KOS: Fraud in South Carolina!

The pre-election poll average in New Hampshire was:

Obama 36.7
Clinton 30.4
Edwards 18.4

The final results were:

Clinton 39
Obama 37
Edwards 17

So the polls nailed Obama and Edwards, while Clinton picked up the undecided vote. But overall, it was about a 10-point difference between the polls and the actual results.

Of course, this launched the Mother of All Whines, with morons across the internet charging fraud without knowing what the hell they were talking about. But it was Clinton! And she won! And of course, that meant that her victory couldn't have been legitimate.

So let's go to South Carolina.

The pre-election poll average in South Carolina was:

Obama 43.1
Clinton 28.5
Edwards 17

The final results were:

Obama 55
Clinton 27
Edwards 18

So again, the polls pretty much nailed the second and third spots, but ... wait ... what's this? Obama got 12 points more than the polls indicated? Overall, the poll average was 14 points off from the final results, worse than in New Hampshire. So this could only mean ONE THING -- FRAUD!!!!!!!!

Did I mention that South Carolina uses ES&S touch screen machines with no paper trail?

But funny how there's nothing but silence out there. Is there any doubt that if the results were reversed, and if Hillary had outperformed the polls by 12 points, that people would once again be crying about fraud, demanding recounts in the Palmetto State, and concocting all manners of fantastical theories to rationalize their skepticism? Apparently, since Clinton didn't win South Carolina, the voting machines worked perfectly.

Perhaps the cries of fraud in New Hampshire had little to do with actual concerns about electoral integrity, and everything to do with irrational Clinton hatred and the pathological need to see dark conspiracies even were none exist?. (Apparently the Clinton cabal is capable of the darkest, most sinister conspiracies, but the Obama cabal is not.)

New Hampshire was crying "wolf!", and for all the wrong reasons. As a result, they did the legitimate cause of electoral reform few favors.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/29/10323/8025/682/444774

So there!

--p!

the better off everyone will be.

Saying Hilary is crooked is deliberately lying out of hatred.

and he did.

Obama was expected to win New Hampshire by a lot

and he didn't.

I'd say that's a bit of a difference. But once again, nobody factored in the undecideds and probably undercounted the black vote.

very Republican owned computers, at that.
Remember the men who created hava are now in jail.

Because their hypocrisy is undeniable.

are folks on here who truly wonder about this no matter who the candidate is. I do not think they are hypocrites but i do wonder why there is so much silence? The polling was even more out to lunch than in NH or NV.

have no civility. They haven't had any for over a year now.
And like Publicans, you aren't going to reason them into getting any.

They've decided good and evil already, and after that they don't care.

Which is why I don't care any more how they and their man are treated.

Furthermore, there were factors that effected the outcomes of both states that dont have jack shit to do with the polls. Any attempt to dissect the results of either NH or SC without taking those things into consideration is incredibly disingenuous.

"Nothing but silence out there."

Really?

I guess, then that these 70,000 Google hits (for one SC county) are very very quiet.

As far as I know, this dKos diarist is right that there hasn't been an official challenge to the primary as there was in New Hampshire. There are many considerations involved for a candidate, public interest group or voter to decide when and where to challenge an election, including whether or not they have standing for a particular kind of challenge (be it recount or other type of challenge), whether they can afford any charges for the 'recount' or other contest, and whether the challenge is likely to be effective in the circumstances at hand. In NH, there were paper ballots to be counted, though there were also significant problems with the chain of custody of the evidence. In SC, with paperless touchscreen technology, there will be no way to prove voter intent. While an investigation may turn up problems that are actionable, no true count of the votes can be made.

This is why work needs to happen at all levels to get this country an election system where the voters actually have the opportunity to vote for the candidates of our choice and have our votes counted.

dKos is notorious for squelching discussion of the problems with the U.S. election system. If you're picking up "silence" there it may be because much has been done there to silence voices speaking on this issue.

I think KOS is a tool and has been set up to lead people in certain directions.

Apparently Markos is not interested in either facts, or Election Integrity. I'm quite sure he didn't bother to read this:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5611
...in which it is explained that:



Also, it shouldn't be necessary to note, but it is, since Kos continues to spread disinformation concerning issues of Election Integrity (and banning those from posting who question him or his other front-pagers with actual facts), but no serious Election Integrity person that I know of, has charged either "fraud" or "dark conspiracies" in New Hampshire. Rather that 80% of the ballots were never counted or verified by anyone after they were tabulated on the very same error-prone, hackable Diebold op-scan systems seen flipping an election without detection (save for actually counting the paper ballots) in HBO's Hacking Democracy (video of the hack here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=J36Jfkxd1vA)