Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

chknltl

(10,558 posts)
80. Diebold scanners plus other problems in NH
Mon Feb 8, 2016, 02:05 AM
Feb 2016

Apparently you might not even be able to review the ballots if you think there were shenanigans.

from: http://bradblog.com/

"We go on to discuss worries about the even less transparent New Hampshire Primary, where most of the state still uses the same Diebold paper ballot optical-scan computer systems to tally votes that were seen flipping a mock election in HBO's Emmy-nominated 2006 documentary Hacking Democracy. (Watch how it was done right here, and feel free to be concerned when the 100% unverified results are reported next Tuesday night.)

Among the recommendations Harris offers for those concerned about Election Integrity next week (and for the rest of the year, frankly): "One thing I think is really important --- is for people to get out their mobile phones, take a picture of the results at the polling place [at the end of the night] and they can text it to themselves, to a friend, put 'em on Facebook, Tweet it." She says that puts a timestamp on the graphic image of results as they were produced by computers at the precinct, which can later be compared to the results reported by the state on the web. "I think that's one thing that's pretty important this time. Just photograph the paperwork. It's not hard. Ship it off electronically somewhere, which will automatically timestamp it."

That's particularly important in places like New Hampshire where, she explains, the state "very quietly, and actually wrongfully, passed a law in 2003 so that we cannot go back and look at [paper ballots after the election] ... In New Hampshire, they put an amendment on an unrelated bill, the dark of night, and quietly said 'ballots are not a public record anymore'. So while they may say, 'we have ballots and anyone can look', that's not true. I tried." "


Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Every lead needs to be above Margin of Error Jackilope Feb 2016 #1
Wish I could..... daleanime Feb 2016 #2
Anyone not worried about fraud hasn't been paying attention... polichick Feb 2016 #3
I think it would be naive to completely rule it out, even so ... Phlem Feb 2016 #4
New Hampshire runs clean elections sarge43 Feb 2016 #5
thank you. its good to hear from people right there. restorefreedom Feb 2016 #9
I'm not saying it couldn't happen, just unlikely. n/t sarge43 Feb 2016 #12
Diebold scanners plus other problems in NH chknltl Feb 2016 #80
I am. Happened against Obama in NH Jarqui Feb 2016 #6
i had heard that some funny stuff happened in 08 restorefreedom Feb 2016 #8
This is worthy of an OP, imho...Notice Hillary 'gaining in NH, with Bernie 'losing' in the lead-up.. AzDar Feb 2016 #52
Yes, Obama was +8, Hillary won by 2; 10 point swing Jarqui Feb 2016 #57
EXTREMELY worried. cui bono Feb 2016 #7
if the wh is concerned enough to get involved, i don't even want to think restorefreedom Feb 2016 #11
Exactly right MissDeeds Feb 2016 #27
it would not surprise me. restorefreedom Feb 2016 #28
All interesting possibilities MissDeeds Feb 2016 #37
i think he has steel resolve. and hopefully good genes. nt restorefreedom Feb 2016 #44
Funny that the networks all decided at the same time that exit polling was too expensive. Dustlawyer Feb 2016 #10
exactly. i hope bernie has his teams ready to do that. restorefreedom Feb 2016 #13
I think Jeff Weaver is terrific MissDeeds Feb 2016 #32
i just hope it doesn't come to lawsuits restorefreedom Feb 2016 #34
I think it has gone too far even for that, It's time to involve the UN election specialists Dragonfli Feb 2016 #24
they would fight every effort to get monitors. nt restorefreedom Feb 2016 #30
Of course they would, it is precisely how corrupt election systems work, they resist being caught. Dragonfli Feb 2016 #38
yes, it proves the point. restorefreedom Feb 2016 #46
Yooge plus one! Enthusiast Feb 2016 #47
That's the playbook. We've all seen it before. FourScore Feb 2016 #14
so glad anonymous endorsed bernie restorefreedom Feb 2016 #22
for me, u.s. elections haven't passed the sniff test since 2000 mooseprime Feb 2016 #15
yup. 2000 ripped off the mask restorefreedom Feb 2016 #21
Same here NowSam Feb 2016 #23
+100%! Enthusiast Feb 2016 #45
You're not crazy. TIME TO PANIC Feb 2016 #16
yes, and it just stayed there restorefreedom Feb 2016 #20
It was like torture. TIME TO PANIC Feb 2016 #29
i should have known something was up restorefreedom Feb 2016 #31
Yep, just in the nick of time. TIME TO PANIC Feb 2016 #36
almost too obvious. nt restorefreedom Feb 2016 #42
Given what we've seen with the DNC and Iowa Dem party, Jarqui Feb 2016 #17
Why worry? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Feb 2016 #18
I feel the same way you do. The Democratic Party has proven that it CharlotteVale Feb 2016 #19
FWIW sarge43 Feb 2016 #25
seems like nh is pretty straight up with its voting restorefreedom Feb 2016 #26
Good point about the voting demographics. It likely could happen that way sarge43 Feb 2016 #40
I'm aware of the possibility, but I don't think so. HooptieWagon Feb 2016 #33
thank goodness there are way more primary states restorefreedom Feb 2016 #35
Agreed. HooptieWagon Feb 2016 #39
i do worry about nevada restorefreedom Feb 2016 #48
I view Nevada like this: HooptieWagon Feb 2016 #50
very true. good odds for bernie though. nt restorefreedom Feb 2016 #51
You're not crazy! It was a calculated scheme. Enthusiast Feb 2016 #41
Yes, I am worried. DamnYankeeInHouston Feb 2016 #43
K & R AzDar Feb 2016 #49
Republicans TeddyR Feb 2016 #53
i dont have proof that it will occur, i have a concern restorefreedom Feb 2016 #66
I'm not that worried Mufaddal Feb 2016 #54
It will help if we don't "get over" Iowa. left lowrider Feb 2016 #55
Fraud how? TeddyR Feb 2016 #56
i explained my thought process in the op restorefreedom Feb 2016 #67
So yeah TeddyR Feb 2016 #73
when they account for the iowa votes restorefreedom Feb 2016 #75
That's why the Corrupt Corporate Owned MSM has the polls tighter...to give her a chance to steal it. in_cog_ni_to Feb 2016 #58
you're not joanbarnes Feb 2016 #59
I have worried about fraud every election since 2000. jwirr Feb 2016 #60
When it's this close... Bohemianwriter Feb 2016 #61
This is the Democratic Party doing the counting.... Spitfire of ATJ Feb 2016 #62
You bet I'm worried. Big. 840high Feb 2016 #63
Not crazy. Paka Feb 2016 #64
They will not go quietly. Or legally. Just ask JFK. nt silvershadow Feb 2016 #65
Really, really, really worried Nite Owl Feb 2016 #68
i reread the bernstein interview on cnn and just about got sick restorefreedom Feb 2016 #69
If they do something like Nite Owl Feb 2016 #70
i am trying to remind myself that no one is more invested restorefreedom Feb 2016 #71
I am grateful for Bernie Nite Owl Feb 2016 #72
yup. nt restorefreedom Feb 2016 #74
You are not crazy but NH is not the place to worry over much about it. mikehiggins Feb 2016 #76
i hope we got the worst state out of the way first restorefreedom Feb 2016 #77
I'm worried about fraud everywhere eridani Feb 2016 #78
yup. it is unfortunate that the first state restorefreedom Feb 2016 #79
of course grasswire Feb 2016 #81
Yes, Diebold is involved in NH chknltl Feb 2016 #82
thats what i suggested a while back restorefreedom Feb 2016 #83
I read that earlier suggestion here at DU, it's a good idea. chknltl Feb 2016 #85
The moment votes go into black boxes, is the end. delrem Feb 2016 #84
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Bernie Sanders»is anyone else worried ab...»Reply #80