READER COMMENTS ON

"Hillary Clinton: The Luckiest Woman in the World"

(70 Responses so far...)





COMMENT #1 [Permalink]

... Dan-in-PA said on 4/23/2008 @ 5:30 pm PT...





My wife was purged from the voter rolls. I've decided to get involved. These fucktards don't know what they've just unleashed.

COMMENT #2 [Permalink]

... C Smith said on 4/23/2008 @ 5:36 pm PT...





17745

proof 1 proof 2 {Ed note: And this is "proof" of what exactly? - BF}

COMMENT #3 [Permalink]

... GWN said on 4/23/2008 @ 5:48 pm PT...





I can see MSMedia ,or whatever handle he uses, saying in big headlines...

"BRAD FRIEDMAN TURNS AGAINST HIS READERS, CALLS THEM CONSPIRACY THEORISTS" "She Who Lies A Lot" certainly is a lucky woman.

COMMENT #4 [Permalink]

... Floridiot said on 4/23/2008 @ 6:03 pm PT...





What the fuck is that Mr. Smith? Some kind of percentage adjustment?

COMMENT #5 [Permalink]

... leftisbest said on 4/23/2008 @ 6:43 pm PT...





POST-election exit polls (the only time one can do an EXIT poll!) gave Hillary a 4% spread, with a 2% margin of error. Chances of the REAL outcome being nearly (but NOT) a 10% spread are statistically astronomical. Wow, this is one lucky lady alright! Thanks Brad, way to firmly plant the tongue in the cheek. Well stated - it's just luck, and the earth is flat! Oh, and did I forget to say, War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery and Ignorance is Strength.

COMMENT #6 [Permalink]

... Orangutan. said on 4/23/2008 @ 6:44 pm PT...





Anyone know the situation we have facing us in Indiana as far as the voting machines go?? Damn we need to get this situation straightened out. Great work Brad. http://www.GetItStraightBy2008.org

http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008 Do what you can do.

COMMENT #7 [Permalink]

... Dredd said on 4/23/2008 @ 6:56 pm PT...





Hillary McNeocon is very lucky in states that can not back up their electronic assertions. Her religion political philosophy is the "trust us" religion of election officialdumb. Only McPain is dumber. He is rock dumb. To trust the government is one of the cardinal sins of Americana, and one of the whoopee doos of Amurkana. We Americans figured that out a couple of centuries ago. We figured out something more astounding than what Sir Isaac Newton discovered! We discovered the laws of power. The first law of power is that power corrupts. The second law is that absolute power corrupts absolutely. And the third law is that to the degree you listen to those who have been corrupted is the degree to which you will be corrupted. That is why I hang here. Less corruption.

COMMENT #8 [Permalink]

... Orangutan. said on 4/23/2008 @ 7:01 pm PT...





Of course, the Republican or Democratic parties themselves have it within their power to once-and-for-all put an end to your endlessly exhausting conspiracy theories and falderall, by New York gets Paper Ballots post said something abomaking it nearly impossible for you loons to continue your incessant ramblings. They could assure an election system in which it could be proven, with actual evidence and such, that the person that they the computers announced as the winner was actually the one who received the most votes. They could. But obviously, they don't want to. Yo Brad. You say the above. I'd like to know what organizations or what methods of voting reform are best for what you are talking about. Do you recommend the two I posted? Do you know of better stuff? It's complex for the average voter. The phrase I try to repeat and push is: Voter Verified Paper Ballots with Paper trails that are randomly audited. Does that cover it? Another poster under the New York gets Paper Ballots post said something about Stalin using paper ballots and that wasn't secure. I know the electronic voting machines were touted as reform after the florida debacle. The florida thing was a mess. I just want to push for voter integrity reform that is going to be the ideal. It's the bottom line for any democracy. Peace.

COMMENT #9 [Permalink]

... C Smith said on 4/23/2008 @ 7:07 pm PT...





voting machine some sort of adjustment i do not think for display

17745 thank you

COMMENT #10 [Permalink]

... Floridiot said on 4/23/2008 @ 7:08 pm PT...





Somehow I feel that Mr. Smith let us have a peek into the matrix of the electron election

COMMENT #11 [Permalink]

... billl4 said on 4/23/2008 @ 7:18 pm PT...





9.2% = 10% Wow, you are correct Brad, she is definitely lucky. I don't think any of my math professors would have let me get away with a calculation like that, but then again, I'm not as lucky as she is. 7:15 pm PT 4/23/08 Clinton 1,238,232

Obama 1,030,703

..........2,268,935 votes Clinton 54.57%

Obama 45.43%

Difference = 9.15% which of course, equals a double-digit, 10 point victory!! As Dubya would say, "Is our children learning?"

COMMENT #12 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 4/23/2008 @ 7:31 pm PT...





