Welcome! I enjoyed looking at your graphs. They draw the picture of what we concluded ourselves the night of the election. It is so much easier to see with Clinton and Obama, which we looked at, but we were looking at Ron Paul and Guiliani too. If it's easy for you to do I'd like to see the same graphs with those two (RP and Rudy). Also, if you put all the candidates on your graph, I think you would see the same results with Romney and Guiliani running alongside Clinton, and the rest below. Some have postulated that votes may have been skimmed off all candidates electronically and given to those three, since everyone else is a loser under diebold.

1. Ron Paul vs Guiliani - no problem
2. Romney vs Guiliani - no problem
3. Some Democrat vs Some Republican - I have to think about how to do that for a little.

I also liked your first graphs which showed spikes by towns. Those spikes are kind of odd, don't you think, especially since they are all small towns? I'd like to get the names of all towns that spike like that, and see if any other candidates are spiking like that, so maybe put all candidates on your list and see what happens. I don't know if it means anything, but it would be interesting to look at.

Those spikes are an illusion, caused by the fact that there is no connection between the name of the town and the number of votes cast. Technically, I think you could call it a noise pattern.

Some have suggested that people are voting differently in cities where the diebold is likely to be used than in the rural areas where hand counting is likely. I suppose this might be true, but really, all of NH has a pretty rural feel to it, even the few big cities. But we might want to flesh that out a little more too by looking at the population of our diebold towns.

We've also talked about that possibility. The question was "Why did Obama do better in rural areas of NH, especially since he did better in urban areas in Iowa?"

Nobody could think of a good answer.

Anyway, it might all have reasonable explanations, but I think it's prudent to make sure. I'll be sending money to your man, Dennis, to help with the recount. He's a good guy and the only Democrat I can tolerate.

Yeah, you're right ... I need to do that too.

Thanks

Glad we can all work together on this!

Same here Molly

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

Yeah - vote fraud is a big problem, but as an Obama supporter, I'd like to ask you WHY you like Obama?

I visited his site a few months ago, and his platform basically read - if you thought through it - give large corporations massive amounts of money and do nothing for the US population, other than make them poorer, and their offspring poorer for ringing up debts we can not afford.

He (Obama) is a very good public speaker - he speaks for "change", yet never really gets into what this change is all about. He promises "free" health care - but someone has to pay for it. It's called taxes and sometimes those are put off onto your offspring. Empire building always leads to financial collapse. It's not pretty - a lot of people die and there is long lasting poverty and misery. We are talking THIS COUNTRY!

What can you tell me he is going to SPECIFICALLY do to make our lives better? "Free" health care - at the expense of the Government - who provides the money to the government? - well, you do! It's called taxes! - You pay for it! and in a monopoly there is massive waste. What about getting out of Iraq? Obama isn't offering that any time soon - he's promising we will be in there as a minimum - a very long time! Past his first year term - over 5 years of this hell, and stirring international dissent into something that could really go off in our faces!

Our economy is based on printing dollars, causing inflation and borrowing money from China and other countries!

Don't you get it? Were is Obama on these issues?

-n

 

[Sir Rhino]

Yeah - vote fraud is a big problem, but as an Obama supporter, I'd like to ask you WHY you like Obama?

I visited his site a few months ago, and his platform basically read - if you thought through it - give large corporations massive amounts of money and do nothing for the US population, other than make them poorer, and their offspring poorer for ringing up debts we can not afford.

He (Obama) is a very good public speaker - he speaks for "change", yet never really gets into what this change is all about. He promises "free" health care - but someone has to pay for it. It's called taxes and sometimes those are put off onto your offspring. Empire building always leads to financial collapse. It's not pretty - a lot of people die and there is long lasting poverty and misery. We are talking THIS COUNTRY!

What can you tell me he is going to SPECIFICALLY do to make our lives better? "Free" health care - at the expense of the Government - who provides the money to the government? - well, you do! It's called taxes! - You pay for it! and in a monopoly there is massive waste. What about getting out of Iraq? Obama isn't offering that any time soon - he's promising we will be in there as a minimum - a very long time! Past his first year term - over 5 years of this hell, and stirring international dissent into something that could really go off in our faces!

Our economy is based on printing dollars, causing inflation and borrowing money from China and other countries!

Don't you get it? Were is Obama on these issues?

-n

Hokay, this is where I try to ballet dance through a mine field.

I'm not really an Obama supporter, although I do think he would do a light years better job in the White House than its current resident. This isn't saying much since I think any of the Democratic candidates would also be light years ahead of Chimp. (Yeah sure, I think Ron Paul would be light years ahead of Bush too.)

The only candidate I've sent money to is Chris Dodd. I liked the way he stayed in DC and derailed that Get Out Of Jail Free Card For The Phone Companies bill (at least temporarily) and the day after Bhutto's assassination he had a plan for moving ahead which was far superior to what was being suggested by other Dems (noticeably Richardson and Clinton). I think Dodd thinks 'outside the box' and I think he does it well.

But that's irrelevant ... he has a 0% chance of getting the nomination, so who's next?

