New Tally on New Hampshire Recount
Submitted by kcop on Thu, 01/17/2008 - 15:27
See the difference in totals between the recount and machines!!!!
Hillsborough County only / Democrat Count / (some democrats voted for republicans)
Clinton
Computer 9584
Recount 8194 +1390
Edwards
Computer 3326
Recount 2812 + 514
Obama
Computer 6441
Recount 5630 + 811
Kucinich
Computer 195
Recount 154 + 41
Giuliani
Computer 27
Recount 21 + 6
Huckabee
Computer 34
Recount 31 + 3
McCain
Computer 144
Recount 130 + 14
Romney
Computer 101
Recount 100 + 1
Thompson
Computer 1
Recount 3 - 2
Paul
Computer 38
Recount 39 - 1
»
Your original vote count does not
line up with what is posted on the website...where are you getting your numbers?
"It does not take a majority to prevail. But rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." ~Samuel Adams while plotting the Boston Tea Party.
http://disillusionedrants.blogspot.com/
okay, I'm confused
to me, in this specific county listed, it looks like Hillary gained 1390 votes she should not have had based on the recount. It also looks to me that Edwards and Obama received many more votes by the machines in comparison to the recount. Am I understanding this correctly, or am I in need of "Vote Counting for Dummies"? I'm sorry, but I haven't voted since Ronald Reagan.
The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. James Madison
The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. James Madison
no, 'kcopley' compares wrong numbers
he's comparing the full election results with the recount results,
while 2 wards are still missing.
not good!
he should correct it or close the thread, otherwise this just causes wrong speculations.
your numbers missing ward 5 & 7
at blackboxvoting they are reporting these numbers:
http://www.sos.nh.gov/recountresults.htm
as of 11:54 pm PT, Hillsborough County Ward 5 & 7 have not been "recounted" yet
*********** original ** recount ** difference
DEMS
Clinton ******* 8148 *** 8194 ** +0.56%
Obama ******* 5616 *** 5630 ** +0.25%
Edwards ****** 2801 *** 2812 ** +0.39%
Richardson ***** 853 **** 859 ** +0.70%
Kucinich ******* 153 ***** 154 ** +0.75%
REPUBS
McCain ******* 106 ** 130 ** +22.64%
Romney ******* 89 ** 100 ** +12.36%
Paul ********** 32 *** 39 ** +21.88%
Huckabee ****** 27 *** 31 ** +14.81%
Giuliani ******** 17 *** 21 ** +23.53%
Scatter ******** 54 *** 23 ** -57.41%
scatter?
I'm guessing scatter was votes that the machine marked as unreadable and half of them have not been decoded and awarded to some candidate??
Here is the website posted
Here is the website posted previously for NH Secretary of State and the numbers for the recount: Maybe Wards 5 & 7 have not been posted, it is very unclear from their site. Even so the difference in numbers between the recount and machines show significant errors in the reliablity of the machines.
http://www.sos.nh.gov/recountresults.htm
It looks like an average
It looks like an average random undercount of 1%. This will only make a difference if the margin between two candidates is less than 1/10 of the square root of the number of votes cast.
For an election with 1 million votes, that means a random change of only 100 votes.
For an election with 250,000 votes, that means a random change of only 50 votes.
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for James Madison.
Nope
http://www.sos.nh.gov/recountresults.htm
You simply cannot count ward 5 or 7 yet as there is no handcount tally for them yet.
Using the machine-hand counts in the other wards hillary has gained 46 votes.
0.5% is nearly acceptable
And that's assuming no errors in the handcount.
0.5% is not acceptable
Florida in 2000 was decided by 300 out of over a million votes.
A 1/2 percent of a million votes is 5 thousand votes.
Yes a 1/2 percent is generally enough to cause a recount, but is a completely unacceptable error rate.
Whoah, if this is right
This is outrageous, errors of 15% ?
But I'm not sure this is the whole story. The data you show says that the computers overcounted everyone but thompson and paul.
My question is, where did these votes come from - all except paul or thompson gained votes from the computer count. Certainly they counted the number of voters, and matched that to the total number of votes.
Significant differences
“Remember that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have.” Barry Goldwater
Double counting
Looks like there's a bunch of double counting or plain old fabricating votes going on. Regardless whether there's any conspiracy going on, this is still disturbing.
WRONG
You can't count ward 5 or 7 yet we don't have recount totals yet.
Clinton has gained about 20 votes from the recount, not lost 1370!
Then how do you know she is
Then how do you know she is up 20 votes?
Sorry should be 46
Take totals from all wards except 5 and 7 these have not been counted yet.
But including the machine count from those wards you are essentially assuming that the hand count will give her 0 votes in those wards.
The + or - after recount
The + or - after recount number is the difference. I tried a table but it didn't work.
How can almost every total be higher
How can almost every total be higher?
Are those just ones the machines
weren't able to read?