Orangutan asked: I'd like to know what organizations or what methods of voting reform are best for what you are talking about. Do you recommend the two I posted? No. Very much no. And thanks for asking. Common Cause (the first link) has been pushing for "paper trails" via the Holt bill for a long time, even after they learned that DREs, with or without a so-called "paper trail" cannot safely be used in any election. Moveon knew that took, but supported the Holt bill nonetheless, when they should have been calling for a ban on ALL DREs (touch-screens) instead of supporting federal legislation which would have federally institutionalized both DREs and secret voting software. It's complex for the average voter. The phrase I try to repeat and push is: Voter Verified Paper Ballots with Paper trails that are randomly audited. Does that cover it? Unfortunately, no. I might suggest instead, calling for "a hand-marked paper ballot --- one which is actually counted --- for every vote cast in America" That, at least, will get us started. The prob with what you've been calling for, as mentioned above, is that a "Voter Verified Paper Ballot" is ALREADY a "paper trail". By definition, if it's a paper BALLOT, it has been verified by the voter when they filled it in. However, matters have become complicated by ballot marking devices which print electronic printouts of the ballot to be counted by another means (such as op scan or hand count). Unfortunately, we've learned that two-thirds of voters who use electronic devices to create their ballots, don't notice when the machine has flipped a choice on that ballot. That is, of course, if they actually bother to check the computer created paper trail (which some 80% don't, according to studies). I could go on, and have. But hopefully that gets you back thinking in the right direction, since you were off a bit in your current strategy and thinking as described above.

COMMENT #13 [Permalink]

... Steve said on 4/23/2008 @ 7:47 pm PT...





LEFTISBEST #5- Everyone knows that exit polls are no longer accurate in the USofA. Please don't give me that mumbo jumbo about exit polls being considered as highly accurate everywhere else in the world (including the USofA before 2002) and even used by the Bush Administration to cast doubt on the election in the Ukraine. We no longer trust this scientific malarky in the USofA. This is a faith-based country and we must trust our faith-based elections. It's time for guys like you to junk your old ideas and come into the new millenium (or end up with other "old world thinkers" in one of Bush's gulags)!

COMMENT #14 [Permalink]

... ONYX said on 4/23/2008 @ 8:19 pm PT...





I heard a rumor over at DU that the unadjusted exit polls showed Obama leading in PA into the afternoon. Anyone hear any more about this? I've searched around and found nothing. I think it is strange that there is so little talk about raw exit poll numbers. Seems they have sealed up the leaks. If anyone sees or hears anything - especially anything verifiable - please let us all know.

COMMENT #15 [Permalink]

... olenska said on 4/23/2008 @ 8:22 pm PT...





What WERE the exit polls in Pennsylvania. Does anybody know? We know that New Hampshire was stolen, as the exit polls gave Obama a 10% point lead. what did they say in Pennsylvania. anybody?

COMMENT #16 [Permalink]

... C Smith said on 4/23/2008 @ 8:25 pm PT...





i did let you know proof of what you think here and here

COMMENT #17 [Permalink]

... CharlieL said on 4/23/2008 @ 8:26 pm PT...





Exit polls do not account for provisional ballots. If you leave an election site having voted on a provisional ballot and somebody asks you who you voted for, they don't ask you whether or not you voted provisionally or not. Guess what... The same old tricks are working just fine.

COMMENT #18 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 4/23/2008 @ 8:57 pm PT...





Media "buzz" phrases: "The Tide is Turning" "Obama can't seal the deal" (so, Hillary's strategy was to GET BEHIND...and then say that Obama can't "seal the deal") "Americans want a fighter" (you have to be LOSING, to be called "a fighter" btw...) All phrases you use when YOU'RE LOSING!!!

COMMENT #19 [Permalink]

... Linda said on 4/23/2008 @ 8:57 pm PT...





Good one , Brad.

COMMENT #20 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 4/23/2008 @ 9:01 pm PT...





And the setup for when McCain & the Republicans steal yet another presidential election: "The Democrats lost because of the long primary" "The Democrats bloodied themselves in the primary and that's why they lost to McCain" Instead of investigating vote anomolies, people showing up to vote and not being in the books, and vote suppression. The story of the McCain victory is being written right now!!!

COMMENT #21 [Permalink]

... Big Dan said on 4/23/2008 @ 9:05 pm PT...





Also, doesn't it seem like all the anomalies so far favor Hillary? If all the questionable occurrences favor one candidate or party, then it's not random.

COMMENT #22 [Permalink]

... Alex said on 4/23/2008 @ 9:16 pm PT...





Brad:

Can you summarize for us the percentage of each state's (that has voted already)voting system whether itis determined by hackable electronic voting systems or other sytems. And then show us which states were won by Hillary and which by Obama. The talking heads on the MSM "news" like to remind us how corrupt and antiquated the Caucus system is, but they don't use the similarly derrogatory terms when referring to the electronic systems.

COMMENT #23 [Permalink]

... John said on 4/23/2008 @ 9:46 pm PT...





Thanks, Brad, for your amazing work to bring us this information day after day. I tell everyone I know about your web site. I hope at least some of the main stream media are covering your posts, but I haven't seen much evidence of that. I guess we'll have to find the truth on your site and similar ones. I hope all your readers are supporting you financially. I know I am. The work you do is priceless!! Thanks again!!

