Reply #111: There is no fucking EVIDENCE of tampering [View All]

This is not 2000 and 2004.

Show me counties where there are overvotes that number in the thousands, and I might believe you. Show me counties that were projected to go overwhelmingly for one candidate and inexplicably flipped, and I might believe you.

None of that happened here. The counties that were expected to go for Obama (mainly western NH), he overwhelmingly won. Clinton won largely due to rebounding support from women and in cities in southern NH where she was strong BEFORE IOWA. Whether or not you think the exit poll numbers were adjusted, the demographic breakdown reflects this and the result is explainable by events that took place on or before election day.

The question you should be asking is why polls showed such a dramatic shift in support in just a day or two in a state that Clinton was winning. The fact is, NOBODY would be asking this question if it was Clinton who was up in the polls and Obama came from behind to win it. They'd be celebrating the upset and talking about how the pundits were wrong and the people had spoken.

People are trying to disguise a partisan squabble as concern about election fraud. It cheapens the effort to expose the actual fraud that occurred in 2000 and 2004 and may occur again in 2008.