Voter Fraud?

I hate to admit it, and it could be from my own lack of sleep as my daughter loses her afternoon nap, but I find myself seeing voter fraud as the simplest explanation for the New Hampshire primary results.

Consider this compelling statistic on the difference in results between paper and computer polling places in New Hampshire. The paper polling districts correspond to the pollsters’ predictions. The computer districts do not:

News Updates from Citizens for Legitimate Government 09 Jan 2008
http://www.legitgov.org/

Where Paper Prevailed, Different Results
By Lori Price 09 Jan 2008

2008 New Hampshire Democratic Primary Results –Total Democratic Votes: 286,139 –

Machine vs Hand (RonRox.com) 09 Jan 2008

Hillary Clinton, Diebold Accuvote optical scan: 39.618%
Clinton, Hand Counted Paper Ballots: 34.908%
Barack Obama, Diebold Accuvote optical scan: 36.309%
Obama, Hand Counted Paper Ballots: 38.617%

Machine vs Hand:
Clinton: +4.709% (13,475 votes)
Obama: -2.308% (-6,604 votes)

2008 New Hampshire Republican Primary Results –Total Republican Votes: 236,378

Machine vs Hand (RonRox.com) 09 Jan 2008

Mitt Romney, Diebold Accuvote optical scan: 33.075%
Romney, Hand Counted Paper Ballots: 25.483%
Ron Paul, Diebold Accuvote optical scan: 7.109%
Paul, Hand Counted Paper Ballots: 9.221%

Machine vs Hand:
Romney: +7.592% (17,946 votes)
Paul: -2.112% (-4,991 votes)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedinmailFacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedinmail