|
|
Post by behindthebook on Jan 8, 2008 13:41:33 GMT -5
Well the early voting from Hart's Location and Dixville Notch, the two towns that vote at midnight, give the early leads to McCain and Obama. Should be interesting to see how that holds up.
On an unrelated note, Dixville Notch is my new favorite town name, because it sounds dirty but it's not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trent Lawless on Jan 8, 2008 14:09:37 GMT -5
I think that's how it's gonna go in the end. Hillary's got some catchin' up to do after today, I reckon. On an unrelated note, Dixville Notch is my new favorite town name, because it sounds dirty but it's not. There's also (I believe) Blue Ball (or Balls), PA. And naturally, Intercourse, PA. But those sound a little more flagrant. |
|
|
|
Post by Aquinas on Jan 8, 2008 14:17:22 GMT -5
I think the Clinton campaign is heading towards crisis mode. You just have a feeling the Obama train is in full gear. I could see Hillary finishing a distant 2nd, even third.
Her pathetic faux tears thing yesterday is going to hurt too -- and it should.
As for the Republicans, I just hope the Huckabee surge ends as soon as possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by GalactiKing on Jan 8, 2008 14:40:34 GMT -5
I think that's how it's gonna go in the end. Hillary's got some catchin' up to do after today, I reckon. On an unrelated note, Dixville Notch is my new favorite town name, because it sounds dirty but it's not. There's also (I believe) Blue Ball (or Balls), PA. And naturally, Intercourse, PA. But those sound a little more flagrant. Intercourse has a real weird explanation for its name. Apparently it involved an old race course at the edge of town. It said Enter Course....and apparently it eventualyl was corrupted into the town name. |
|
|
|
Post by daytondave on Jan 8, 2008 23:58:42 GMT -5
Fox News has called it for Hillary and McCain. I am no great fan of Obama, but I am pulling for him just to watch Hillary melt down  |
|
|
|
Post by behindthebook on Jan 9, 2008 8:02:16 GMT -5
You know what I don't get? Hillary at one time lead the polls in New Hampshire by 20 some odd points. She won last night by 2. How is this a shocking comeback?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chewey on Jan 9, 2008 22:06:17 GMT -5
I am no great fan of Obama, but I am pulling for him just to watch Hillary melt down But isn't everybody in the medical profession at least a de facto fan of Obama? I mean, Hillary and her universal health care plan melting down in favor of John Edwards isn't exactly a great tradeoff either.  |
|
|
|
Post by KellyMonro007 on Jan 10, 2008 3:07:17 GMT -5
You know what I don't get? Hillary at one time lead the polls in New Hampshire by 20 some odd points. She won last night by 2. How is this a shocking comeback? You get great "comebacks" when FRAUD is involved. The electronic Diebold machines can be tweaked by even someone who has moderate computer skills. Yet how they were thrust upon the American people is a crime in itself. Sutton NH, Ron Paul was cheated out of votes in the Primary. Sutton and Greenville originally had ZERO votes for Paul, yet in Sutton people actually came forward and said that they did in fact vote for him. Afterwards, they found that there were in fact 31 votes for Ron Paul in Sutton, and immediately Greenville and other districts which also voided his votes changed them and he finally got credit for them. 31 votes for a small town is a lot of votes. Hillary is Supposed to win. And TPTB are pulling out all the stops to make sure that it does happen. Once Obama is counted out he will probably point at NH, but it will be way too late. He should make a big stink about it, but he won't, so he will fall to wayside soon and take his licks from the Clinton/Bush/NeoCon managers. Kelly |
|
|
|
Post by Trent Lawless on Jan 10, 2008 5:12:33 GMT -5
Diebold bothers the heck out of me, as does electronic voting. There are so many problems related to it that I just have to say technology isn't always the answer.
But in my district, that's the kind of machines they have, so I'll just have to cross my fingers and pray that what I mean to say actually gets counted.
