Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

500 Diggs and Counting.... this page is really really cool... A Closer Look At The Count

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
althecat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:48 PM
Original message
500 Diggs and Counting.... this page is really really cool... A Closer Look At The Count
500 Diggs and Counting.... this page is really really cool... the source may annoy some but the numbers is the numbers.

******

2008 New Hampshire State Primary Results
A Closer Look At The Count

With all the activity and stories today, the thousands and thousands of views to this page in the last 12 hours, I wanted to emphasize a few key points.

First, all of the numbers here are either untouched from the latest polling results or pretty simple calculations using those results.

Second, these results by themselves are NOT enough to prove that any fraud occured. They simply show that some things stand out as being odd and worthy of further investigation.

Third, my purpose in all of this is to simply bring attention to these apparent anomalies. The anomalies appear in the votes for both parties. My only agenda is that the voters on both sides be accurately represented.

Last, please be civil and courteous with those whom you discuss these issues. Do not attack, slander, or otherwise disparage anyone until there has been verified fraud if that happens to be the case. And even in that case, take the high road. Again, all we should be trying to do is make sure that every vote is accurately reflected and counted.

http://ronrox.com/paulstats.php?party=DEMOCRATS

*****



al
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ORDagnabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. the mantra must be transparent and verifiable elections for everyone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
althecat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-10-08 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. Yes. And Excellent graphic that you found BTW....


The graphic has its own thread too...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. Is that a Ron Paul website? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
althecat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Thats why it carries a warning in OP....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Didn't see that part -- skipped straight to the link n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-09-08 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Looks like it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kip Humphrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-10-08 12:48 AM
Response to Original message
7. Simple Formula: flip the machine counted vote between Hillary and Obama (9967 vote transfer) and
you get:

Obama 114,606
Hillary 102,199

Total Votes 287,580

Now, calculate their respective percentages of the total vote:

Obama 39.85%
Hillary 35.53%

Compare to the avg. Hand count %
Obama 38.785% (1.065% variance)
Clinton 34.703% (.827% variance)

Compare to exit polls avg>
Obama 39% (.85% variance)
Clinton 35% (.53% variance)


(Source: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2645358)

If you simply flip the machine vote between Barack and Hillary, their vote totals coincide with the average of exit polls and are close to the hand counted vote %. Don't need no rocket science to figure this out (beats the 101 excuses I've heard to explain the anomalies between the reported vote and the polls).


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
althecat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-10-08 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Now if only someone has the gumption to look behind the curtain....
Where is dorothy when you need her :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-10-08 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. What sort of deadbeat commie rabble rousing
Edited on Thu Jan-10-08 12:26 PM by truedelphi
Pinko are you these days, Kip?? <sarcasm meant>

Can't you trust the process?? <sarcasm meant>


And I bet you think it chicanery that the Media is getting us to fall in line with the notion that the voting results should be announced and the winner called with only 65 to 67% of the total vote brought in? <sarcasm meant>

However, it should be pointed out that in column one under Pre-election polls, a full five per cent of the voters were undecided. So maybe they all went to Hillary (which I don't think is really possible, but it does need to be mentioned that she could possibly pull some portion of that 5 %)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Diane R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-10-08 02:41 AM
Response to Original message
9. That makes sense. The machine counts were flipped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-10-08 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
10. What's a digg and why should I care what those lunatics think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cloudythescribbler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-10-08 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. NOTE HOW 99% of the vicious insults are directed AT those with a 'conspiracy theory' but all the ...
whining about "negativity" is directed AT the very same 'purveyors of conspiracy theory'

I hate to rain on such nice people's parade, but this kind of contradiction is VERY COMMONPLACE

I remain skeptical about the Voting Fraud NH 08 theory either way, but the debate is clearly one side bringing forward evidence (like that VERY interesting chart) and the other side just namecalling and moderators like Skinner siding with the namecalling "anti-divisive" side hurling almost all the personal insults!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-10-08 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. How true - but now why should there be a debate?
This can be settled with a hand-count of the optiscan ballots. No guessing or speculation necessary. But it needs a candidate to file the contest and pay $80,000 unfortunately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
althecat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-10-08 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
14. Kick,,,,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 07:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

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.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC