New News. New email I received asserts that the NH Primary Votes were miscounted! This news is all over the Internet. See below and see my video ..
News Updates from Citizens for Legitimate Government
09 Jan 2008
http://www.legitgov.org/
http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news
Where Paper Prevailed, Different Results By Lori Price 09 Jan 2008
2008 New Hampshire Democratic Primary Results --Total Democratic Votes: 286,139 - Machine vs Hand (RonRox.com) 09 Jan 2008
Hillary Clinton, Diebold Accuvote optical scan: 39.618%
Clinton, Hand Counted Paper Ballots: 34.908%
Barack Obama, Diebold Accuvote optical scan: 36.309%
Obama, Hand Counted Paper Ballots: 38.617%
Machine vs Hand:
Clinton: 4.709% (13,475 votes)
Obama: -2.308% (-6,604 votes)
2008 New Hampshire Republican Primary Results --Total Republican Votes: 236,378 Machine vs Hand (RonRox.com) 09 Jan 2008
Mitt Romney, Diebold Accuvote optical scan: 33.075%
Romney, Hand Counted Paper Ballots: 25.483%
Ron Paul, Diebold Accuvote optical scan: 7.109%
Paul, Hand Counted Paper Ballots: 9.221%
Machine vs Hand :
Romney: 7.592% (17,946 votes)
Paul: -2.112% (-4,991 votes)
NH: "First in the nation" (with corporate controlled secret vote counting) By Nancy Tobi 07 Jan 2008 81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as "Premier"). The elections run on these machines are programmed by one company, LHS Associates, based in Methuen, MA. We know nothing about the people programming these machines, and we know even less about LHS Associates. We know even less about the secret vote counting software used to tabulate 81% of our ballots. [ See also CLG's Coup 2004 and Yes, Gore DID win!.]
Please forward this update to anyone you think might be interested. Those who'd like to be added to the Newsletter list can sign up: http://www.legitgov.org/#subscribe_clg.
Please write to: signup@legitgov.org for inquiries.
CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, Manager. Copyright © 2008, Citizens For Legitimate Government ® All rights reserved. CLG Founder and Chair is Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D.
UPDATE: My video on this matter:
I've just stumbled upon this...
ReplyDeleteCurrently, I'm preparing a talk on electronic voting (which isn't really what has been done here, because documents have just been count by machines).
I know that other Diebold machines are simply crap and I don't understand how these can still be in use...
[cite source="ftp://ftp.cs.bham.ac.uk/pub/authors/M.D.Ryan/06-voting-JCS-review.pdf"]
For example, an attacker who gets physical access to a [Diebold AccuVote-TS voting] machine or its removable memory card for as little as one minute could install malicious code, which could steal votes undetectably, modifying all records, logs, and counters to be consistent with the fraudulent vote count it creates. They also showed how an attacker could create malicious code that spreads automatically from machine to machine during normal election activities.
[/cite]
Here's a comical link to variations on Diebold mock-up ads:
ReplyDeletehttp://homepage.mac.com/rcareaga/diebold/adworks.htm
Enjoy!
The fact that the hand counts and machine counts are different means nothing. In fact it's to be expected. The machine-counted votes are almost entirely from precincts with 1,500 or more votes - that is, larger towns and cities.
ReplyDeleteIn these large precincts, only 2% of votes were counted by hand. In the smallest precincts, 700 votes or fewer, 87% of votes were counted by hand, and nearly 2/3 of the hand-counted votes came from these small precincts.
The bottom line is, there's a huge demographic difference between the hand-counted and machine-counted votes. They are apples and oranges. Would you be surprised to find that people voted differently in cities versus in the country? Well, they do. That's all the hand versus machine is telling you. It's representative of where those votes came from.
I did an more thorough analysis on my blog, link from my name above.