I would most like to see Edwards get the nomination, for the basest of reasons. With Edwards I think the Dems would win, and win big. Not only do I think he would carry some swing states that the other Dems would not, I think the Dems would also pick up congressional seats that they otherwise would not.

I think the Democratic Party should concentrate on getting Bush and his evil neo-con minions out of power, first and foremost. Anything more than that is a bonus, and at this time, I'd rather not be trying for the first woman or first Black American president in history award.

My least favorite candidate is Hillary Clinton. I suspect that the neo-cons have been readying their artillery for years and are all set to broadside her continuously from the moment she gets the nomination until election day. With that they could actually get the contest close enough that they can steal another election with help from their buddies at Diebold.

I also haven't been that impressed with her record in the Senate. It's been ok, but that's all ... just ok.

Having just said that, I'm going to turn right around and say that I would really like to see the Dems remove Harry Reid of the burdons of the position and make Hillary the Senate Majority Leader.

Not only do I think she'd be good at it, but ... ahhhhh ... the poetry of it all.

 

[parocks]

Bah ... sleep is overrated

1. Ron Paul vs Guiliani - no problem
2. Romney vs Guiliani - no problem
3. Some Democrat vs Some Republican - I have to think about how to do that for a little.

Those spikes are an illusion, caused by the fact that there is no connection between the name of the town and the number of votes cast. Technically, I think you could call it a noise pattern.


We've also talked about that possibility. The question was "Why did Obama do better in rural areas of NH, especially since he did better in urban areas in Iowa?"

Nobody could think of a good answer.


Yeah, you're right ... I need to do that too.

Thanks



Same here Molly

Why did Obama do better in rural areas ...

That is a good question.

I'm guessing that there was voter fraud having nothing to do with diebold.

I'd guess that Clinton's GOTV was really, really good, and included voter fraud.

Apparently, you didn't have to be a resident of NH to vote. Is that right?
If so, I'd look for high Clinton counts near borders, near interstates. Did dead people vote? Democrats are known to do that. Walking around money. Were people bribed to vote? I heard things about the league of women voters. Did they have anything to do this?

These are the types of things to look at.

I'd say there is very little evidence to support any voter fraud related to Ron Paul, and the odd results surrounding the Obama/Clinton race could point to voter fraud. Obama was expected to win, and Clinton would be expected to do better in rural (hand count) areas, not urban (machine count) areas.

 

[parocks]

duplicate

 

[Sir Rhino]

Why did Obama do better in rural areas ...

That is a good question.

I'm guessing that there was voter fraud having nothing to do with diebold.

I'd guess that Clinton's GOTV was really, really good, and included voter fraud.

Apparently, you didn't have to be a resident of NH to vote. Is that right?
If so, I'd look for high Clinton counts near borders, near interstates. Did dead people vote? Democrats are known to do that. Walking around money. Were people bribed to vote? I heard things about the league of women voters. Did they have anything to do this?

These are the types of things to look at.

I'd say there is very little evidence to support any voter fraud related to Ron Paul, and the odd results surrounding the Obama/Clinton race could point to voter fraud. Obama was expected to win, and Clinton would be expected to do better in rural (hand count) areas, not urban (machine count) areas.

What is GOTV? I don't think I've heard the term before (*SR has the feeling he's about to feel really dumb*).

Can non New Hampshire candidates vote in the NH primary? I don't know, but I'd doubt it. I could be wrong though.

I get the distinct feeling that you think Hillary bussed a load of people in from out of state. I see it differently.

Right after Iowa, Hillary's campaign was about to implode. Obama seemed poised to sweep through the early states and probably the nomination. Now that Obama did not crush her in NH, her candidacy has gotten renued life. Without that her quest would now be spirling down into oblivian.

As I mentioned before, I think Diebold and friends want the fall election to be between McCain and Clinton, and they can't have that very well if she gets knocked out in the primaries.

That they interceeded so obviously is a measure of the desperation they felt at the possibility of losing their preferred target.

IMHO

 

[housebrand]

The checktevotes.com numbers seem to indicate that if the election was determined by ONLY the votes for Clinton vs. Obama, Clinton won the machine counts 52.9% to 47.1% -Obama won the hand counted areas by 52.8% to Clinton's 47.2% - Ron vs. Rudy has a similar, but not so close flip.

 

[Molly1]

Yes non New Hampshire residents can vote in the New Hampshire primary.

That's another dirty little secret we've uncovered from the underbelly of politicsfantasyland.

You just sign an affidavit saying you are intending on moving to NH.

We need to also find and count those affidavits.

Somebody remind Albert Howard.

Or let's not forget to do that ourselves.

 

[dannno]

What is GOTV?

"Get out the vote"

An active effort to actually get people out to vote, in this case, on the day of the election..


Speaking of neocons, Paul gave their full history, called them all out and named them by name in a congressional speech. Pretty intense:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYdxD8UgG3A&feature=related


(know your enemy )

 

[Molly1]

"Get out the vote"

An active effort to actually get people out to vote, in this case, on the day of the election..