COMMENT #24 [Permalink]

... C Smith said on 4/23/2008 @ 10:02 pm PT...





all electronic devices have hidden service menu if you know how to get into them or happen to stumble up on one in that mode someone tell me what machine this is and what this menu is for please LINK - what is this LINK - what do these do

COMMENT #25 [Permalink]

... Shannon Williford said on 4/23/2008 @ 10:12 pm PT...





Can somebody give a link to real PA exit polls?

Are exit polls in individual states traditionally as accurate as for whole countries? Just wondering... shw

COMMENT #26 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 4/23/2008 @ 10:46 pm PT...





Alex #22 asked: You can use this page, to see which equipment is used in each state/county. You'll have to compare that, as you wish, to the various primary races so far. Remember, however, that even states with all paper ballots (for instance, New Hampshire), likely count the bulk of their ballots with computer op-scan systems, and don't bother to audit/spot-check any of them at all. They trust the scanners to be accurate. Even though they are easily hackable, and often just plain error prone.

COMMENT #27 [Permalink]

... Adam Fulford said on 4/23/2008 @ 11:17 pm PT...





Hillary Clinton has exposed herself to be a moral coward and a corrupt corporate sycophant, willing to make murderous choices for the sake of gaining power, as demonstrated by her vote for mass-murder of Iraqi civilians (thousands of times more Iraqi civilians have been killed and tortured than those committed by Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, Dennis Raider and all other American serial killers combined), her racist fear-mongering against Obama Barack her support of war-profiteering defense contractor GE/NBC's ousting of Dennis Kucinich from debates, and her active endorsement of rigged elections in Pennsylvania. The United States of America, forged with the blood of natives and slave labor, fought for freedom from tyranny for European American men (and European American women to a lesser degree). Compromised as the founding of the nation was, the principles were a true advancement for democracy when applied to all Americans, not just White males. Now, a nation that once could arguably call itself a democracy has been passively falling into the very kind of monarchic system that it fought against in its founding as a nation. Hillary Clinton, like Bush before her, feels entitled to inherit the crown. Everything that is good about America is being trashed, while everything bad is being promoted, with people like Hillary Clinton leading the way. Hillary Clinton should be imprisoned for aiding and abetting war crimes, not bestowed with a coronation.

COMMENT #28 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 4/23/2008 @ 11:33 pm PT...





Right on, Adam!

COMMENT #29 [Permalink]

... marzi said on 4/24/2008 @ 4:27 am PT...





Check out the Globe this week for their brave expose of Hillary. No not about the false sniper fire, but about her love life.

COMMENT #30 [Permalink]

... Floridiot said on 4/24/2008 @ 5:49 am PT...





You were supposed to tell us what that screen was for Mr.Smith. If I was in the position that you were to grab that picture, I would have took the picture, pocketed the camera and hung around until the dude working on it came back and asked him what that screen was for. That would have solved a lot of the mystery in your case. Or then you at the very least could have told us that he wouldn't tell you what it was.

COMMENT #31 [Permalink]

... dr. elsewhere said on 4/24/2008 @ 5:53 am PT...





hey, brad, it really would be edifying to list all the primaries thus far attached to their voting methods. may try to crank that up. but mr. smith may be on to something we should attend to. mr. smith, may i recommend that you post those shots over at emptywheel (emptywheel.firedoglake.com), as she has some wicked savvy computer geeks who have been helping her parse out in the comments just what is up with the administration's inexplicable 'loss' of all those emails. duh. her site has never addressed the voting irregularities (there are just SO many to keep up with!), but it would be great to get input from those brains over there, IF we can get their attention. yeah, that exit poll thang. y'know, there really needs to be a concerted effort to recover that tool. i mean, how hard can it be? i remember after the 04 fiasco contacting john zogby about my horror that mitofsky was variously weighing and adjusting the data BY FACTORING IN THE 'OFFICIAL RESULTS'!!! this struck as particularly badbadbad science, but zogby's reply was that 'this is the way it's always been done.' now, i have never done polling, but i do know a thing or two about stats, and this struck me as just really really wrong. so surely there is someone out there who does know something about polling AND good stats who can generate enough interest in someone with money (ok, who out there has a connection to soros??) and can start reversing this destructive trend toward the toilet? finally, and consistent with this last point, i have been finding it particularly bizarre whenever the media does stories on this topic of voting machines (the nytimes piece last month, especially) that they NEVER mention how this voting thang is done elsewhere. as it happens, in most western european countries (e.g., germany, norway, etc.), they still use the old paper ballots and hand counting. hell, it's still done that way in some precincts in the US, but you never hear about them. the thing is, those ballots are hand counted until everyone at the table is satisfied (all parties represented by a specific counter), then they're placed in a sealed envelope with the total inscribed, and preserved, while that total is delivered to the central election office. and guess what? those totals virtually always fall (now get this) within .01% of the exit polls! no kidding.... not 1%, but .01%. that is SUCH good science! worth a trip to germany to figure out how all this is done! now, is that so hard? the results may not happen in a matter of hours, but it gets done. and it sure gets a result faster than the full month we waited in 2000 before the supreme court took the power of our votes away! of course, there are other concerns such as those presented by the likes of stalin's - and even sadam hussein's - systems (and all those others i countries where the US has supported dictatorships that support our 'national interests'). but that just highlights where we as voters must PARTICIPATE in our election systems in order to keep it honest. we have to be willing to volunteer at the voting sites, we have to be willing to run for office as election commissioners and even secretaries of state, and we have to be willing to take the power of the vote out of the hands of corporations and criminals and keep it in the hands of the people. we have to reverse the efforts concerted by the republican party and place ourselves in these positions of power, removing the corrupt parties. er, party. well, you get the picture; we just need to take our voting system back! HANDS ON VOTING, i always say. because democracy is not a spectator sport, it will always be as pure as we want it to be, or as corrupted as we allow it to be. that said, we clearly have a LOT of work to do! so thanks, brad, for providing such an inspiration for us all!

