13 January, 2008

“Red Flags Over New Hampshire”

Posted by Socrates in democracy, elections, equalocracy, Socrates, voting at 8:07 pm | Permanent Link

The results of New Hampshire’s primary election are being questioned by both Democrats and Republicans. (It will be interesting to see how that might affect the Michigan primary on January 15th and the South Carolina primaries on January 19th [for Republicans] and January 26th [for Democrats]):

[Article].


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 01/08/08 Ron Paul in New Hampshire, Part 2 82% similar
  3. 01/05/08 Ron Paul in New Hampshire 63% similar
  4. 05/19/14 New Hampshire Police Commissioner Resigns Over a Word 31% similar
  5. 11/12/16 Leftists – the Most Intolerant People on Earth – Are Trying to Reverse the Election 31% similar
  6. 09/25/15 House Speaker John Boehner Resigns, Thanks to Trump 28% similar
  7. 5 Responses to ““Red Flags Over New Hampshire””

    1. Hoosier Says:

      more on this:

      http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=749

      http://yannone.blogspot.com/2008/01/new-hampshire-election-fraud.html

      I read that Obama polled something like 42/29 percent over Hillary, but she pulled a “stunning” upset. I can’t find the link now.

    2. Hoosier Says:

      I found it, and More:

      “…Now the January, 2008 election: dateline New Hampshire. Zogby International has a well-deserved reputation for accuracy. It’s January 5 – 7 pre-election poll numbers showed Obama at 42% v. Clinton’s 29% – an impossible gap to close in a few days or even weeks. Yet magically it happened. Clinton miraculously snatched victory from certain defeat with 39% of the vote to Obama’s 36% with the loser saying no more than “I am still fired up and ready to go.” Where to he should ask after this type reversal with obvious grim signs for his hopes.

      Consider final New Hampshire vote tallies for all candidates compared to Zogby’s January 5 – 7 pre-election poll numbers. For Republican and Democrat candidates alike, they were dead-on right with one glaring exception. Something to ponder and question.

      “On the Republican side, something fishy happened as well to its one outlier – Ron Paul. The candidate’s “war room” hand count showed he got 15% of the vote, but official counting gave him 8% and 9% in total when electronically tabulated votes were included. His web site said he scored 10% or better in every township and listed percentages for them all. They ranged from 34% to 10.25%. If these numbers are accurate, Paul got a minimum of 10% of New Hampshire’s vote for a third place finish.

      Another disturbing report also emerged. The town of Sutton admitted it voided all Paul votes. He got 31, but none made the official tally. It was blamed on “human error” that might account for a slight variance but highly unlikely to erase his entire total. Yet it did and raises strong suspicions of fraud. Once this information got out, other districts where Paul scored zero changed their final count adding votes for him never counted. Something clearly is rotten in New Hampshire. It doesn’t say much for the process ahead, or past ones either for that matter.”

      Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago”

      http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7770

    3. ajiarcher Says:

      if you add the total percentage’s for the hand counted votes for Ron Paul and divide by the number of cities and towns you will get 14.84%. that’s the 15% the polls said he had going into the N.H. primary.
      some of the cities and towns that were electronically counted, did not even have him get 1 vote.
      you can draw your own conclusions.

    4. Hoosier Says:

      Apparently, the Ron Paul campaign will not be seeking a recount:

      http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2008/01/new-hampshire-r.html

      It seems like there is a grassroots effort to raise the money – $65,000 – for a recount of the republican primary in New Hampshire. I can’t vouch for the accuracy of this site:

      http://grannywarrior.chipin.com/recount

    5. Hoosier Says:

      http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/rants/r3volution.htm

      According to Ed Steele, commenting on the Diebold electronic voting machines, where the controversy seems to stem:

      “Did you know that the Diebold voting machines are made in Israel? Did you know that an Israeli company was in charge of tallying the Iowa caucus results? Did you know that Israel, like the Council on Foreign Relations, has blessed every Presidential candidate except Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich (Kucinich is one of the fellows demanding a recount in New Hampshire)? Make of those facts what you will. I’ll save what I make of them for another day.”