Diebold From The Democratic Side

[Sir Rhino]

Sir Rhino, we already did this without graphs the night of the election. Have you seen that link that shows the differential between hand and diebold for all the candidates? I've lost track of it at the moment. It shows the quantitative effect of diebold for each candidate.

It showed that every candidate lost votes under diebold except for Romney, Guiliani (which bumped him above Paul), and Clinton (which bumped her above Obama). Those three gained votes under diebold.

If you haven't seen that work, you need to see it.

Guiliani isn't showing up on your graph because it was such a small effect, but it was enough to bump him above Paul since Paul also lost about 2.2% under diebold.

Guiliani and Paul look the same as Clinton and Obama. Clinton got a big positive effect from diebold and Obama got a big negative effect, and the result was Clinton won the election.

You have to look at it as a whole, both parties, all major candidates.

What is most signifigant in my mind is that there is a "diebold effect" for every candidate. And the diebold effect determines the outcome of the election for Clinton, Obama, Guiliani, and Paul. It changes their order in the pack.


.

I took a look at those numbers and I should be able to duplicate all of them from my distributions. If I can't, then either my mathematics is wrong or we're not seeing the same raw data.

I'm not saying we've disagreements here, only that I should check to see if we do.


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

It seems to me that graphs like the ones we get with Clinton vs Obama and Ron Paul vs Guiliani may indicate an election which was overturned by the diebold effect. It would be wise to check out all the other possible candidate combinations to see if that pattern reemerges somewhere.

It would make sense for there to be a noticeable difference in the overturned election graphs, since probably the theft occurs by taking all the votes from one candidate and giving them all to another ... more bang for the buck ... Ron Paul and Guiliani are dead even and a vote is stolen from RP and given to G. Ron Paul is now two votes behind.

So in doing it with the fewest number of stolen votes, they may have left their 'fingerprints' on the results.

 

[Fight-n-Mad]

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

She's talking about looking at numbers and trying to find strange patterns.
I don't think that the diebold vs hand count thing is worth investigating in this particular case.
ge
I'm talking about investigating the voter fraud that took place in Manchester Ward 9, based on what the poll watcher saw in Manchester Ward 9.

If I was looking at numbers to try to guess where the fraud was taking place, I'd start with those areas where, on a percentage basis, Hillary did better than Obama - the ratio of Hillary to Obama. In Manchester Ward 9, the ratio of Hillary to Obama was high.

I'd also look at places where the gap between Hillary and Obama was high in terms of raw votes. I believe that over 1,000 votes separated Hillary and Obama in Salem.

But, we know that vote fraud took place in Manchester Ward 9 based on reliable eyewitness accounts.

I'd try to prove the fraud by getting the affidavits that people signed in Manchester Ward 9, and then going to the locations that people said they lived, and making sure that those people actually lived there.

You seem fixated on Hillary/Obama. The numbers show the same kind of pattern for Romney in the more populated areas, and those areas just happen to be the ones where the optiscam machines were being used. This pattern is one thing that alerted us to the possibility of something odd, but it might not have anything to do with the machines. It could all be explained by non-residents coming into the state to vote, and they would be most likely to go to the more populated areas to do that.

Who "won" isn't quite as significant as who might have bussed in large numbers of voters from outside the state, increasing their percentages, and effectively stealing votes from the other candidates by causing them to capture lower percentages of the total. Remember, this isn't just about who placed first, it's about delegates. Someone who takes second in all the states could win the nomination if first place wasn't always taken by the same person, couldn't they?

 

[parocks]

I don't think you understand.

We have what is close to proof of voter fraud, and it has nothing to do with Diebold machines.

One of the Ron Paul poll watchers saw van load after van load of people come in without any form of identification, they all talked about voting for Hillary, and they all were able to vote even though they showed no form of identification.

That's voter fraud.

That would be voter fraud whether the ballots were hand counted or machine counted.