COMMENT #32 [Permalink]

... Lora said on 4/24/2008 @ 7:01 am PT...





Well... Hillary has some bona fide reasons for having won PA. She has roots in Scranton, the PA women truly have supported her, and PA is frankly a very racist state (from the Times Leader also linked here from John Gideon's post I believe: "WYOMING – A judge of elections in the borough reportedly told a voter, “Remember, it’s a White House, not a Black House.”). And I don't believe that rounding up from 9. something to 10 is out of line. However, as Brad has pointed out, there is absolutely no way to confirm or deny Hillary's win. The way elections are run is a mass brainwashing event. That herds of citizens can go into the poll booth, cast their electronic ballot, or mail in their absentee ballot, and have faith that the system will work, is just mind boggling. Disclosure: 1) I am a PA resident.

2) I am a tepid Hillary supporter (Gasp! Don't kick me out, please!).

COMMENT #33 [Permalink]

... maybe c. smith said on 4/24/2008 @ 8:52 am PT...





C. Smith-

Just guessing here, but it may be an alignment screen for a touchscreen system. Touchscreen devices have to be calibrated so that they respond to the proper boxes, and the machines currently in use rely on older technology that requires that they be recalibrated on an semi-regular basis.

The sliders with the test boxes makes me think that these may be pictures of such a calibration screen. (i.e. if not calibrated properly touching the "yes" box could result in no response or checking the wrong selection. This happens IN EVERY ELECTION because invariably at least one machine has drifted out of calibration. This is not new information, nor proof of anything except the curious fact that Secretaries of State actually saw this technology and still thought it was acceptable.)

COMMENT #34 [Permalink]

... Jody said on 4/24/2008 @ 9:13 am PT...





"Leftisbest" - You said: "Everyone knows that exit polls are no longer accurate in the USofA." This is akin to the term "some people say..." used frequently by FoxNoise, faux news! Who are "everyone". You need to be specific with documented evidence that exit polls are not accurate. That is a movement by the right wing to invalidate exit polls. Exit polls are the most highly accurate. They are all we have right now to get a clear picture of how the electorate is voting.

COMMENT #35 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 4/24/2008 @ 9:19 am PT...





Jody No, that was Steve who said that in response to leftisbest, and he was being sarcastic, tongue in cheek. We all know exit polls are highly accurate, despite some weird press out there. Honestly, no one is dissing exit polls here. We want them fresh and unadjusted to match outcomes. And stuff like this drives me nuts!

COMMENT #36 [Permalink]

... Mr. Chad said on 4/24/2008 @ 9:28 am PT...





HAVA = Help Anesthetize Voting Americans. There is no proof of election fraud with computerized voting. Of course, there is no proof it didn't happen. It is time for progressives to use the words "ELECTION FRAUD" the same way the right-wing radio brainwashers use the words Marxist and Socialist when referring to those on the left. Mainstream media won't touch this subject, but that doesn't change the fact that we are living in a time of ELECTION FRAUD IN AMERICA.

COMMENT #37 [Permalink]

... C Smith said on 4/24/2008 @ 10:13 am PT...





maybe c. smith said on 4/24/2008 @ 8:52 am PT... You may be right about that I do not know. The strange part is that the cartridge thing was in the machine at the time. I don't know why it would need to be in there to set up the display.

COMMENT #38 [Permalink]

... karen said on 4/24/2008 @ 10:40 am PT...





Hey Lora Yes, Hill had reasons for doing well in PA, demographics of state were perfect for her (older etc...)but of course hypothetical election riggers should be smart enough not to rig Hawaii or Illinois for a Hillary win. Trick is, to take a contender and make them a winner with a few point bump. But to Brad's point, I'd say it's McCain who is the luckiest candidate (does not contradict Hill as luckiest WOMAN in world). If Hillary camp was effective at rigging things, she should have rigged a win by now, but instead, she loses 12 states in a row. Just when Hill is wobbling at the knees, the bell rings. In the next round, she wins, just by the amount needed to almost, but not totally, even the score card. And in the next round, she manages to head butt Obama (accidentally?) causing a bleeding cut above the eye. Of course, the comeback kid gains some appeal, even if some say she's dirty. This invariably leads to either a controversial stoppage of the fight by the referree for medical reasons or to a controversial split decision by judges with all the handlers and fans rushing into the ring to fight about it. McCain couldn't write a better script. Hill could. McCain is the luckiest MAN in the world.

