Primary Concerns Hoisting a few Fed Flags about the Elections

By ROBERT C. KOEHLER
Tribune Media Services

January 10, 2008

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.)

http://commonwonders.com/archives/col429.htm

But they absolutely despise her.

They looked like they were chewing on a turd when they announced that Hillary won.

If it was orchestrated, why not make the predictions match the outcome?

If the results are tainted and THERE'S NO WAY TO KNOW IF THEY WERE OR NOT short of an audit which is not going to happen, it was probably done by the private companies who do the counting for their own reasons, whatever those might be.

But there's not way to know, AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

But I do wish he had mentioned the other set up - that both the Democrats and the Repugs had the races called for a clear winner with less than 69% of the total vote in.

Is that what we want happening again? Our beloved media calling the shots!!

When will this nation and its candidates learn?

We need to stand up as voters and say we won't vote unless the candidates make it clear that NO ONE CONCEDES for a full 24 hours.

Period!