We saw the voter fraud with our own eyes.

Look at the affidavits. Do the affidavits match up with actual people living in Manchester Ward 9? If not, then the person filling out the affidavits is guilty of voter fraud.

It was Hillary who got these people to commit voter fraud.

It's all very simple.

I'm following up on real, actual evidence of voter fraud provided by a Ron Paul poll watcher.

I'm not talking about a "pattern", which could exist for any number of reasons.
I'm talking about real evidence of voter fraud committed by Hillary.

What alerted me to something odd was a live Ron Paul poll watcher saying "I witnessed something odd, I witnessed voter fraud"

The "non-residents" were taken to the polls in vans. They were coordinated by the Hillary campaign.

I think I agree that it's bad when people who are not eligible to vote actually vote.
That's why it's either a felony or a misdemeanor to do so, and subject to a $5000 fine. Yes, it does effect the order of the candidates, the delegates, the story about the primary, any number of things.

You seem fixated on Hillary/Obama. The numbers show the same kind of pattern for Romney in the more populated areas, and those areas just happen to be the ones where the optiscam machines were being used. This pattern is one thing that alerted us to the possibility of something odd, but it might not have anything to do with the machines. It could all be explained by non-residents coming into the state to vote, and they would be most likely to go to the more populated areas to do that.

Who "won" isn't quite as significant as who might have bussed in large numbers of voters from outside the state, increasing their percentages, and effectively stealing votes from the other candidates by causing them to capture lower percentages of the total. Remember, this isn't just about who placed first, it's about delegates. Someone who takes second in all the states could win the nomination if first place wasn't always taken by the same person, couldn't they?

 

[Fight-n-Mad]

I don't think you understand.

We have what is close to proof of voter fraud, and it has nothing to do with Diebold machines.

One of the Ron Paul poll watchers saw van load after van load of people come in without any form of identification, they all talked about voting for Hillary, and they all were able to vote even though they showed no form of identification.

That's voter fraud.

That would be voter fraud whether the ballots were hand counted or machine counted.

We saw the voter fraud with our own eyes.

Look at the affidavits. Do the affidavits match up with actual people living in Manchester Ward 9? If not, then the person filling out the affidavits is guilty of voter fraud.

It was Hillary who got these people to commit voter fraud.

It's all very simple.

I'm following up on real, actual evidence of voter fraud provided by a Ron Paul poll watcher.

I'm not talking about a "pattern", which could exist for any number of reasons.
I'm talking about real evidence of voter fraud committed by Hillary.

What alerted me to something odd was a live Ron Paul poll watcher saying "I witnessed something odd, I witnessed voter fraud"

The "non-residents" were taken to the polls in vans. They were coordinated by the Hillary campaign.

I think I agree that it's bad when people who are not eligible to vote actually vote.
That's why it's either a felony or a misdemeanor to do so, and subject to a $5000 fine. Yes, it does effect the order of the candidates, the delegates, the story about the primary, any number of things.

I think the difference between me and you is that you want to focus on the places that there is clear evidence. And although I do agree that that's a good idea, I would like to also look anywhere else that there could be more evidence. The thread where the person reported the unregistered voters coming in vans would not have happened if we weren't making a stink.

I think there needs to be people crawling all over every aspect of this thing like fire ants -- in every single state.

We don't need probable cause to inspect and verify. But we do need to be vigilant to keep our freedom.

I was just saying that Romney's votes follow the same pattern, and perhaps the same thing happened there. It's worth checking out. I wonder if there's a way to correlate the domicile affidavits with the party they registered with.

 

[Molly1]

I don't think you understand.

We have what is close to proof of voter fraud, and it has nothing to do with Diebold machines.

One of the Ron Paul poll watchers saw van load after van load of people come in without any form of identification, they all talked about voting for Hillary, and they all were able to vote even though they showed no form of identification.

That's voter fraud.

That would be voter fraud whether the ballots were hand counted or machine counted.