I hope you're not right about "TPTB," but let's just say I wouldn't be surprised if you were right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike M on Jan 10, 2008 9:33:27 GMT -5
While Clinton won the popular vote, I heard that she walked away with the same number of delegates as Obama. You'd think that the media would have learned to cover the whole delegates/electoral college angle better by now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aquinas on Jan 10, 2008 9:41:06 GMT -5
You know what I don't get? Hillary at one time lead the polls in New Hampshire by 20 some odd points. She won last night by 2. How is this a shocking comeback? You get great "comebacks" when FRAUD is involved. The electronic Diebold machines can be tweaked by even someone who has moderate computer skills. Yet how they were thrust upon the American people is a crime in itself. Sutton NH, Ron Paul was cheated out of votes in the Primary. Sutton and Greenville originally had ZERO votes for Paul, yet in Sutton people actually came forward and said that they did in fact vote for him. Afterwards, they found that there were in fact 31 votes for Ron Paul in Sutton, and immediately Greenville and other districts which also voided his votes changed them and he finally got credit for them. 31 votes for a small town is a lot of votes. Hillary is Supposed to win. And TPTB are pulling out all the stops to make sure that it does happen. Once Obama is counted out he will probably point at NH, but it will be way too late. He should make a big stink about it, but he won't, so he will fall to wayside soon and take his licks from the Clinton/Bush/NeoCon managers. Kelly I think the whole vote tampering thing is becoming an excuse whenever somebody doesn't like the results. I think there IS voter fraud in plenty of cases, and there are improvements needed, but I highly doubt there are any grandiose conspiracies at hand. And if there were Bush/Neocon seedy little plots mucking around with the election, why the heck would they care about Ron Paul, who has a snowball's chance in hell? That's just crazy conspiracy talk. |
|
|
|
Post by Trent Lawless on Jan 10, 2008 11:31:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Aquinas on Jan 10, 2008 12:01:19 GMT -5
And I don't disagree with the flaws of the voting process here. I was more lashing out at the crazy notion that the "evil" Bush cabal and Neocons are somehow trying to undermine Ron Paul. As if he's anything more than a fringe candidate with a cult following. Or that the Clinton machine is rigging things so Hillary beats Obama. The machines are flawed, yes. But these conspiracies are lunacy. Just my 2 cents. |
|
|
|
Post by Wildfire on Jan 10, 2008 12:25:42 GMT -5
While Clinton won the popular vote, I heard that she walked away with the same number of delegates as Obama. You'd think that the media would have learned to cover the whole delegates/electoral college angle better by now. Nope, they cover what makes the best story... Hillary actually got one MORE delagate in Iowa than Obama....it wasn't mentioned on CNN once, even when they showed it on the screen. |
|
|
|
Post by behindthebook on Jan 10, 2008 15:13:44 GMT -5
Iowa delegates
Obama: 16
Edwards: 14
Clinton: 15
Though this doesn't take into account the states "Superdelegates".
NH delegates:
Clinton: 9
Obama: 9
Edwards: 4
So nationally, it's:
Obama: 25
Clinton: 24
Edwards: 18
|
|
|
|
Post by Trent Lawless on Jan 10, 2008 16:18:47 GMT -5
This should remain interesting for a little while longer, at least. I'm particularly interested in how South Carolina turns out on the Dems side and Florida on the Repubs side. That's where Giuliani's best hope seems to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by KellyMonro007 on Jan 19, 2008 4:28:33 GMT -5
Update:
After recounting the ballots in Manchester's Ward 5 in NH, they have come up with totals that were not even close to those that the Diebold machines claimed. Conspiracy or faulty machines? It's up to you. Oh, and some of the memory cards that some machines used? They are missing.
Here are the votes for the main 3 Dems:
Hillary Clinton: Votes from Diebold: 683. Votes from the hand recount: 619
John Edwards: Votes from Diebold: 255. Votes from hand recount: 217
Obama: Votes from Diebold: 404. Votes from hand recount: 365.
And this is in small NH. Do you honestly believe that YOUR vote will be counted when you vote?
Diebold sucks.
Kelly
|
|
|
|
Post by Trent Lawless on Jan 19, 2008 10:12:14 GMT -5
What sucks is that in a lot of states (my own of Maryland included), they insist on using these electronic machines almost everywhere. It's so easy to mess with data these days that I just don't get why there's such a big push for this technology.
I'm willing to give Diebold a little bit of the benefit of the doubt and say these are more likely glitches than evil intentioned manipulation, since it seems like on the Dems' side at least the discrepancies were universal and not weighted one particular way. But still, something's gotta be fixed here.
But this kind of news is boring to most people. Who's gonna care ultimately, I wonder? Sad.
|
|
