Brad: Huge new disparities in Manchester Ward 5

[Stevepol]

Brad blogged this on 1-17-08 before going over for a screening of "Uncounted: The New Math of American Elections." The numbers he shows seem passing strange to me, as if there's some sort of prestidigitation going on that I can't quite cognate. Here's what he says before leaving for the movies:

As mentioned earlier today, NH SoS Bill Gardner told WMUR in NH that "We did nine of the 12 wards in Manchester, and a lot of the votes were exactly the same...Some went up by a vote or two." He didn't, of course, note that a lot of the vote counts (most of them) were off by 5 or more.

And now, the rest of the numbers from the rest of the Manchester wards are coming on. And get a load of Ward 5:


Diebold Result HandCount
CLINTON 683 619
EDWARDS 255 217
OBAMA 404 365

All of the other candidates seem to have lost votes as well. No clue who received them instead, and must run out to tonight's Oakland screening of UNCOUNTED: The New Math of American Elections. But thought you'd want to know.

Link: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5573

[ORDagnabbit]

1. and the crazy thing is edwards, Clinton and Obama all are down exactly 12 votes..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2707750&mesg_id=2707750

[SoxFan]

2. The Ward 5 moderator isn't with Clinton

The moderator (chief election official) in Ward 5, Jeff Michelsen, is an Edwards supporter. He's not part of the Shaheen/Clinton clique.

Just sayin'.

[rateyes]

8. And, what the hell does that matter when it comes to

counting votes?

[Botany]

3. Nothing here

Diebold = Clinton 50% Edwards 19% Obama 30 %
Hand Count
Clinton 51% Edwards 18% Obama 30%

[papau]

5. Don't tell Brad - he is too happy - it'd spoil his day

[JackRiddler]

6. Are you kidding?

The machine count found they all had 10 percent more votes than ballots.

How does the machine add 10% to each total? Do you found this acceptable?!

[Stevepol]

7. Not only that. LHS had two weeks to radjust the count before the recount

with almost unrestricted access. Steve Freeman points out a recent case in AZ where activists discovered by nosing around that counterfeit paper votes had been added in a machine counted election. This is a recent interview found I believe at Solar bus, don't have the link right now.

Something's been going on in NH for a long time now I think and I think LHS is at the center of it.

The recount has a ways to go. I'm sure a lot of other obvious machine discrepancy will be found, tho I doubt the percentage differences will be changed for the Dems.

[HughMoran]

4. dupe

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x494739

[Marrah_G]

9. It's not huge- they found the problem- it was pretty evenly spread out

[JackRiddler]

10. Ten percent is "not huge"! - What qualifies as huge?!

What about middling to large, is that bad? Nah.

What's the big deal if the machine adds votes, long as it does so fairly? (Alternatively, what's the big deal if 10 percent of the paper ballots were misplaced since the primary?)

Anyway, I think the difference of fictional votes counted by the machines probably came from Pollyanna Happy-Happy Sleepland, so it's all good, right?

AAAAERRRGH!!!