This is a stunning read and Bradblog I believe has always been doing good work in showing election boo boo's as they happen. You do know that Diebold Machines were used in this one. Keep in mind none of this is me, but a crosspost after reading at bradblog.
What's going on here? Before proceeding, I recommend you read the third section of the post I just ran an hour or so ago, concerning the way the ballots are counted in New Hampshire, largely on Diebold optical-scan voting systems, wholly controlled and programmed by a very very bad company named LHS Associates.
Link to the post.
Those Diebold op-scan machines are the exact same ones that were hacked in the HBO documentary, Hacking Democracy. See the previous report, as I recommend, which also includes a video of that hack, and footage of the guy who runs LHS Associates.
As you'll note, the numbers in Zogby's latest polls, for all but Clinton and Obama, seem to have been dead-on the money for both the Republicans and Democrats. Edwards, for example, was polled at 17% in Zogby's poll, and he received exactly 17% in the MSNB numbers, with 63% of precincts reporting. So are we to believe that only those voters who preferred Obama previously, decided to change to Hillary at the last minute? I suppose so.
It's interesting. Every Clinton person was on tv today spinning how a defat is a win. I watched MSN NBC all day. There was talks of even Clinton skipping the next one and how that would effect the Black vote.
This election was regarded as do-or-die for Clinton, after most in the media had already written her off at her "thumpin'" in Iowa. But Tim Russert just agreed with Brokaw and Matthews, that "this was the most stunning upset in the history of politics."
So is there reason they would have rigged the machines like past elections?
When computer security specialist Harri Hursti testified to the NH legislature he explained the workings of his hack into Diebold optical scanners like ours in NH (sponsored by BlackBoxVoting.ORG and featured in the Emmy-nominated film "Hacking Democracy"), and then he referred to the 16 additional vulnerabilities in our NH optical scanners, which were found by the University of California. Here's what he was talking about.
Can you believe the State of NH allows these machines to "count" 81% of our ballots???? When private corporate interests count 81% of our ballots in secret, do we still have a democracy?
Video in that link on talking about it. Back to bradblog.
While I have no evidence at this time --- let me repeat, no evidence at this time --- of chicanery, what we do know is that chicanery, with this particular voting system, is not particularly difficult. Particularly when one private --- and a less than respectable one at that, as I detailed in the previous post --- runs the entire process.
I should also note that some 40% of New Hampshire's precincts are hand-counted, which equals about 25% of the votes. I've just spoken to Bev Harris of BlackBoxVoting.org who seems to share my concern, as have other folks who follow this sort of thing. Harris noted that it will be interesting to compare numbers of the hand-counted precincts with those counted on the hackable Diebold op-scan systems.
There is a lot here to think about and read. Trying to break it up as best I can. I know I'm not the best at this sort of thing, but I find it interesting myself that it happen just like 2004.
UPDATE 9:48pm PT: Olbermann repeated what Russert had said earlier, that Obama's internal polls showed him winning by 14%, Clinton's internal polls had Obama winning by 11%.
This part is interesting as well.
Note: the Exit Pollsters used here were Mitofsky/Edison, the same ones who ran the infamous Exits in 2004 showing that, in state after state, Kerry should have one. They also later said their own polling was completely wrong (which is disputed strongly by statistics experts such as U. of Pennsylvania Prof. Steven F. Freeman Ph.D.) So, it's lovely that AP and the TV nets hired them again...