NH Dem Primary Vote Machine Discprepancies - Kerry-Dean Closer on Paper

[HR_Pufnstuf]

I wonder if Nader was influenced at all by the Kerry-Dean vote anomalies we clearly saw in the NH Dem primary in Feb '04?

Anyone remember this?


Kerry Beat Dean in New Hampshire by Only 1.5% When Computers Were Not Doing the Counting

http://www.livejournal.com/users/explodedview/1389.html?thread=25709

In the New Hampshire Democratic Primary, exit polls, which are seldom far wrong, indicated a very close race. The final vote was not close. A close race would have constituted a win for Dean, given expectations. There is serious reason to be dubious of computerized vote counting systems (see Verified Voting or Black Box Voting for details). Such systems were used in New Hampshire, especially those of Diebold, the company that has attracted the most controversy, so I decided to analyze the New Hampshire Democratic primary vote in terms of who was doing the tabulation. According to the New Hampshire Secretary of State’s office there are three possibilities:


Some ballots are counted by Diebold machines.

Some ballots are counted by ES&S machines.

Some ballots are counted by hand.


Let me note that neither the Diebold nor the ES&S ballots lack a paper trail in this case. These are optical-scan systems, where the voter marks a paper ballot that is subsequently counted by computer. There is, then, the possibility of a recount, but only if the issue is forced, since the election was not considered close enough to mandate an automatic recount. Given the problems demonstrated with Diebold systems and the serious allegations made against ES&S, perhaps such a recount should be pursued. In any case, here are the vote totals and percentages for the big five candidates, grouped by vote tallying method (percentages are percentages of the big five vote, i.e., it does not include the minor candidates)).


VotingTechUsed Kerry Kperc Dean Dperc Edwards Eperc Clark Cperc Lieberman Lperc
Diebold 59421 40.1% 37589 25.4% 18334 12.4% 19119 12.9% 13549 9.2%
ES&S 5952 37.6% 4415 27.9% 1877 11.8% 2076 13.1% 1516 9.6%
Hand 19004 34.9% 18148 33.3% 6276 11.5% 7217 13.2% 3846 7.1%


see link for full analysis..

[Dookus]

1. this "analysis"

completely ignores the geographic distribution of the voting machine types.

It was debunked here last winter.

[HR_Pufnstuf]

2. ok, thanks,.

didnt know that. keep that in mind folks.

debunked last winter.


any chance someone can pull up the debunked material? i would love to read it again. much preciated.

[Dookus]

3. heheh

you can search for the old threads.

The issue is that the areas of NH that bordered on massachusetts all used one kind of voting system, while the rural areas, and those bordering Vermont, used a different type.

So if one didn't know that, it would appear that Kerry did better among optical scan or e-voting systems. But in fact, he did better in those AREAS, and there was a simple correspondence between those areas and the voting systems used.

[HR_Pufnstuf]

5. no, i cant search.

i have never donated here.

help someone. please re-debunk.

thanks.

[Dookus]

7. donate 5 or 10 bucks...

there's a fundraising drive right now.

[Eloriel]

4. Oh, yes. I remember it WELL

Very well. Thanks for the link.

[Dookus]

6. yes, I'm sure you do

and you conveniently forget the very simple explanation that the difference was geographical, not in the voting system.

[HR_Pufnstuf]

8. do u have a county list,,,

... of where machines were used?

thx.

[Dookus]

9. again

it's all in the archives. I'm not inclined to go do a lot of research for you. Donate 5 bucks and look it up yourself.

[HR_Pufnstuf]

10. ok, get a good night's rest.

the fun is just beginning.

thanks for the input.

anyone who has search capabilities and can pull down nh counties in dem primaries using machines vs paper, post away.

danke.

[Dookus]

11. you too

good luck with your research.

[Dolphyn]

12. Try this link: http://www.verifiedvoting.org/verifier/

http://www.verifiedvoting.org/verifier/

[jhgatiss]

13. Wouldn't this explain...

the IdaBriggs rationale for having Ralph Nader recount New Hampshire too? Or am I missing something there?