COMMENT #39 [Permalink]

... Marybeth Kuznik said on 4/24/2008 @ 11:09 am PT...





Re: Smith Pictures 1) They are shots of the display on an ES&S iVotronic. (note the Vote button)

2) They are NOT screen calibration. I have observed iVotronic calibration being done. You touch a series of Xs in the correct order as they move around the screen to calibrate. If C. Smith could or would tell someone (off blog if necessary) where/when the photos were taken it would help to identify. Marybeth Kuznik

http://www.VotePA.us

COMMENT #40 [Permalink]

... Marybeth Kuznik said on 4/24/2008 @ 11:13 am PT...





PS --- the pictures may be part of the programming process (placing the "targets" or touchpoints on the screen during the election setup) but I have never directly observed that being done. MBK

COMMENT #41 [Permalink]

... C Smith said on 4/24/2008 @ 11:27 am PT...





The only thing I can tell you is that those photos were taken in Pennsylvania on 4/22/08. The cartridge key thing was in the machine at the time.

COMMENT #42 [Permalink]

... atlattl sees said on 4/24/2008 @ 12:13 pm PT...





Good work Brad, you are continuing to outdo your own good work. I think your post has gotten extra attention because of the engaging writing. Good writing comes with a 'tude. Your tude snuck up on indeterminacy. How things may or may not be known. And how would we know? You cathected. Yet even the smart BB commenters responded in a scattershot --- including "please Brad, organize the data for us", or "tell us the answer"... No sense for applied probability. My point is that even the best people we work with have a hard time understanding variation, "error", evidence, and, uh, "numbers". When events do not turn out as they "should" --- as expected --- they get all lost. The opposite of yer cathexis. "All processes and data of US elections should be subject to statistically sound, continuous-quality monitoring and improvement." --- official ASA (the statisticians) statement. Do we know what that looks like? How many of our "stars" and "experts" actually know what that looks like? Can we imagine a world where that is common knowledge? Or will we be stuck with ways of knowing based on myths of invariance? Probably.

COMMENT #43 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 4/24/2008 @ 12:16 pm PT...





Doc Elsewhere #31 said: her site has never addressed the voting irregularities You mean ELECTION irregularities. The voters are doing just fine. Please leave them alone.

COMMENT #44 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 4/24/2008 @ 12:52 pm PT...





atlattl, I think your use of the term "cathexis" here is unfortunate, shows some lack of vision.

COMMENT #45 [Permalink]

... Marybeth Kuznik said on 4/24/2008 @ 1:01 pm PT...





The only thing I can tell you is that those photos were taken in Pennsylvania on 4/22/08. The cartridge key thing was in the machine at the time. The "cartridge key thing" is the PEB, or personal electronic ballot, which yes WOULD be in the machine if it is in a programming or administration mode. The fact that it was on Election Day indicates that it is not programming or machine setup (or at least it shouldn't be) so perhaps it is screen adjustment. But not calibration, at least not the way I saw it done. If you can't tell us any more who was attempting to do what it would be difficult to say more, unless someone comes on who is very familiar with the administration of iVotronics. What I would suggest is that please, before November, take the time to join a local election integrity group and volunteer to learn about the process and become an observer for your county's logic and accuracy testing and/or tabulation. We desperately need citizens to step forward and volunteer for this work of watching the process, in every county. And / or you might also volunteer to become a pollworker. We see a lot and are in a good position to report problems and ask questions. Marybeth Kuznik

http://www.VotePA.us

COMMENT #46 [Permalink]

... C Smith said on 4/24/2008 @ 1:18 pm PT...





I can not do that because I was followed

COMMENT #47 [Permalink]

... Floridiot said on 4/24/2008 @ 1:30 pm PT...





I'm revolting again,

and I'm also tired of the worry about being "followed"... screw 'em

It's time for all males to stick your meat in the meat grinder NOW!!!, playtime is over

COMMENT #48 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 4/24/2008 @ 1:39 pm PT...





Floridiot! You ROCK! I'm still revolting....

COMMENT #49 [Permalink]

... Floridiot said on 4/24/2008 @ 1:58 pm PT...





You guys caught the Abramoff poseur delivering an anniversary present to Feeney's office over at Raw, din't ya? What a hoot

COMMENT #50 [Permalink]

... CharlieL said on 4/24/2008 @ 2:52 pm PT...





I've worked with touchscreen kiosks and touchscreen monitor software a fair amount, and have never seen sliders like that used for calibration. Touchescreens are calibrated by TOUCHING different points on the screen (generally the four corners and the center, sometimes four corners, then four inner corners, and then the center) until the machine accepts that you are touching where it things you should be touching. The programming trick used repeatedly by the makers to assure an additional margin for their candidates was to set the "default on touch error" result to RETHUGLICAN in every case ever discovered, so that if you missed, or hit correctly after the machine had gone out of calibration, your vote would register for the Rethuglican candidate. I think now, you can substitute Clinton for Rethuglican in primary races, but the same graft still applies. Think of it this way. On a screen with two buttons, one for Clinton (or Bush) and one for Obama (or Kerry), a touch DIRECTLY ON THE CENTER of the Obama button would register for Obama and a touch ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE SCREEN (whether on a button or not) would register for Clinton.

