RELEASE: New Hampshire Democratic Primary - Were Votes Counted Accurately?

0 views
Skip to first unread message

news.omega

unread,
Jan 14, 2008, 6:06:48 PM1/14/08
to freepa...@googlegroups.com
RELEASE: NEW HAMPSHIRE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY – WERE VOTES COUNTED ACCURATELY?

http://electionarchive.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=149&Itemid=84
http://electionarchive.org/ucvData/NH/ReleaseReNHPrimary2008.pdf

Park City, UT January 14, 2008
CONTACT: Kathy Dopp ka...@electionarchive.org 435-658-4657

NEW HAMPSHIRE'S DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY ELECTION RESULTS ARE SUSPICIOUS

Pre-election polls projected that Barrack Obama would win the New
Hampshire Democratic primary election. An average of seven opinion
polls predicted that 38.8 percent were going to vote for Obama, while
30 percent would vote for Clinton. The opinion polls came close to
predicting the final results for New Hampshire's hand-counted votes -
39.2% for Obama and 34.9% for Clinton - but New Hampshire's
Diebold/Premier machine-counted votes reversed the outcome.

The reversal of the machine and hand counts is consistent with
programming errors counting votes cast for Obama, for Clinton and
votes cast for Clinton, for Obama.

To see this consistency of New Hampshire's election results with
programming error, analysts examined Clinton and Obama vote shares out
of votes cast only for Obama and Clinton. Overall, Clinton's hand
count share of such votes is 47.07% to Obama's 52.93% share and a
virtually exact reverse pattern occurs with machine counts where
Clinton's share is 52.95% to Obama's 47.05%.

A statistical analysis of New Hampshire's Democratic primary by the
National Election Data Archive rules out precinct-size and seems to
rule out demographic factors as possible causes for the reversal of
Obama and Clinton's machine and hand-counted results; and shows that
the pattern is consistent with vote miscount favoring Clinton.

The National Election Data Archive's New Hampshire analysis and raw
data is posted on the Internet at ElectionArchive.org

http://electionarchive.org/ucvData/NH/DemPrimary2008-PairedPrecinctStudy.pdf
and
http://electionarchive.org/ucvData/NH/

About 80% of New Hampshire ballots were counted by Diebold/Premier
optical scanning machines without any post-election manual audits to
verify the machine count accuracy.

Press reports hypothesized theories for why Clinton beat Obama in New
Hampshire including:

1. the "Bradley effect" (closet racism) that white voters lie to
pollsters and "say" they'll vote for a Black, but given a secret
ballot don't,

2. the "damsel in distress" theory that Clinton's tears brought women
voters out for her,

3. the "good weather" theory, and

4. the "economy was key" theory.

It would be interesting to know why these effects would only occur
when ballots are counted by Diebold/Premier voting machines but not
when ballots are counted in public view by hand.

The "electronic miscount" theory could be a more plausible explanation
for the discrepancies between the opinion polls and the
machine-counted results.

Could someone have mis-programmed – by accident or on purpose – the
optical scan machines such that Hillary's votes went to Obama and
Obama's votes went to Hillary?

UPCOMING RECOUNT OF THE TUESDAY, JANUARY 8, 2008 NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY
ELECTION

The Secretary of State (SOS) of New Hampshire announced that there
will be a statewide recount of the paper ballots beginning on
Wednesday, January 16, because presidential candidates Democrat Dennis
Kucinich and Republican Albert Howard requested it.
http://www.sos.nh.gov/recount%20press%20release.pdf


It is imperative that, not only ballots, but poll books and absentee
and provisional voter records are inspected for a representative
sample of recounted precincts. Post 2004 election investigations of
"recounted" (and non-recounted) precincts in Ohio discovered large
numbers of "phantom" ballots for which no voting records could be
found, and disenfranchised voters for whom no ballot could be found -
see http://baiman.blogspot.com/

U.S. Representative Kucinich asks for a Recount of NH machine counts
in the interest of election integrity
http://www.dennis4president.com/go/homepage-items/kucinich-asks-for-new-hampshire-recount-in-the-interest-of-election-integrity/

Kucinich is asking for donations to pay for the Democratic Primary recount
http://www.dennis4president.com/go/homepage-items/help-defend-the-integrity-of-our-voting-system/

CONCLUSION:

Is the suspicious pattern in New Hampshire's Democratic primary
results caused by voting machine counting? We have no clear idea,
because we have no confidence in the unaudited machine vote counting
process. Knowing how easy it is to corrupt machine-counted election
results, it is appalling that New Hampshire and other states do not
routinely conduct post-election manual checks of the accuracy of
machine vote counts. Human mistakes and worse are inevitable, and
without routine post-election measures to detect and correct mistakes,
and without public oversight over security and chain of custody of
ballots, inaccurate vote counts and incorrect election results are
inevitable.