We saw the voter fraud with our own eyes.

Look at the affidavits. Do the affidavits match up with actual people living in Manchester Ward 9? If not, then the person filling out the affidavits is guilty of voter fraud.

It was Hillary who got these people to commit voter fraud.

It's all very simple.

I'm following up on real, actual evidence of voter fraud provided by a Ron Paul poll watcher.

I'm not talking about a "pattern", which could exist for any number of reasons.
I'm talking about real evidence of voter fraud committed by Hillary.

What alerted me to something odd was a live Ron Paul poll watcher saying "I witnessed something odd, I witnessed voter fraud"

The "non-residents" were taken to the polls in vans. They were coordinated by the Hillary campaign.

I think I agree that it's bad when people who are not eligible to vote actually vote.
That's why it's either a felony or a misdemeanor to do so, and subject to a $5000 fine. Yes, it does effect the order of the candidates, the delegates, the story about the primary, any number of things.

It's worthy of investigation. You're right.

 

[Molly1]

I think the difference between me and you is that you want to focus on the places that there is clear evidence. And although I do agree that that's a good idea, I would like to also look anywhere else that there could be more evidence. The thread where the person reported the unregistered voters coming in vans would not have happened if we weren't making a stink.

I think there needs to be people crawling all over every aspect of this thing like fire ants -- in every single state.

We don't need probable cause to inspect and verify. But we do need to be vigilant to keep our freedom.

I was just saying that Romney's votes follow the same pattern, and perhaps the same thing happened there. It's worth checking out. I wonder if there's a way to correlate the domicile affidavits with the party they registered with.

I think the best you could do is correlate by party, because they would pick a primary to vote in.

 

[alexa doherty]

Fraud is fraud, period.

 

[parocks]

I think the difference between me and you is that you want to focus on the places that there is clear evidence. And although I do agree that that's a good idea, I would like to also look anywhere else that there could be more evidence. The thread where the person reported the unregistered voters coming in vans would not have happened if we weren't making a stink.

I think there needs to be people crawling all over every aspect of this thing like fire ants -- in every single state.

We don't need probable cause to inspect and verify. But we do need to be vigilant to keep our freedom.

I was just saying that Romney's votes follow the same pattern, and perhaps the same thing happened there. It's worth checking out. I wonder if there's a way to correlate the domicile affidavits with the party they registered with.

I'd say that if there was a bunch of new voters registering Republican in a Romney stronghold, that would look like Romney did some voter fraud.

I'd argue that all of this talk about Diebold vote fraud hasn't really helped shine the light on evidence based voter fraud. It sorta hides the real stuff.

 

[Sir Rhino]

I know I'm going to regret this, but I'm an idiot ... I'm going to do it anyway.

I don't think Hillary had anything to do with the fraud, for reasons which you may have missed because you weren't looking in that direction.

Just before the NH primary, the Clinton campaign appeared to be in panic mode. There ws talk of getting rid of this person and that person and maybe bringing in Carvelle etc. There was talk of maybe skipping NC and concentrating on Super Tuesday. There was even talk about her contacting the superdelegates* to get 'appointed' presidential candidate by the party.

Immediately after the primary, they appeared to me to be shocked, like

We won?????????

Being the politicians they are, they recovered their footing pretty quickly and started taking advantage of the victory, but their initial reaction was one of surprise.

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

On the other hand, Diebold has a well documented history of manipulating election results (thank you Bev Harris). In fact a whole industry has grown up to support stealing elections and getting away with it. Investigating the possibility of election fraud is reasonable, especially considering the very surprising results in Clinton vs Obama.

I think you're chasing ghosts with the Clinton Brought In Vans Of Voters theory**, but it diesn't matter what I think. You think there's something there and for that reason you should investigate the possibility as best you can.

Likewise, I should investigate the possibility of election fraud because I think there's something there. The country has to benefit by our persuing our separate lines of inquiry.







