' ' '

: MediaTakeOut.com is hearing some disturbing chatter going around that Hillary Clinton may have rigged the New Hampshire primary vote. According to growing reports on both Democratic and Republican blogs, Hillary's surprising victory may have been caused by voter fraud.

Of course the mainstream media isn't trying to touch this story with a 10 foot pole. But we're not the mainstream media. And besides, while we're not quite sure we believe it, this is the kind of story that needs to be put out there.

PRIMARY CONCERNS
By Robert C. Koehler
Tribune Media Services

As the breathless sports coverage of the presidential primaries bursts around me this morning, I’m doing my best to resist surrendering to the contrived drama about “comeback kids” and the flying shrapnel of numbers and hold onto my troubled skepticism about the electoral process, or at least most of it.

First of all, before we get too enthusiastic about feminist solidarity or wax knowingly about New Hampshire Democrats’ traditional soft-heartedness toward the Clinton family, let’s ponder yet again the possibility of tainted results, which is such an unfun prospect most of the media can’t bear to remember that all the problems we’ve had with electronic voting machines — and Diebold machines in particular, which dominate New Hampshire polling places — remain unsolved.

Did the Hillary campaign really defy the pollsters? She had been trailing Barack Obama by 13 percentage points, 42 to 29, in a recent Zogby poll, as election watchdog Brad Friedman pointed out. And the weekend’s “rapturous packed rallies for Mr. Obama,” as the New York Times put it, “suggested Mrs. Clinton was in dire shape.”

So when she emerged from the Tuesday primary with an 8,000-vote and 3-percentage-point victory over Obama, perhaps — considering the notorious unreliability, not to mention hackability, of Diebold machines — the media might have hoisted a few red flags in the coverage, rather than immediately chalk the results up to Clinton’s tears and voter unpredictability. (Oh, if only more reporters considered red flags patriotic.)

The fact is, whatever actually happened in New Hampshire voting booths on Tuesday, our elections are horrifically insecure. For instance, Bev Harris, of the highly respected voting watchdog organization Black Box Voting, recently wrote that the Diebold 1.94w optical scan machines used in some 55 percent of New Hampshire precincts (representing more than 80 percent of the state’s voters) are “the exact same make, model and version hacked in the Black Box Voting project in Leon County (Florida)” a few years ago. They haven’t been upgraded; the security problems haven’t been fixed.

National, or at least media, denial about this situation doesn’t say much for the strength of our democracy.

And there's more. The political blog Prescue showed the difference between hand counted and machine counted votes.

By Percentage:

Method Hillary Clinton Barack Obama
Diebold Machines 53.23% 46.77%
Hand Count 47.47% 52.53%


By Votes

Method Hillary Clinton Barack Obama
Diebold Machines 82860 72807
Hand Count 18898 20912


By Number of Municipalities Won

Method Hillary Clinton Barack Obama
Diebold Machines 54 33
Hand Count 43 77



About 81% of the votes will be "counted" by the Diebold machines.

Tags:

Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Share to Email
blog comments powered by Disqus