[Active-l] (NEWS) (URGENT) Blatant election fraud? Please give me another explanation for this.

[Dara (R'ykandar Korra'ti)]

	Polling in the last few days before the New Hampshire primary as well  
as exit polling showed Senator Obama winning the New Hampshire primary  
over Senator Clinton. Exit polling also showed Senator Edwards in a  
solid third place.

	Senator Edwards's finish statewide matched the polling. Senator  
Clinton and Obama's didn't. Various theories have been floated as to  
why.

	Andrew Sullivan pointed here ( http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/01/by-hand-or-dieb.html 
  ) to this analysis here ( http://billnoxid.wordpress.com/2008/01/09/pretend-primary-diebold-strikes-again-2/ 
  ), which provides an extremely disturbing data point. In New  
Hampshire, some precincts are hand-counted. The others are Diebold  
machines. In the hand-counted precints, Senator Obama's and Senator  
Clinton's counts matched the exit and pre-primary voting, with Senator  
Obama winning strongly. In the Diebold-counted precincts. Senator  
Clinton won by significant numbers.

	Please give me another explanation for this discrepancy. Please.  
Because this is a disaster. If it's Clinton's machine doing it, it's  
desperately stupid to have done so so sloppily - even if they trust  
the useless, fawning political media not to talk about it. But  
frankly, I think it's too obvious and accordingly too stupid. On the  
other hand, if it's the GOP's - and if they've covered their tracks  
too well for it to be tracked back to them - it's a master stroke,  
setting up the Democratic party for internal war. In either case, if  
true, it destroys whatever confidence might have been remaining in the  
American elections system.

	I have said many, many times that Diebold machines are trivially  
hackable fraudboxes that need to be banned. They need to be gone. This  
has to happen. Now. MoveOn.org has a petition. It's a start:

	http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008/

					- Dara