* Due to the 1972 McGovern debacle, the Dems instituted the system of Superdelegates, made up of all current Democratic members of congress, Democratic Party big wigs, past Dem presidents, and such, who control 40% of the vote at the convention. It is possible for Hillary to be 39% behind Obama in terms of elected delegates and still get the nomination.

Fortunately for the party, these superdelegates have a history of going whichever way the wind blows ... which is as it should be. They're there to stop another McGovern, nothing more.


** Ya know, I first heard this Clinton Bringing In The Vans theory from Bill O'Reilly, which instantly made it suspect to me. In the world of BSers, Bill is a champ!

 

[fmontez]

Please! No more fraud posts! There was no fraud, but if you aren't sure you can just wait for the recount. Argh!!!

 

[dannno]

Please! No more fraud posts! There was no fraud, but if you aren't sure you can just wait for the recount. Argh!!!

Have you even looked at all of the evidence, or are you just that trusting of our system?

 

[John_Haigh]

It seems to me that graphs like the ones we get with Clinton vs Obama and Ron Paul vs Guiliani may indicate an election which was overturned by the diebold effect. It would be wise to check out all the other possible candidate combinations to see if that pattern reemerges somewhere.

It would make sense for there to be a noticeable difference in the overturned election graphs, since probably the theft occurs by taking all the votes from one candidate and giving them all to another ... more bang for the buck ... Ron Paul and Guiliani are dead even and a vote is stolen from RP and given to G. Ron Paul is now two votes behind.

So in doing it with the fewest number of stolen votes, they may have left their 'fingerprints' on the results.

Sir Rhino, did you post your analysis of Ron Paul v Guilani anywhere? Also did you do any analysis of Romney v Huckabee?

I think it is possible that Hilary might be an unknowing beneficiary of machine count fraud. Perhaps the manipulators want Romney and think Hilary might be easier to beat than Obama.

 

[dannno]

Sir Rhino, do you know anything about the Bilderberg Group?

 

[Sir Rhino]

Sir Rhino, did you post your analysis of Ron Paul v Guilani anywhere? Also did you do any analysis of Romney v Huckabee?

Specifically that match-up ... no ... so far all the Republican stuff is only here. All the Democratic stuff is also found on a liberal BBS.

I think it is possible that Hilary might be an unknowing beneficiary of machine count fraud. Perhaps the manipulators want Romney and think Hilary might be easier to beat than Obama.

The data sure is pointing in that direction.

 

[parocks]

Michael Whouley worked for Hillary in New Hampshire in 2008.
He worked for Kerry in 04
He worked for Gore in 2000.

He's the one who knows how to do this stuff.

If Hillary is gonna go out there and say "wink, wink, nudge nudge, we've got a secret weapon" that'll tip people off to the voting fraud.

And, I'm not trying to stare at data and try to imagine how it might mean fraud.

I'm saying that a Ron Paul Poll Watcher sat at Manchester Ward 9 and watched as van load after van load of people came in, all talking about voting for Hillary before signing a statement, and voting. They showed no ID whatsoever.

However surprised Hillary acted, this is what we saw on the ground, and it looks a lot like voter fraud.

The Democrats have a long history of voter fraud. Remember the Illinois results
in 1960, when Kennedy beat Nixon due to Chicago Mayor Daley's activities?
Much better documented than any Diebold allegations.

Remember, we have evidence of voter fraud in Manchester Ward 9 from our people.

I know I'm going to regret this, but I'm an idiot ... I'm going to do it anyway.

I don't think Hillary had anything to do with the fraud, for reasons which you may have missed because you weren't looking in that direction.

Just before the NH primary, the Clinton campaign appeared to be in panic mode. There ws talk of getting rid of this person and that person and maybe bringing in Carvelle etc. There was talk of maybe skipping NC and concentrating on Super Tuesday. There was even talk about her contacting the superdelegates* to get 'appointed' presidential candidate by the party.