Speaking of neocons, Paul gave their full history, called them all out and named them by name in a congressional speech. Pretty intense:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYdxD8UgG3A&feature=related


(know your enemy )

Thank you. That should be on a sticky.

 

[Wyurm]

Can non New Hampshire candidates vote in the NH primary? I don't know, but I'd doubt it. I could be wrong though.

I get the distinct feeling that you think Hillary bussed a load of people in from out of state. I see it differently.

I'm not saying this is what happened, but the USA Today came out with an article about this in November. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-11-27-iowa-nh_N.htm

It's not that this is what happened, only that it can happen.

DES MOINES (AP) — It's Jan. 3 in Iowa and you decide to go to a precinct caucus.
Not affiliated with a political party? Not registered? Not even old enough to vote?

No problem.

In yet another quirk of Iowa's caucus system, all citizens can participate as long as they sign a voter registration card, attesting to residency in the precinct and show that they'll be 18 by the general election.

"It has not been a problem," said state Democratic Party spokeswoman Carrie Giddins.

Some people, however, do have a problem with the ease of registering for New Hampshire's leadoff primary on Jan. 8.

New Hampshire allows same-day registration at the polls, has no minimum residency period and defines a voter's home as the place where he or she sleeps most nights or intends to return after a temporary absence. The state, not the parties, runs the primary, and changes to residency laws have been hotly contested.

More at the link above.

 

[parocks]

What is GOTV? I don't think I've heard the term before (*SR has the feeling he's about to feel really dumb*).

Can non New Hampshire candidates vote in the NH primary? I don't know, but I'd doubt it. I could be wrong though.

I get the distinct feeling that you think Hillary bussed a load of people in from out of state. I see it differently.

Right after Iowa, Hillary's campaign was about to implode. Obama seemed poised to sweep through the early states and probably the nomination. Now that Obama did not crush her in NH, her candidacy has gotten renued life. Without that her quest would now be spirling down into oblivian.

As I mentioned before, I think Diebold and friends want the fall election to be between McCain and Clinton, and they can't have that very well if she gets knocked out in the primaries.

That they interceeded so obviously is a measure of the desperation they felt at the possibility of losing their preferred target.

IMHO

Hillary's campaign knows all the GOTV tricks. Michael Whouley ran her GOTV
effort in NH, as he did for Bill in 92, Gore in 2000, Kerry in 04. He knows how to make the numbers big, how to win.

Democrats are legendary cheaters about getting votes. Typically this takes place in cities. Dead people vote for democrats. Democrats bribe people to vote for them. They have probably developed methods that have yet to be discovered.
Busing in people from out of state might be one of them. I don't know all the tricks, but I can tell you that Whouley might be the biggest expert there is about
voting tricks in NH.

The likelihood of voting fraud in these old fashioned ways by Hillary Clinton is greater than diebold related fraud. There's little to evidence at all of any of this, though. I'm just making a guess.

 

[Sir Rhino]

I got the first 4 graphs for Ron Paul vs Ghouliani.

So it looks like your guy also did better in the 'rural areas'.

 

[Berri]

I got the first 4 graphs for Ron Paul vs Ghouliani.

So it looks like your guy also did better in the 'rural areas'.

WOW!

I think it is way past time not knowing Diebold Ceo's ph number and email address so we can ask him about his thoughts on these results.

 

[Sir Rhino]

Howzabout I work on McCain vs Romney next?

 

[hillertexas]

bump

 

[Sir Rhino]

Here are the ones from McCain vs Romney

This is really surprising ... Romney did better in Diebold districts than the Hand districts. I'm at a loss to explain this. Maybe either votes were not sloughed off of Romney and given to McCain, or my approach is wrong.

I donno

**************

Maybe the thing to do at this point is look at the individual candidates and see which ones did better with Diebold and which did worse.

 

[Molly1]

Here's an interesting factoid:

In 2008, 2004 and 2000, towns and cities using ballot-counting machines skewed toward Democratic primary winners Clinton, John Kerry and Al Gore, while those where ballots are hand-counted went to second-place finishers Obama, Howard Dean and Bill Bradley.


What a surprise, the diebold vote skews towards the primary winners going back to the year 2000, and the hand counts skew towards the losers.

ROFL!!!

Those country voters just can't pick winners.

What's sad is that we could have seen this anomaly 8 years ago at the very least...

 

[Molly1]

Here are the ones from McCain vs Romney

This is really surprising ... Romney did better in Diebold districts than the Hand districts. I'm at a loss to explain this. Maybe either votes were not sloughed off of Romney and given to McCain, or my approach is wrong.

I donno

**************

Maybe the thing to do at this point is look at the individual candidates and see which ones did better with Diebold and which did worse.

Mccain did better in the hand count than he did in diebold.

Mccain lost percentage under diebold. But he was still way ahead of the pack and finished in first place.

Romney did better on diebold than he did by hand. He still ended in second place but with more percentage (+7) under diebold than by hand.

I already told you this result. Everyone lost percentage under diebold except for Romney, Hilary, and Guiliani.