Diebold steals election for Hillary

[Ozark]

Don't know if it is true, but their are many People calling in to local radio talk shows from New Hampshire, saying they saw many cars with out of state plates, and saw many unknown people voting,

plus this :


The polls were right--Hillary lost New Hampshire. More Diebold election fraud...

Ron Corvus compared the database values of vote tallies with the machine counted ballots and guess what...Obama won with 38.6 to 34.9%.

Check out the e-mail he sent to me just minutes ago:

    Diebold favors Hillary, hand count for Obama
    Wed, 01/09/2008 - 05:46 - clark

    I used the Comma delimited database: NH municipalities hand count vs use Diebold machines from BlackBoxVoting.org to see if there was a deviation between the results from precincts which used hand counts and those which relied on Diebold machines. The results were astonishing. :

    Updated: 5:05 AM (EST) - Results tallied for 209 out of 236 of the municipalities.

    By Percentage
    Method Hillary Clinton Barack Obama
    Diebold Machines 53.23% 46.77%
    Hand Count 47.47% 52.53%

    By Votes
    Method Hillary Clinton Barack Obama
    Diebold Machines 82860 72807
    Hand Count 18898 20912

    By Number of Municipalities Won
    Method Hillary Clinton Barack Obama
    Diebold Machines 54 33
    Hand Count 43 77

    About 81% of the votes will be "counted" by the Diebold machines.
    http://presscue.com/...

We need to get on the ball and contact as many media outlets as possible. I won't be able to stick around for the comments, but hopefully I'll be able to read them later this afternoon.

Update 3:03 PM CST:
Votes reportedly now not being counted for Ron Paul in some areas


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/9/134532/8188/515/433738

[Decker]

I am all for this.  Ever since the Bush I primaries where he was being trounced by Dole yet he pulled out a miraculous victory, I have been questioning Diebold.

But the clincher for me is when exit polls are wrong.  Exit polling is a science unto itself and extremely reliable.  But they have been wrong for last few election cycles.  Not wrong w/in the margin of error but stunningly wrong like they were for President Bush's primary and presidential runs and with Clinton's recent miracle in New Hampshire.

I don't trust the privatization of our system of voting.  Paperless ballots are a bad thing--no accountability.

[240 is Back]

I am all for this.  Ever since the Bush I primaries where he was being trounced by Dole yet he pulled out a miraculous victory, I have been questioning Diebold.

But the clincher for me is when exit polls are wrong.  Exit polling is a science unto itself and extremely reliable.  But they have been wrong for last few election cycles.  Not wrong w/in the margin of error but stunningly wrong like they were for President Bush's primary and presidential runs and with Clinton's recent miracle in New Hampshire.

I don't trust the privatization of our system of voting.  Paperless ballots are a bad thing--no accountability.

Kerry led BIG TIME in Ohio in 2004.  There was something like a 1 in 50,000 chance of a Bush victory based upon exit polls.  THen, the power went down right before results were due.  Two hours later, once the diebold team fixed the issue (remember their CEO promised Bush the election in an internal memo earlier that year), Bush had won by a sizable amount.

Then, the Repubs sued to prevent the paper backups form being counted.  They still haven't been counted, to this day.  Repubs have actually sued to have them DESTORYED, but that hasn't happened yet.

[youandme]

No I heard we are switching voting systems from DIEBOLD to the democratic counterpart DIEHARD

[JOHN MATRIX]

i always wondered about these voting numbers we see on the screen...how do they get counted and how do we know they are accurate and not tampered with? the people who run these machines could easily just make up any result they want and who would challenge it?

[Tre]

i always wondered about these voting numbers we see on the screen...how do they get counted and how do we know they are accurate and not tampered with? the people who run these machines could easily just make up any result they want and who would challenge it?

The people who vote decide nothing.

The people who count the votes  decide everything.

[JOHN MATRIX]

The people who vote decide nothing.

The people who count the votes  decide everything.

haha exactly, i loved that line from gangs of new york, "sir, hes already won by 2000 more votes than there are voters"
"what id i tell you? the voters dont determine the outcome, the vote counters do"

or like back in 2001 or something when saddam hussein won a 100% victory, everysingle eligible voter supposedly turned out, and all the millions of paper ballots were counted by hand overnight. bwahahaha