Immediately after the primary, they appeared to me to be shocked, like

We won?????????

Being the politicians they are, they recovered their footing pretty quickly and started taking advantage of the victory, but their initial reaction was one of surprise.

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

On the other hand, Diebold has a well documented history of manipulating election results (thank you Bev Harris). In fact a whole industry has grown up to support stealing elections and getting away with it. Investigating the possibility of election fraud is reasonable, especially considering the very surprising results in Clinton vs Obama.

I think you're chasing ghosts with the Clinton Brought In Vans Of Voters theory**, but it diesn't matter what I think. You think there's something there and for that reason you should investigate the possibility as best you can.

Likewise, I should investigate the possibility of election fraud because I think there's something there. The country has to benefit by our persuing our separate lines of inquiry.







* Due to the 1972 McGovern debacle, the Dems instituted the system of Superdelegates, made up of all current Democratic members of congress, Democratic Party big wigs, past Dem presidents, and such, who control 40% of the vote at the convention. It is possible for Hillary to be 39% behind Obama in terms of elected delegates and still get the nomination.

Fortunately for the party, these superdelegates have a history of going whichever way the wind blows ... which is as it should be. They're there to stop another McGovern, nothing more.


** Ya know, I first heard this Clinton Bringing In The Vans theory from Bill O'Reilly, which instantly made it suspect to me. In the world of BSers, Bill is a champ!

 

[parocks]

Sir Rhino, did you post your analysis of Ron Paul v Guilani anywhere? Also did you do any analysis of Romney v Huckabee?

I think it is possible that Hilary might be an unknowing beneficiary of machine count fraud. Perhaps the manipulators want Romney and think Hilary might be easier to beat than Obama.

We have the EVIDENCE that Hillary was dragging in van load after van load of unregistered voters who got to vote after showing no ID whatsoever.

You have vague theories.

 

[Sir Rhino]

Sir Rhino, do you know anything about the Bilderberg Group?

I just looked it up on Wikipedia.

Here's my take ...

I don't care if there is a group of overlords, whether it is called The Bilderberg Group, The Trilateral Commission, or even Skull And Bones, pulling the strings and controling us all. They may or may not be there.

But I know Bush&Co exist and are evil. Their instincts are bad, their actions Unamerican, and their competence close to zero on matters which affect the rest of us.*

My focus is on getting Bush and his cronys out of political power. If I have to turn around and fight some other group of corrupt goons, because I haven't struck down the real heart of evil ... then so be it.

That Real Heart Of Evil may or may not be there ... I know Bush is there.




* "You and I could have done a better job of the Katrina cleanup than Bush did ... with paper towels."
- A friend of Keith Olbermann

 

[Sir Rhino]

We have the EVIDENCE that Hillary was dragging in van load after van load of unregistered voters who got to vote after showing no ID whatsoever.

You have vague theories.

If you can show that Hillary Clinton is guilty of voter fraud, then go for it ... take it as far as you can. I have no vested interest in seeing her get the nomination.

I have the same right to persue the possibility of election fraud perpetrated by LHS on Diebold equipment. You think the evidense is vague, I think it's pretty clear ... so we have a difference of opinion.

It's possible that both Hillary and LHS are guilty of fraud. If so, I hope we are both successful in our separate quests.

 

[badmp3]

Smoking GUN


Optical Scan
Clinton 91,717 52.9507%
Obama 81,495 47.0493%
Total 173,212

Hand Counted
Clinton 20,889 47.0494%
Obama 23,509 52.9506%
Total 44,398

 

[Fight-n-Mad]

I think you're chasing ghosts with the Clinton Brought In Vans Of Voters theory**


** Ya know, I first heard this Clinton Bringing In The Vans theory from Bill O'Reilly, which instantly made it suspect to me. In the world of BSers, Bill is a champ!

Could be a red herring... or not.