COMMENT #51 [Permalink]

... olenska said on 4/24/2008 @ 3:01 pm PT...





clinton is not doing the rigging. she is complicit however. the Reps are doing it because they cannot beat Obama and Obama will bring with him substantial majorities in both House and Senate. think back. when was the last time the people's choice got anywhere near the white house. it is all rigged. has been for some time. if the press will not even acknowledge that, we have no hope of changing it

COMMENT #52 [Permalink]

... olenska said on 4/24/2008 @ 3:12 pm PT...





I just contacted the Obama campaign in Indiana and asked them to get in touch with Brad. this crap has got to stop. at least as far as this primary goes

COMMENT #53 [Permalink]

... Ken Carman said on 4/24/2008 @ 4:01 pm PT...





Hmm... Republican's can't win against Barack? Wishful thinking. Maybe if Barack would learn to hit back instead of sounding like a better version of Kerry, speaking-wise; maybe. Yes, he's a great speaker, and though I have questions about the timing of his talks (like taking the Wright controversy, addressing it briefly, and then speanding most of his time on race relations. Great acceptance speech, but not so great when addressing issues like how he supposedly never even heard a whisper about controversial sermons like what the media has been pounding on, over and over. And if anyone thinks calling attackers racists, or whining about how "unfair" people are being to O'Bama, will work against the Swifties: good luck with that. You all will be laughed and mocked right out of winning the presidency. I'm not saying Hillary's better. I have issues with her too, though not as many: or as inventive, or outright hateful and nasty, as some of the posters here... but I will vote for either, or both if the impossible happens and Dems stop acting like children having tantrums. That comment is for both sides of the Dem divide. Here is what I am saying: whether we like it or not we live in a sound bite culture where... "No, God DAMN America." ...will be played over and over. No matter how hard we try to explain what he meant, or O'Bama's response, the sound bite is more powerful than super glue. No matter who gets the nomination they will have to learn to strike back quick, fast and not with some long ass speech that only spends a few brief moments addressing the core of the controversy. They probably will have to get nasty about it. So, yes, they will need to learn to strike back hard. If you've been watching the blogs, or listening to what little Left talk there is, then you know the organizations who supposedly have no connection with McCain already have a Swift Boat ready to sail. You either sink the boats, or drown all chance of winning: doesn't matter who is the hell is running.

COMMENT #54 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 4/24/2008 @ 5:16 pm PT...





Yeah, Ken, I don't want to get used to it. Let's kill the sound bite and give people back their brains... or we might as well just kill ourselves.

COMMENT #55 [Permalink]

... Ken Carman said on 4/24/2008 @ 7:28 pm PT...





Agent 99, I wish we could kill them. I agree: the sound bite needs to suffer a quick death. But short of giving us both super powers to infect the media and the talking heads (most of whom serve the satanic GOPbeast) with a conscience and a return to (GASP!) objective journalism... our candidates need to adapt or die. It sucks. But brains take a while to grow. It also would help if terrorists decided to attack our TVs instead of also serving the GOPbeast... quite totally unintentionally I'm sure. (Yeah... right.) In fact, maybe we should just give all our TVs to them. Let them have the MSM too, and the talking heads. Soon their minds will rot and they'll forget all about dying for virgins. Sarcasm aside, the only way to kill the sound bite is to go on attack; and be rabid about it. O'Bama tries, but IMO, he's not very good at it. The only way to handle bullies is to out bully them. I know, that sucks too. Sad to say, but a smile full of teeth and a lecture just doesn't make it. And if you think I believe Clinton is better, "surly" and "ACK, ACK, ACK" won't work either. If only Mike Malloy or Bernie Ward were running... pit bulls trained to kill would be like kittens in comparison.

COMMENT #56 [Permalink]

... Ken Carman said on 4/24/2008 @ 7:41 pm PT...





BTW, I think one poster had a very valid point. If it were being fixed for Hillary they certainly would be doing a better job than this. While I believe we should kill the voting machines and go back to handcounts... and that elections are being fixed, in this case: I doubt it. In fact if anything is being "fixed" right now it's the animosity between the two camps. I absolutely believe that trolls and the MSM are doing everything they can to shred the party... not that candidates, or supporters, aren't gleefully helping. SIGH.