The full analysis of the National Election Data Archive is available
at ElectionArchive.org
http://electionarchive.org/ucvData/NH/DemPrimary2008-PairedPrecinctStudy.pdf


QUESTIONS THE PRESS COULD ASK DURING EACH ELECTION ARE:

Does this state conduct any publicly observable post-election
independent manual counts to check the accuracy of machine counts?
(This would require voter-created, or at least voter-checked, paper
ballots.)

Were the detailed vote count data and raw polling data made publicly
available immediately after the election for analysts to detect any
possible suspicious patterns?

Were the invisibly-machine-counted vote counts checked, audited,
provably correct?

Is there public oversight over chain of custody procedures for
election records and ballots?

What are the state's procedures for securing paper ballot and election
records; and how may the public participate?


DATA AVAILABLE FOR ANALYZING THE NEW HAMPSHIRE JANUARY 8, 2008 PRIMARY
ELECTION RESULTS

Another Statistical analysis which reaches the same conclusions as the
National Election Data Archive, with links to vote count data
http://call-with-current-continuation.blogspot.com/2008/01/statistical-exploration-of-new.html

New Hampshire Secretary of State Web Site
http://www.sos.nh.gov/presprim2008/index.htm

2008 New Hampshire Republican & Democratic Primary Results
http://ronrox.com/paulstats.php?party=REPUBLICANS
http://ronrox.com/paulstats.php?party=DEMOCRATS

The type of voting method each town uses:
http://www.bbvdocs.org/NH/state/Jan-08-votingsystems-NH.txt
http://www.sos.nh.gov/voting%20machines2006.htm

National Election Data Archive
http://electionarchive.org/ucvData/NH/

Pre-election opinion polls:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_primary-194.html

Note: No exit poll data was publicly released after the election
unless it had been adjusted to match the final unofficial vote counts.
I.e. No public exit poll data is available to use to judge the
accuracy of the election results as occurred after the 2004
presidential election.

CNN Exit poll info:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#val=NHDEM

FOX News Exit Polls: Women and Seniors Like Clinton
http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/01/08/fox-news-exit-polls-independents-like-obama-mccain/


SOME OTHER ARTICLES ON THE NEW HAMPSHIRE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY ELECTION

NY Times on the planned NH recount on
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/11/candidates-push-for-a-nh-recount/

Keith Olberman Covers the Story
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMJB4OCE1fo

Diebold Again: Did Hillary Really Win New Hampshire?
by Dave Lindorff
http://baltimorechronicle.com/2008/011108Lindorff.shtml

New Hampshire to Recount Ballots in Light of Controversy
by Kim Zetter January 11, 2008
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/01/new-hampshire-t.html

Do NH Primary Statistics Show Election Fraud?
http://salonesoterica.wordpress.com/2008/01/09/do-nh-primary-statistics-show-election-fraud/

Informative article w/ good links to exit poll info
http://www.margieburns.com/blog/_archives/2008/1/9/3455407.html

Diebold favors Hillary, hand count for Obama
http://presscue.com/node/38034

Election Integrity Questioned in New Hampshire - Dennis Kucinich
formally requests recount
By Michelle Wolski, Epoch Times Florida Staff
http://en.epochtimes.com/news/8-1-11/63935.html

Electronic voting machine results questioned in New Hampshire primary
Dan Kaplan
http://www.scmagazineus.com/Electronic-voting-machine-results-questioned-in-New-Hampshire-primary/article/104145/

Alternet: http://www.alternet.org/story/73551/

Primary Concerns - Hoisting a few red flags about the elections
by Robert C. Koehler, Tribune Media Services, January 10, 2008
http://www.commonwonders.com/archives/col429.htm

Ben Mosley's Blog
http://benmoseley.blogspot.com/2008/01/do-nh-primary-statistics-show-election.html

Analysis of Hand-counted versus Diebold-counted Precincts
http://i4.tinypic.com/823g1mt.gif

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rahmainepugh/CWg

Where Paper Prevailed, Different Results, By Lori Price
http://www.legitgov.org/nh_machine_vs_paper.html

PLEASE DONATE

US Count Votes, DBA National Election Data Archive urgently needs your
donations if it is to continue its work to try to obtain public
oversight over the integrity of election results via mandatory routine
vote count audits and public access to election records and election
data, and public oversight over ballot security procedures. Donating
money to get out the vote efforts, to political candidates, or to
efforts to educate voters on issues, makes little difference if votes
are not accurately counted. NEDA can not continue its efforts without
funding.

http://electionarchive.org/fairelection/donate.html

THANK YOU. PLEASE PASS ON THIS ANNOUNCEMENT.

CONTACT: Kathy Dopp ka...@electionarchive.org 435-658-4657

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages