Diebold vote tally irregularities in the New Hampshire primary?! WHEEE!

[thewayne]

"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.'"

http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/10/1635225

I think everyone in the country should have to go to Washington, D.C. to vote by dropping a pebble in a box for their candidate of choice. Can't be much worse than what we have right now.

Comments

[fastlearner.livejournal.com]

While it doesn't address that particular Ron Paul instance, there is a pretty good explanation for why the voting machine percentages differ from the hand-counts: the hand counts were almost all in very rural areas, while the machines were in the more populated areas. There's almost always a difference in voting patterns between those.

On the difference between the pre-polling and the results, there are a lot of potentially valid reasons, including the number of people who feel like they should say they'll vote for the black candidate but who won't actually do it in the booth.