New Hampshire Primary - All Diebold. All the Time. Your thoughts?

[cyberpj]

New Hampshire Primary - ALL Diebold, ALL the Time
Tuesday, 8 January 2008, 7:55 pm
Opinion: Michael Collins

"1st in the Nation" with Corporate Controlled, Secret Vote Counting
By Nancy Tobi
Democracy for New Hampshire

Introduction.
The more things stay the same, the worse they smell
- By Michael Collins - "Scoop" Independent News - Washington, D.C.

Tomorrow's New Hampshire primary represents a major turning point in the presidential primaries. We've got the rising star of Obama, the stunned Clinton camp, and the populist efforts of the fast moving Democrat, John Edwards, just off a 9% increase in the national polls. At this juncture, the Republican race is less compelling unless you happen to be John McCain or Mitt Romney.

Does Obama's highly favorable corporate media image stack up against reality? Is this the end of Hillary, or at least the beginning of the end? Can Edwards kick in the door with a strong showing and demand coverage? Will Ron Paul embarrass Giuliani by edging him out for fourth?

We'll never know for sure.- Why? It's been nearly eight years since the debacle of Florida and nearly six since the miracle Chambliss win against Cleland. Surely we have reliable, verifiable voting systems in place? It's been almost four years since the nationwide disaster of the 2004 election with irregularities still emerging.

Hasn't all this been fixed? - You'd think so. But, the answer is definitely no. Votes are still taken by voting machines produced by vendors highly sympathetic to the Republican Party. The machines are still off limits to those who want to examine how they operate and observe real vote counting. And good luck if your candidate loses and there's fraud or voting machine problems suspected.

More:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0801/S00057.htm

[Sancho]

1. Fix the elections!

On else nothing matters!


:dem:

[jgraz]

4. I think they're pretty well fixed

:grr:

[mod mom]

2. A single Co LHS controls chain of custody for ~ 80% of op scans

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x488799

Thank goodness Nancy Tobi is in NH!

[Honeycombe8]

3. Interesting when it's close and it's Diebold...the Repub choice wins?

Just thinking out loud.

[mod mom]

5. ER list servs were all ablaze this am with worries.

[cyberpj]

10. Thinking along those same lines... notice that McCain jumped to a large lead too. So it could well

be that the DESIRED Republican wins as long as they can control the machines, counts and recounts.

[K Gardner]

6. I'm having a flashback to what matthews said this morning nt

[mother earth]

7. I have always thought that Dean's demise was not his scream,

it was his phenomenal rise and internet-history-making-support that did him in, via republican stealth and vulnerable machines. Why the heck has this not been rectified????!!!

Kicking this to wake up the masses, wake up DU'ers, wake up country, when push comes to shove they won't hesitate to rob us again.

[cyberpj]

8. And for those who keep saying, "but we use scanners... and paper..." keep reading:

NH: "1st in the nation" with corporate controlled secret vote counting
By Nancy Tobi
Democracy for NH Article Link

81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as "Premier Election Systems"). 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. People like to say "but we use paper ballots! They can always be counted by hand!"

But they're not. They're counted by Diebold. Only a candidate can request a hand recount, and most never do so. And a rigged election can easily become a rigged recount, as we learned in Ohio 2004, where two election officials were convicted of rigging their recount. (Is it just a funny coincidence that Diebold spokesman is named Mr. Riggall?)

We need to get the count right on election night. Right now, nobody in New Hampshire, except the programmers at LHS Associates and Diebold Election Systems, knows if we are getting it right or wrong. Our state officials and representatives know this. They learned all about it when computer security specialists Harri Hursti and Bruce Odell testified before the legislative subcommittee on e-voting in September 2007 (Hursti's testimony is shown in this video). Scientific reports about the vulnerabilities and risks with Diebold optical scanners have been available since 2003.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0801/S00057.htm

[Anouka]

9. Hmm.

We'll see.

[Maven]

11. How about you wait to see who actually wins it first before you try to delegitimize the results

You might save yourself some embarrassment later.

[cyberpj]

15. I'm just thinking out loud here.

And I'm never embarrassed about thinking.

[SharonAnn]

12. THe Republicans didn't fix it, because they were in the majority in House and Senate

The system of new voting machines was working just fine for them and they looked forward to things getting even better.

[K Gardner]

13. So, I'm the only one who is wondering how ALL the polls got it SO wrong in a Primary State?

[elizm]

16. No, you are not the only one. nt

[PretzelWarrior]

14. this is interesting. after people are motivated about Obama...

a few key things happen. The MSM goes into overtime threatening the Oklahoma centrist group is going to introduce a third party candidate if "the right candidates" aren't chosen.

Then Hillary goes on her teary eyed tilt.

Then Bill goes crazy into attack mode. Almost reminded me of Cheney.

Then Diebold takes over.

[cyberpj]

17. self deleted. nt

[LiberalMandrake]

18. Obama's role is to confirm that voting machines count Clinton's votes correctly.

Obama's role is to confirm that voting machines count Clinton's votes correctly.

[creeksneakers2]

19. If Diebold could steal it

Romney would have won the GOP race.

[avaistheone1]

20. It is a little late now. Isn't it?

Voting machines screwed up the elections in 2000 and 2004 and we still haven't done anything about it.

Shame on us.

[Tom Rinaldo]

21. In 2004 exit polls and vote tallies diverged

We don't have all the info yet, but this time the early leaks from exit polls had Clinton possibly winning and certainly doing much better than had been anticipated a few days ago.

Diebold had nothing to do with those exit polls today that showed Clinton doing very well in this primary.

[crazy homeless guy]

22. is clinton a preffered oponent for the republicans?

hmmm. clinton was trailing, then she finished ahead. the exit polls predicted otherwise. the exit polls were never this far off before diebold became so heavily involved in the game. it is just like the elections of 2004. so what am i saying... i personally think hillary poses both, a candidate that is easier for the republicans to beat, and, if elected, a president who more entrenched in the traditional political system. so guess what, it doesn't surprise me that the diebold machines once again felt a candidate that aligned closer to their views pulled ahead. coincidence?

[LiberalMandrake]

23. Beyond that

It's more than "hillary being a candidate that is easier for the republicans to beat".
Clinton was picked up long ago to be the president.