New Hampshire primary 1988: Allegations of voting machine election fraud

Analysts hypothesize this morning that the last-minute Clinton vote in the New Hampshire primary was partly a matter of Barack Obama's race. But would Dennis Kucinich supporters and Bill Richardson supporters have made a last-minute turn to Clinton in the voting booth because of 'race'?

Maybe a walk down memory lane would help explain.

Among the wickedest recent examples of possible computerized vote fraud, of the sort that has disillusioned millions of Americans, is the 1988 New Hampshire primary that saved George Bush from getting knocked out of the race to the White House. – James M. Collier, Kenneth F. Collier



‘Comeback’ what? --

The authors of the little book Votescam, the Collier brothers, discussed the 1988 Republican New Hampshire primary at some length. The upset by George H. W. Bush in New Hampshire, confounding every poll before the tallies, was pivotal in Bush’s winning the 1988 election and becoming president:

“The Bush campaign of 1988, as historians have since recollected it, was filled with CIA-type disinformation operations and deceptions of the sort that America used in Viet Nam, Chile and the Soviet Union. Since George Bush was one of the most admired CIA directors in the history of the organization, this was not so surprising.

Yet George Bush . . . had suffered a terrible political wound when Dole won big by a show of hands in an unriggable Iowa caucus. Bush came to New Hampshire with all the earmarks of a loser whom the press had come to identify as a ‘wimp.’

Political observers were downbeat in their observations of Bush’s chances in the face of Dole’s Iowa momentum. Virtually every television and newspaper poll had Bush losing by up to eight points just hours before the balloting.

. . . When election day was over the following headline appeared in the Washington Post: “NEW HAMPSHIRE CONFOUNDED MOST POLLSTERS; Voters Were a Step Ahead of Tracking Measurements.”

Here is the lead of WP reporter Lloyd Grove’s article after the primary:


http://www.margieburns.com/blog/_archives/2008/1/9/3455407.html

Who pulled the switch?

you can take the device and fuck the whole thing as the dutch observed and documented.

You can't do it with multiple candidates you can only do it with 2 units, anything more than that is
hard to program on the switch which is why none of the other canidates had a change between
electronic vs paper differences, which the Dutch found with the machines

Maybe, it was fair, I don't know, but it is an issue that techies have discussed and it would
good to see if the machines were true or not by testing their so called paper trail
to give the populace and the naysayers
a sense of confidence in the system.
But right now, mathematically it doesn't compute in my book.

The Attorney General in charge of the election is a Republican, maybe she will do that



'As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,
they are not certain; as far as they are certain,
they do not refer to reality.' Einstein

'It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere.
There are men who can think no deeper than a fact.' Voltaire.

Won't that be nice?

In order to live it, you must be asleep.