Capitol Hill Blue Forums Capitol Hill Blue Opinions CHB Columnists In the end, the voters still decide

If one(and I am one) were to consider that those whose actions bother one are co-creators and that, as a gift to one, the co-creators are mirroring to one what is also in the one, maybe one would do more reflecting prior to shooting off one's mouth.

This one's tendency is to shoot first and ask questions later and I've discovered that that tendency is not working for me. I need much more reflection to see the greater good in the Bush administration other than that it is awakening us so that we can pay attention to the rest of the world and collectively change our perceptions and to demand addressing problems differently.

Good point, Mellow Julia. The question here of course is whether we know what the "actual results" are.

It's important to bear in mind too that there are a lot of different kinds of polls, of differing reliability. "Exit polls" for example have consistently proven to be accurate to within a single percentage point. That has a lot to do with the way they are conducted (voters are canvassed as they leave the voting area), and the way the questions are asked (i.e.; "who did you just vote for?")

I want to reiterate that in the case of the university poll conducted just before the NH primary, pundits failed to mention that one of the questions asked was whether the respondents' mind was made up as to who they would be voting for, and about 30% said NO. So it was the Media misleading the public into thinking that Obama was a sure thing.

Good point, pondering. Obama's supporters include more who are younger, more fired up, and more mobile.

Just a point of information: everyone in NH used a paper ballot. In some districts, the paper ballots were counted by machine. That means in a hand recount, they will be counting paper ballots, not receipts from a touch-screen machine.

Its probably impossible to get a 100% correct vote count for any election using electronic or even punch-card systems.

But, the figures I saw on the link that I posted in this thread were so profoundly different between the electronic scan count and hand count. I would consider it to be near criminal negligence by the manufacturer if the electronic devices were hacked or just failed to tabulate correctly. Just as bad would be somebody or persons having the power to manipulate the hand counts.

If there is in fact such a profound vote manipulation in New Hampshire, regardless of how it has occurred, why isn't the entire country screaming bloody murder?

Dennis is screaming, but I would think Hillary and Obama should be screaming louder...and more in particular Obama.

The strange thing is...if I understand of the delegate system... if the vote counts were reversed, it most likely wouldn't change the number of delegates for Obama and Hillary.

This just in from Salon dot com:

Was the New Hampshire vote stolen?

Why do I have a feeling this election won't end in November?

On Paul Harvey "News" yesterday morning, it was reported that Dennis Kucinach is asking for a recount in New Hampshire. The spin that Mr. Harvey's "news" outlet put on the story is that it is because Dennis only got 2% of the vote - not because the results did not match the exit polls.

It is also being said that if the weather in New Hampshire wasn't so balmy, a lot of Hillary's older voters would have stayed home.

Figures. In his press release Dennis specifically said he didn't anticipate the recount would change his results significantly, and that his action was intended solely to promote confidence in the electoral process. But don't expect to hear that in the Librul Media. Even less in the Right Wing Echo Chamber!

I know, stereoman. I can't stand Paul Harvey. But, ABC radio news (which is no longer owned by Disney-ABC, but Citadel Broadcasting) renewed his contract unfortunately.