The New Hampshire results are in and...

posted by The Vidiot @ 7:48 AM Permalink

...I don’t believe them for a New York second.

Honestly, are we to believe that the two biggest war mongers, the two firmest members of the industrial war complex, the two most embedded, firmly ensconced politicians, the two most insipid, pathetic, detestable excuses for humans who’ve ever run for office actually won in the one of the most independent thinking states in the country?! Really? Are we really going to accept that John “we’re going to be in Iraq for 100 years and I would’ve gone to Iraq, WMDs or not” McCain and Hillary “I count my marriage to Bill as part of my years of political service” Clinton got the most votes in a state that has on their license plates “live free or die”?

Really?

I can’t wrap my head around it. And neither should anybody else.

And this isn’t sour grapes. I’m not particularly cheering for any of the sycophants, not even Kucinich or Paul, (though, I would giggle and skip my way to the voting booth if they were on the same ticket in November for reasons that are wholly unrelated to who’s a better candidate.) But there’s no way that Clinton and McCain won.

No.
Way.
On.
God’s.
Green.
Earth.

And if you believe these results then you believe in flying, pink bunnies.

Already, there are reports that people who voted for Ron Paul looked at the town’s tallies and saw that there were no votes for Ron Paul. How can THAT be if there wasn’t any tampering?

So, what we have now is that the illusion of a democracy is gone. It’s bad enough that we haven’t had a democracy for a very long time, maybe never, but now they’ve taken away the comforting illusion...

and NOW I’M REALLY PISSED.

Update: And let the parsing begin.

Some more statistics from the data shows that Obama in non-Diebold towns garnering 38.7% of the vote to Clinton's 36.2%. The results in Diebold towns show the exact opposite: Clinton with 40.7% of the vote and Obama with 36.2%. Not only are the positions swapped but the informal statistics have the second place candidate holding 36.2% in both cases, which could easily be a pure coincidence. What doesn't make a lot of sense to me right now and this could be a mathematical mistake on my part is where Clinton got the extra 2% of votes in Diebold towns.

More data can be found here.

Update 2: BlackBoxVoting had an interesting graph on one of their forum pages.

Labels: 2008 election, primaries, voting machines