About 81% of the NH votes were "counted" by Diebold and something is off!

RiverStone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:00 PM
Original message

About 81% of the NH votes were "counted" by Diebold and something is off!

Check this out!

http://presscue.com/node/38034

I know, some folks will say...:tinfoilhat:

But WTF is Diebold still doing figuring out our votes?

Did I not hear "election reform" bantered about for the last 4 years?

This does not add up and we best be vigilant now! :patriot: :kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Clintonista2

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:00 PM
Response to Original message

1. yawn

Edited on Wed Jan-09-08 01:00 PM by Lirwin2

sour grapes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ixion

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #1

3. yeah, there can be no wrong when it's YOUR candidate

right? :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

helderheid

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #1

8. hmmm

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2640000&mesg_id=2640000

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RiverStone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #1

11. Regardless of who won, the concern stands...

Congrats on a Hillary victory last night, but I assume you would be concerned anyway that 81% of NH votes were counted by Diebold.

If Hillary is the nominee, would you not want an accurate paper trail (and an accountable one) in place before the GE?

Diebold should not be counting anybodies vote.

More than sour grapes, it's about having a fair and legal accounting of our votes, regardless of the candidate.

I'd have the exact same vote counting concern if Obama or Edwards won.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

nadinbrzezinski

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #1

16. Get over it, Bush won! (Never mind folks have gone to jail

in OH over VOTER FRAUD)

You think that just because YOUR GUY or GAL wins, we don't have to remain vigilant?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mondo joe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:01 PM
Response to Original message

2. I think you're right. Hillary's win was really MUCH bigger but Diebold artificially

increased Obama's votes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Arugula Latte

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #2

7. Actually -- you could be right. Or she might have been blown out.

The point is, with Diebold counting, we'll never know.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RiverStone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #7

17. exactly!

I'd be concerned regardless of who won.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

helderheid

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #2

9. We won't know without counting paper ballots by hand.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mondo joe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #9

10. I'm not opposed to a hand count. But the parity in exit polling makes me

far less anxious about it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RiverStone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #9

12. And it's really that simple...

Diebold should not be a player in our elections, period.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bdamomma

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #12

27. I think these diebold machines should be dumped into Boston Harbor

until something is done with those e voting machines are dealt with we will always question the validity of our votes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Bitwit1234

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:02 PM
Response to Original message

4. Give it a rest....lets check Iowa it came first

since that was on the up and up because it concerned Obama the doodle boppers have to have a reason to spew those sour grapes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

WilyWondr

(380 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #4

23. Iowa?

Iowa has caucuses.

Where do you think anything manufactured by Diebold was used in the Iowa caucuses?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

OHdem10

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:03 PM
Response to Original message

5. No excuses

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

book_worm

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:03 PM
Response to Original message

6. Give it up

The exit polls predicted this. It's not like '04 when Kerry was shown as winning Ohio and then lost. The exit polls showed that turnout was big but unlike Iowa it was across the board, not only younger voters and that women voters were turning out decisively for Hillary. Men went for Obama but there were more women voters than men. Hillary won fair and square--and I say that not as a HRC supporter.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RiverStone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #6

14. Do you think Diebold should still be counting our votes?

Take away winners and losers.

Should Diebold be counting our votes?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LeftCoast

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:08 PM
Response to Original message

13. Did McCain steal it as well?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bdamomma

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #13

15. maybe not, maybe they want Clinton to go up against McCain

because McCain will be hard to beat, just questioning.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LeftCoast

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #15

19. Hmm...who's 'they'? Someone stole it for Clinton?

I'm confused now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RiverStone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #19

24. Republican's want Hillary as their opponent in the GE

But to remove any of this valid (or conspiracy theorist) concern...we simply should hand count votes!

Then nobody, Dem or rethug, will have to worry about your vote being stolen.

It's easy to cry sour grapes, but Diebold sours the entire voting system for the American people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LeftCoast

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #24

26. Why would they want Clinton? Why badly enough to steal an election for her?

I'm just asking questions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bdamomma

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #19

28. the repigs are "they"

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LeftCoast

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #28

29. See post #26

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

HughMoran

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:11 PM
Response to Original message

18. We've been using the Optiscan machines for a long, long time

In 2004 they gave the state to Dems for the first time in 100 years (Governor, House, Senate & more.) It was a historic change in power up here - why would the Diebold people allow this?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

spotbird

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:16 PM
Response to Original message

20. Would someone explain what this

distraction is all about? There must be a subtext, but I have no idea what it is.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ORDagnabbit

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #20

21. the idea is that it is easy to program counting machines to alter results and hand counts should

always be done...

trust but verify.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

spotbird

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #21

22. No, I mean why is this distraction

used for this election. There is no central tabulation in NH, substantially reducing the probability of shenanigans.

These ferrous screams from bogus sources, specifically the fraudster Harris, must have some ulterior motivation, but I don't what the real objective is. Maybe it will be clear later.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

WilyWondr

(380 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #22

25. Pretty simple

1 vote for candidate A = 1 vote for candidate A

Is that too much to ask?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ORDagnabbit

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #22

30. well to begin with the diebold machines are used to count the votes in most areas

those diebold tabulating machines

have an already built in acceptable error rate
are programmable
are not hand verified.

do you completely trust an organization with no oversight to always give you the correct information?

if you do I have a bridge you might be interested in.

its a small state..... and if iraq can have all their votes in clear plastic containers counted by hand then the least we can do if verify totals on a machine against the actual votes cast.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

spotbird

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-09-08 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #30

31. I strongly support random audits

and paper ballots. It does not follow, however, that every election is rigged if they are not used.

It seems to me that raising the charge when it is false discredits real concerns when they arise.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Thu May 16th 2024, 01:15 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.