Skip to main content

The Great Orange Overlord has spoken on the New Hampshire Primary recount.  All is well in the world of Kos, and we should be greatful.

Well, maybe not.

I don't want to get into a pissing match between Brad and Markos.  After all, I'm sure they both can store up a great deal of piss if needed, and I'm not into golden showers.  I will, however, give you the links to the recount totals for both the Repug and Dem recounts:

Repug recount: Notice Stratham.
Democratic Recount.

I'm going to approach this from the point of view of the recount having gone as well as could be expected.  That is to say I'll proceed upon the assumption that the election was as pristine as it possibly could have been (and there have been vote anomalies from both recounts, so this is an assumption which is stretched).

Here's why the NH recount was a good thing:  We've found out that NH has a relatively good election system (or at least it looks that way).  I happen to think that the recount was a good idea, even if that was what was shown!  The key here is that paper ballots are able to be recounted and verified.

Note to Markos: What would bitching about SC do?  They're votes are by (for the most part) electronic device with no paper trail.  The answer, of course, is that we could find that the electronic devices didn't tally the same originally with what was shown as a final vote, but that's neither here nor there for this argument.

Second note to Markos: None of the active campaigns chose to question the primary in SC.  The difference between SC and NH is that the polls were trending toward an Obama blow-out in SC, while NH seemed to contradict what the polls were showing, although there did seem to be some slight trend toward Hillary on the last day of polling.

So, even if the NH recount shows that NH has a pretty good system, the recount was worth it.  I think we're all looking for a system which is close to being very accurate.  If NH's numbers hold up (and the Dem recount only did about 20-25% of votes) then it might be able to be said that their system might be the one to follow if we don't go to the time honored paper ballot/hand count system.

Go Dennis!
http://kucinich.us
http://integritynow.org

Originally posted to rjones2818 on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 05:11 PM PST.

Poll

The NH recount?

77%45 votes
5%3 votes
10%6 votes
0%0 votes
0%0 votes
6%4 votes

| 58 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar: (7+ / 0-)

    I wonder if Bradblog will be considered a reasonable source now?

    Don't blame me, I support Dennis! http://kucinich.us

    by rjones2818 on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 05:13:38 PM PST

  •  New Hampshire??? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doinaheckuvanutjob

    There's a recount brewing in Floriduh right now.

    Don't believe me?  Check this out -- Bush Declared FL Primary Winner; Democrats Despondent (w/Poll).

    John McCain

    Remember to read Joe Lieberman's comments on behalf of his good friend, John McCain.  And to take the diary poll.

    A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. America for Gore

    by JekyllnHyde on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 05:15:37 PM PST

  •  The Dem recount (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    N in Seattle, JekyllnHyde, rjones2818

    covered 39.3% of all state ballots and showed an original miscount of 0.44%.

  •  Notice Stratham? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rjones2818

    I assume you mean the 55 vote change in 9iu11iani's count?

    Got any percentage numbers on corrections?

    'Cause I'm not going to go through the whole rigamarole without more than this.

  •  Pecan...sounds like a vote against Jimmy Carter (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rjones2818

    to me.  Why not peanuts?  :)

    Honesty is still the best policy.

    by oscarsdad on Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 05:42:41 PM PST

  •  You should have added to your poll (0+ / 0-)

    The recount was meant to deflate Hillary's win (and call her a cheat to boot!)

  •  I missed the diary here on SC (0+ / 0-)

    but there were at least 2 comments on fraud as we watched SC results come in.
    It was put in amusing way...about Clyburn and the mighty thumb of Diebold coming down and smiting Clinton votes...or maybe I brought up Clyburn but the thumb line wasn't mine...or maybe only on the phone.

    Clyburn was very angry and partly at the TV commentators when 32.7% of their words that day were white vote black vote black candidate discredited victory. He snapped at them saying "I wouldn't worry about that, no one will be discrediting this one" I wondered then.

    My son was at a wedding and calling for updates as though it was the Super Bowl.I definitely reported fraud but God help me I was laughing.

    Of course I really had no idea and don't mean to dishonor Clyburn's integrity, just felt he might think there were lessons to be taught and it is just too easy.

    But it's not laughable that it could even possibly be true, that you know there is not a damn thing that can be done, no way it can be checked. Nothing. The very worst machine and no way to recount except by the same way it was counted and same results.
    I thought the Clintons must know and my hope was they'd become behind the scene powerful advocates for a fairer, safer way to vote and before November.

    I couldn't vote in the poll for a few reasons. NH recount should be done in random counties that very night. In all states with electronic voting.

    Some fair election advocates were against the recount because NH has no right chain of custody. I don't know my terms right.
    When you see that and the non-sealed storage things well you still take it on faith. But I hope enough error would show up that they'd decide to make it a better system. Not sure what that level would be.

    The big argument here and in many places were that the seeming variance between hand and machine counts had to do with difference in geographics and size and culture.
    The odd patterns showed in both parties.

    Eventually I shrugged.
    Later I did not shrug.
    The people who expressed great concerns weren't experts in understanding the place or the numbers.

    But then experts did look
    New Hampshire Democratic Primary Election Results
    Hand Count versus Machine Counts
    by Kathy Dopp, M.S., Beth Clarkson, M.S., and Ron Baiman, Ph.D

    You can really see the difference when statisticians who know proper methods of analysis do it. Nice report too. Easy charts and simple words for people like me, lots of data and lingo that experts would like.

    They took all the variables into account pairing machine and hand count precincts for size and location.

    Each pair in this study of 25 pairs of New Hampshire precincts (50 precincts) is in the same county and has almost the same total number of votes counted. In this paired sample, the average size of a Diebold machine count is 754 votes cast and the average size of a hand-count is 763 votes cast.

    Turns out that the machine/size issue that everyone explained it by was correct...half correct. Correct for one party.

    A Paired-Precinct Study of the Republican NH Primary Election Results
    The apparent "machine effect" of increased vote share due to Diebold machine counts for Republican Mitt Romney can be explained by precinct size I.e. Romney did better in larger precincts which may have been in less rural areas

    .
    Well Romney is more of a city boy.

    The problem comes with Democrats
    They used various methods but a simple sample finding of the Paired-Precinct Study was

    1. Clinton out-performs Obama (39.7% to 36.3% overall) whenever ballots are counted by Diebold machine rather than by hand; and
    1. Obama out-performs Clinton (38.6% to 35.2% overall) whenever ballots are counted by hand;

    If the same paired-precinct analysis is done by calculating vote shares as a percentage of Obama and Clinton votes only, the results are consistent with a vote flip between Obama and Clinton, as if a ballot programming error caused a vote cast for Clinton to be machine counted for Obama and vice-versa.

    So there you go.

    Again there is nothing you cam do about it for the past but I'm hoping the officials who cooperated in sharing all the data for the coverage will see the need for built in safeguards.

    I've been hoping for changes for many, many years. That any of us accept this is outrageous but really we accept almost everything, even things that outrage us.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site