Courtesy of  Actual vrs Polled NH
Courtesy of

There was shock and awe when Hillary Clinton won New Hampshire. Jaded as I am, anytime I hear of votes being different from the polls before and after the voting, I have to remember the election of 2004. And again of 2006. So of course when I heard that Hillary’s win came out of nowhere, I said “Hmmm. We haven’t heard from Karl Rove lately.”

Now I know most of you would never expect someone capable of manipulating votes in an election. Unfortunately I have seen it done in small down-to-earth local elections, and in other countries where winning takes precedence over playing fair.

So I was not very surprised when I saw this work come out, instead quietly muttered “right on time.” I was planning on spending my night tracking it down, but now……I don’t have to.

Once again it was the bloggers who intercepted this story. I listened on mass media for it all day, and instead heard media pundits trying to explain options that could have occurred that just might make sense of something that was an unexplainable anomaly.

Bottom line, in areas where the ballots were hand counted, Obama’s and Clinton’s results match the data from all the polls. It is only in those precincts where Diebold machines were used, does Hillary have votes that seem to come from nowhere, when compared to the polling data.

Odd. Where have we seen this before. Strange fluctuations where Diebold counts the ballots. Predictable results where people count the ballots.

Can it be possible that someone could throw a world-watched primary, electrically?

It can if you are Silvestro, president of LHS Associates. (Note to law enforcement officials, please check out the malicious code emanating from that sight. Careful, it’s powerful. For the rest of you, I dismantled that link.)

You will certainly believe so if you watch this part of the documentary Hacking Democracy. Earlier this fall, a court case to abolish the Diebolds before the New Hampshire primary, failed in that endeavor. Being a small state, all of the voting machines in New Hampshire, are in the hand of one man.

Again all the polling was dead on for every candidate but two. Hillary Clinton and Obama. They changed not statewide, but ONLY in those precincts where Diebolds were used.

The Ron Paul campaign is crying fowl as well. With New Hampshire being small enough, one can backtrack and determine whether the votes listed are accurate or not. In one precent, 0 Ron Paul ballots were logged and the author of this statement knows how he voted. He also knows others who voted the same way.

So we have an actual account of a machine not counting votes correctly. Furthermore we have video proof that the machine does not total votes using principals of mathematics, ie adding. Additionally we have the website of the company that services the Diebolds, giving out malicious code if one clicks on. Finally we have the owner of the same corporation, showing his contempt for the court, and presumably for the law which it is attempting to uphold…….

So putting all those together, with a win that really shouldn’t have happened based on all data accumulated beforehand, similar to the 2004 Presidential Election, you have a good reason never to trust the totals of a Diebold reader, again.

Which proves what I said last summer. All those corporate interests that supported Bush, long ago cast their lot with Ms Clinton. It’s a shame that New Hampshire does not border Illinois, otherwise an additional 120,000 votes could have helped Obama.