Sure did and I agree. McCain's not going to stand for long. He's expired already.
Posted by peter at January 8, 2008 08:22 PMTurkana:
You might be right concerning the Mittster because I couldn't tell you where his firewall of support is coming from. He was not supposed to lose New Hampshire.
As for McCain going into that Bible belt is going to get mighty bumpy.
Posted by Daryl at January 8, 2008 08:23 PMif mitt couldn't buy iowa, or even win in his own back yard, i don't know where he does...
Posted by Turkana at January 8, 2008 08:26 PMSomething appears to have gone wildly wrong with BushAmerica's polling machinery, such that the polls of all organizations apparently no longer have any basis in reality---or else the vote totals are utterly suspect. There's no way to determine which is false anymore.
Such results are simply impossible. A complete reversal---based on what? At least both parties will now be hopelessly split and splintered, not just us.
Get used to the idea of President McCain.
Unless Edwards is the nominee.
Long days ahead.
Posted by RAM at January 8, 2008 08:30 PMWow, I haven't seen an election go this far against the polls since Bush beat Kerry in Ohio. I wonder if one of the many big companies giving Clinton money these days happens to be Diebold. Or maybe Diebold is just afraid of Obama and figured they'd help out his opponent.
Yeh, I said it.
Posted by at January 8, 2008 08:41 PMclassy.
Posted by addy at January 8, 2008 08:43 PMWill Ron Paul get even MORE support as the field narrows? I think he might.
I'm in a very red area, and there are a lot of Paul supporters here.
I'm in a very red area, and there are a lot of Paul supporters here.
Paul's old letters here. Not very flattering. Perfect for a "red area".
Gold's at an all time high.
Stocks are tanking.
Lets hope bu$h has a safe trip to the middle east, I can't imagine cheney as pResident.
Congrats Hillary. *dabs eyes*
Posted by Seven of Six at January 8, 2008 08:53 PMOh, I sincerely doubt there was any real fraud. And it wasn't an amazing comeback either. The truth is, as I said in the thread below, Obmama's momentum wasn't enough to erase the lead Hillary had 4 days ago. He had enough to cut it in half, about, but no more than that. As long as people don't give up on Obama, the rest of the states will be his practically, demographics demand it.
Posted by Brian Bell at January 8, 2008 08:58 PMRepost from earlier thread...sorry, but I feel very strongly about this issue...largely ignored by both parties.
Hate to be the skunk at the garden party but...quoting Nancy Tobi of the Democracy for New Hampshire website, "81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as "Premier"). The elections run on these machines are programmed by one company, LHS Associates, based in Methuen, MA. We know nothing about the people programming these machines, and we know even less about LHS Associates. We know even less about the secret vote counting software used to tabulate 81% of our ballots."
These are the same machines that were tested in the HBO documentary "Hacking Democracy" in which a computer programmer was able to alter vote totals by introducing computer code through the memory cards. Using an optical scanning machine from a county in Florida, they demonstrated how these machines first attempt to read instructions from the memory card before accepting any votes. The audit log can then be wiped clean to remove any evidence of tampering.
Has this obvious security flaw been changed? There is no way of knowing as the source code is proprietary and not reviewable by anyone outside of the manufacturer.
How can anyone have confidence that the total reported actually represent the votes cast? No random audits are done to verify them. Even when recounts are done, as in the Ohio 2004 presidential election, hanky panky has been practiced as revealed by the recent conviction of two election workers who rigged the recount.
And if the vote totals were accurate in '04...why cheat on the recount?
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4266
The best result from this is that the god damnable media is getting a black eye for their coverage, their predictions, and their punditry.
You know it's bad when Duncan Hunter starts ripping on Faux News.
So Hillary has 187 delegates out of 2000 or whatever is needed. Looks like it's anybodies ballgame still.
Posted by Duckman GR at January 8, 2008 09:16 PMAgain, professional opinion polls cannot be this inaccurate. Both campaigns knew Hillary had lost big. In such a situation, victory can't "happen". So everything we thought we knew about political behavior is now up for grabs.
We're now in uncharted waters, and very likely no longer a "democracy". This win was simply impossible based on the statistical data.
This means basically that physical laws (as Spock would say) no longer apply in BushAmerica, just as elections went (repeatedly and impossibly) against professional polls in Ohio in the Bush Era.
This is the end of the road. We envisioned that we were close, yet we didn't know exactly how close. Now we do.
Posted by euzoius at January 8, 2008 09:20 PMQuit with the conspiracy mongering.
Polls showed a vast number of undecided or barely committed voters. Given the lead Hillary in NH a week ago, it's clear that Obama's support could not have been solid.
You want to believe that the fundamentals of professional opinon polling (including her own polls) no longer operate in BushAmerica, you go right ahead.
We've seen enough with this one to know something is up.
Posted by euzoius at January 8, 2008 09:29 PMEuzoius,
CNN discussed the fact that their polls had Obama leading Clinton by 3% among women previously, but the exit poll showed Clinton leading amongst women by 13%.
Also, nearly 40000 people, they said, made up their mind just before coming to the polls. This number is much higher than the margin of Hillary's victory.
Posted by eriposte at January 8, 2008 09:35 PMThanks to Brisa above comments for explaining the NH electronic computerized voting system. Below is what I wrote before reading comments here...
Cheers.
Maybe Hillary "won" with the help of Republican Corporations "counting" the votes? Who knows? Certainly the pre-election polls did not indicate that her victory was even remotely possible... Could the GOP neocons still be rigging elections in 2008? Does any NH resident have details on the voting machines and how electronic and computerized they are this year? I believe that GOP Senator Sunnu "won" but I remember having some doubts about whether his "victory" was just GOP electronic rigging or was honest... Hillary is corporate America's best good chance to continue Bush wars and unchallenged corporate greed...
I have zero faith in any election that does not employ hand-counted paper ballots. Anything “electronic” computerized voting system can be very easily and undetectably rigged…
Most of the “unexpected” and “amazing” Republican election “victories” in the 21st century were the direct result of GOP operatives hacking, rigging and stealing elections electronically…
i think it was a combination of space aliens and wood elves, sneaking into the back rooms, and skewing the data for hillary. either that or women came out big for her. i'll go with the space aliens and elves.
Posted by Turkana at January 8, 2008 10:30 PMHey, the Republicans outcome was as expected. No discontent on our vote counting. I seem to remember Democrats having problems in the Florida governors race of 2002, Janet Reno was not too happy about her loss. And then there was the Rep. Ciro Rodrigez, Henry Cuellar race in Texas 22rd CD also from 2002.
Posted by peter at January 9, 2008 03:45 AMHey, the Republicans outcome was as expected. No discontent on our vote counting.
Never is when you control the votes.
Posted by Judith at January 9, 2008 05:46 AMI don't understand how anyone can call it a "comeback" when Clinton lead by 20 points in the polls three weeks ago. Sure, Obama was shown winning big in the latest polls thanks to his Iowa bump, but everyone should know that anything can happen on Election Day.
As we know, polls seem worthless lately, look at the results of the last two Presidential Elections compared to the polls. The conventional wisdom on polling is out the window I think and the mainstream media should stop selling the poll numbers as the actual result.
Posted by Joe D at January 9, 2008 07:09 AM