COMMENT #57 [Permalink]

... truthisall said on 4/24/2008 @ 9:34 pm PT...





http://www.geocities.com...l/2008PrimariesLinks.htm The 2008 Primaries: Statistical Footprints of Election Fraud TruthIsAll April 24, 2008 The pattern is very clear. Starting with Clinton’s New Hampshire primary “upset”, there has been an ongoing effort to pad her votes at the expense of Obama. And no wonder: the Republicans want to run against her and are doing all they can to make it happen. Even so, Obama currently leads the recorded popular vote by 700,000. But he may very well be leading the True Vote by 1,500,000 or more. That would make a big difference in pledged delegates (he currently leads by 156). Obama would be the nominee right now were it not for primary election fraud. It’s the ultimate Rovian dirty trick: tear apart the Democratic Party. Divide and Conquer: it’s the only way the Republicans can win in November. And yet the media doesn’t investigate the footprints of election fraud. They want the “horserace” to continue. The Delegate Calculator is an Excel worksheet for projecting the total number of pledged delegates based on input Obama vote shares. This graph displays the effect of incremental Obama projected shares on the delegate count. In order for Clinton to tie Obama in the final pledged delegate count, she needs to win 64% of the vote in the remaining primaries. This graph displays the trend in super delegates. 1. New Hampshire The Final pre-election polls (3-4% MoE) gave Obama an average 8% margin over HRC. The early (unadjusted) exit poll had Obama winning by 8%. He won New Hampshire hand-counts by 5.90% but lost machine-counts by exactly the same margin. 2. South Carolina Even though he finished third, Edwards would have done better in the general election than either Clinton or Obama. 3. Super Tuesday Just like the 2004 battleground state exit poll red-shift to Bush, 14 of 16 states had a Hillary-shift from the exit poll to the recorded vote. In New York, over 80 precincts, many in black areas, recorded Zero votes for Obama. Mayor Bloomberg called it fraud. In Los Angeles, 90,000 independent votes were uncounted due to the confusing ballot design (shades of the infamous Florida 2000 “Butterfly” which cost Gore over 3,000 votes). 4. Ohio Clinton's vote share exceeded her 9pm exit poll share by 3.6% (55.2-51.6%). She won the recorded vote by 10.6% (55.3-44.7%) over Obama. But her exit poll margin was just 3.4% (51.7-48.3%). As always, the Final Exit Poll was adjusted to match the vote count. In addition, there is concrete evidence that Republican cross-over voters played a significant role in delivering votes to Clinton. In Cuyahoga County 17,000 Republicans followed Rush Limbaugh’s advice and voted for her. And this was also the case in many other counties. 5. Primaries, Caucuses and Exit Polls Obama is doing better in the primaries than the recorded votes indicate. But that’s not unexpected; it’s always the fate of the progressive candidate to fare better in the exit polls than in the vote count. He also does much better in human-counted caucuses than machine-counted primaries (see Texas). He leads Clinton by 700,000 votes in primaries (49.5-46.9%) and by 66.3-33.7% in caucuses. If exit polls rather than recorded votes are counted, Obama would be leading by 1.6 million votes. In Texas, there was a strange, impossible result: Zero votes were cast for Republicans in 21 counties (all 36,239 ballots cast were for Democrats). There were zero votes cast for Democrats in 3 counties (all 1865 ballots cast were for Republicans). Did Republicans follow Rush Limbaugh’s advice and cross over to vote for Clinton? We can assume that crossovers, even if not 100%, occurred in other counties. In Mississippi, Obama won by 61-37%, but 25% of Clinton’s votes came from Republicans who followed the advice of Rush Limbaugh. Obama won 65% of Democrats and Independents. In Pennsylvania, where 100% of the votes are machine-counted, the 5pm exit poll had Obama leading 52-47%. But Hillary won the recorded vote by 54.7-45.3%.

COMMENT #58 [Permalink]

... Dredd said on 4/24/2008 @ 10:01 pm PT...





Brad sedd:

But you'd have not an iota of actual proof to support your paranoid suspicions ... I always remind lawyers that "proof" is something a jury produces, and to remember that the "best" a lawyer can produce is "evidence". I hope you dig the nuance. Well, the ad hominem section ("paranoid suspicions") aside, let me take your premise in chief to task. And yes, "evidence" is defined by the laws of evidence, which regulate what you can and cannot present to the jury. If the jury considers it it is evidence, if not it is not evidence. And of course judges decide what the jury can and can not consider. In short judges decide what is evidence. That is why we have "no evidence" on many issues. But that could be changing:

The Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday approved a bill that attempts to limit the government's use of the state secrets privilege, a broad-based evidentiary claim based on national security concerns that the Bush administration has used frequently in court cases involving the government. Federal courts have routinely dismissed lawsuits over the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program and the government's use of detention, interrogation and "extraordinary rendition" after the privilege has been cited because the suits cannot proceed with the requested evidence. (Baltimore Sun). Also Brad, you left out "circumstantial evidence", which IS admissible in every jurisdiction, with some variation as to how much collaborative evidence is required to corroborate it before it is admissible. Clearly, as to electronic voting results, there is a trainload of circumstantial evidence upon which I think many juries would convict election officials. It has been done in Ohio, Connecticut, and elsewhere. Do not forget the Bastille of Amurka nor to bring the bitch down.

COMMENT #59 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 4/24/2008 @ 10:26 pm PT...





Dredd - I used the word proof (versus evidence) in the original article, very carefully, for some of the reasons you suggest. Is there "evidence" that Clinton won PA? Sure, the reported results offer evidence. But is there proof? Absolutely none in existence.

COMMENT #60 [Permalink]

... olenska said on 4/25/2008 @ 2:25 am PT...





I have emailed this column to every paper, columnist, tv station I know. somebody has got to stop this. the corruption in this country is despicable

COMMENT #61 [Permalink]

... karen said on 4/25/2008 @ 9:01 am PT...





Hey Truthisall I agree with most of your posts, but the mysterious Zero votes in some counties in Texas primary have been explained, not that the answer is very good, but it is not a mystery. The party in those districts did not have a primary, its up to the party, in this case to Repubs to make it happen, and they didn't.

COMMENT #62 [Permalink]

... karen said on 4/25/2008 @ 5:21 pm PT...





while i dont have proof that hillary won because the machines produced a false result...i do have proof the machines produced a false result

0005 AVALON WARD 1

VOTES PERCENT REGISTERED VOTERS - TOTAL . . . . . . 1093

REGISTERED VOTERS - DEMOCRATIC . . . . 644 58.92

REGISTERED VOTERS - REPUBLICAN . . . . 289 26.44

REGISTERED VOTERS - REFORM. . . . . . 1 .09

BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL. . . . . . . . 371

BALLOTS CAST - DEMOCRATIC . . . . . . 310 83.56

BALLOTS CAST - REPUBLICAN . . . . . . 59 15.90

BALLOTS CAST - REFORM . . . . . . . 2 .54

VOTER TURNOUT - TOTAL . . . . . . . 33.94

VOTER TURNOUT - DEMOCRATIC. . . . . . 48.14

VOTER TURNOUT - REPUBLICAN. . . . . . 20.42

VOTER TURNOUT - REFORM . . . . . . . 200.00 ********** (DEMOCRATIC) ********** PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

BARACK OBAMA . . . . . . . . . . 134 44.22

HILLARY CLINTON . . . . . . . . . 165 54.46

WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.32

only 1 reform voter registered but the machine says 2 voted.....200 percent turn out for the reformers...lol

seriously tho,a false tape is a false tape and it happens (more reformers than r registered) quite often in allegheny(or at least in the first 400 precincts so far)

COMMENT #63 [Permalink]

... Henry said on 4/26/2008 @ 8:13 am PT...





I believe florida, should be band from voting during A presidential election. Because they have screwed it up in 2000,2004,and now in 2008 by moving up their primary. Let the other 49 states vote in their place they at lease know how to follow in structions.

COMMENT #64 [Permalink]

... dr. elsewhere said on 4/26/2008 @ 9:24 am PT...





brad, point well-taken, and i swear, i will never make that error again. and shame on me, as it's something i harp on myself. csmith@46, YOU WERE BEING FOLLOWED??? please, by all means, tell us, brad, somebody more about this!! who? why? how did you know you were being followed? ETC??? ken carmen@53, i agree on most points. as for dissing the sound bite issue, here's what i suggest:

turn it on its head. USE it. use it to educate the public about the truth.

start up the ad just like the repugs are doing, and then pull a fast rewind, with voiceover saying something like "the republican party would have you believe rev. wright was outright damning america, but here is the truth.'

and maybe include some of his remarkable explanations from last night's interview with bill moyers.

rev. wright's point is so important to addressing how we heal as a nation and people, not just internally but with our worldwide community: we simply MUST admit to our errors and even our crimes, and somehow offer redemption instead of revenge. until we're willing to speak of these things, we'll never end this rapidly escalating downward spiral of self-destruction. and this approach would also be healthy for any other sound bites that come along. just use them to expose how much hatred and divisiveness the repugs are inserting into the whole process. use their own blunders to expose them for what they are. pretty inexpensive way to write ads; let the repugs' screwups write them for us!

COMMENT #65 [Permalink]

... Dredd said on 4/26/2008 @ 10:49 am PT...





Brad #59 Yep. And there is circumstantial evidence to the contrary too. Stalinism ("The voters decide nothing, the ones who count the votes decide everything"), New Hampshireism ("Butch Custody and the Hoppy Kid"), and Pennsylvaniaism ("Trust Duh DRE Votin' sheene dood") has gotta go.

COMMENT #66 [Permalink]

... Becky said on 4/26/2008 @ 8:44 pm PT...





Oh No! I use to come here daily when John Kerry lost the election in 2004. And now I return to find you all support Barack Obama! Are you kidding?

COMMENT #67 [Permalink]

... Ray said on 5/4/2008 @ 6:41 am PT...





Do you think it is an omen that the filly horse in the Kentucky derby was killed?

Does it mean that Hillary cannot win the election?

COMMENT #68 [Permalink]

... Rebecca said on 5/4/2008 @ 6:55 am PT...





I hate that a poor animal had to die to convince people that Hillary is bad luck! This is an omen for the country.

COMMENT #69 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 5/4/2008 @ 6:59 am PT...





Reverend Wright probably put a voodoo hex on Hillary and the poor horse after she said bet on the only female horse. Maybe the horse wasn't black enough?

COMMENT #70 [Permalink]

... The Indypendent said on 5/7/2008 @ 3:09 pm PT...

