Kucinich Asks for NH Recount!
- Thread starter Ender
- Start date
Aardaerimus
Anunnaku
Where is the diebold data stored, and who has access to it in the mean time?
Who is holding the paper ballots and who has access to them?
Who is holding the paper ballots and who has access to them?
dragonslayer2001
Inactive
Ender
who is grannywarrior? RP? lol?
I hope they fly back for a recount, and I hope they can "prove" mistakes in several precincts.
The Bilderberger's invited Hillary to thier Ottawa meeting in 2006. Whether US Presidents or Canadian Prime Ministers they all seem to end up at the Annual Bilderberger meetings JUST BEFORE THEY HAPPEN TO WIN THE NEXT ELECTION.
who is grannywarrior? RP? lol?
I hope they fly back for a recount, and I hope they can "prove" mistakes in several precincts.
The Bilderberger's invited Hillary to thier Ottawa meeting in 2006. Whether US Presidents or Canadian Prime Ministers they all seem to end up at the Annual Bilderberger meetings JUST BEFORE THEY HAPPEN TO WIN THE NEXT ELECTION.
dragonslayer2001
Inactive
They
are not going to prove anything by Diebold unless someone honest has had physical control of the machines......... they do NOT have internet or modem access...........or if they did someone was monitoring and keeping track of the data going back and forth................. or someone takes a physically controlled machine and reads and understands the source code in the chips......... AND had a print out or copy of the source code PRIOR to election night.
are not going to prove anything by Diebold unless someone honest has had physical control of the machines......... they do NOT have internet or modem access...........or if they did someone was monitoring and keeping track of the data going back and forth................. or someone takes a physically controlled machine and reads and understands the source code in the chips......... AND had a print out or copy of the source code PRIOR to election night.
SouthernGal
"Don't retreat...reload"
This is great news! Look, if Ron Paul loses, he loses. But at least let's have an honest election.
ETA: Thanks for that link, Ender!
ETA: Thanks for that link, Ender!
Scott Mayland
Senior Member
If you have not seen this maybe you should watch the video in this post.
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?t=272401
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?t=272401
ontheright
TROPIC LIGHTNING GO 25th
Good for them they might find a couple hundred votes
Aardaerimus
Anunnaku
My question is this:
In the event of major fraud, will anyone be held accountable, or will the story just be blackballed and ignored like Ron Paul is to begin with?
In the event of major fraud, will anyone be held accountable, or will the story just be blackballed and ignored like Ron Paul is to begin with?
Fraud US-Style: Fake Videos
And Elections
By Stephen Lendman
10 January, 2008
Countercurrents.org
First the videos with bin Laden ones Exhibit A. He always seems to pop up strategically at well-timed moments, almost like we planned it that way. Evidence points that way.
Consider the one on Friday (September 7) before the sixth 9/11 anniversary in 2007. Digital image forensics expert, Neal Krawetz of Hactor Factor, said it was full of low quality visual and audio splices, a likely fake. Striking also was bin Laden's beard that was gray in recent images. In this video, it's black. In addition, the footage has him dressed in a white hat and shirt and yellow sweater, precisely his same attire on an October 29, 2004 video. In addition, the background, lighting, desk and camera angle are the same.
Krawetz noted that "if you overlay the 2007 and 2004 videos, bin Laden's face is the same (unaged). Only his beard is darker, and the picture contrast was adjusted. Most important are the edits showing obvious splices, at least six video ones in all. Even more audio ones were used that appear to be words and phrases spliced together making Krawetz suspect a vocal imitator was used.
Now the latest "incident" and video making headlines. They involve a supposed Persian Gulf confrontation between Iranian and US vessels in open waters. A subsequent Pentagon video shows small Iranian boats v. US warships in the Strait of Hormuz earlier this week. The Pentagon and major media reported a fleet of high-speed small craft charged at and threatened to blow up a three-ship convoy of US warships. George Bush called it a "dangerous" provocation and warned of "serious consequences" if there are further incidents.
Iran's response came swiftly and called the Pentagon video and audio "fabricated." The incident was routine and something "normal that takes place every now and then for each party" to identify the other....Iran Navy units always put questions to passing vessels and warships at the Strait of Hormuz and they need to identify themselves. This is in accordance with the normal procedures." The Tehran spokesman said its Navy units "asked (the US ships) to identify themselves. They responded accordingly and continued on their (non-agressive) path."
On January 9 (according to Agence France-Presse - AFP), Iran's Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) accused Washington of fabricating footage of the incident it described as routine and non-confrontational. The country's state-run Al-Alam Arabic language international channel and English language Press-TV both quoted an IRGC spokesman with similar comments. This hardly needs elaborating. It's unimaginable that lightly armed small craft would challenge heavily armed warships from any nation, let alone likely nuclear-armed ones flying US flags. The very notion borders on the absurd. Imagining where this may lead, however, recall the August, 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident. No further comment needed.
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 lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sj.lendman.blogspot.com.
http://www.countercurrents.org/lendman100108.htm
And Elections
By Stephen Lendman
10 January, 2008
Countercurrents.org
First the videos with bin Laden ones Exhibit A. He always seems to pop up strategically at well-timed moments, almost like we planned it that way. Evidence points that way.
Consider the one on Friday (September 7) before the sixth 9/11 anniversary in 2007. Digital image forensics expert, Neal Krawetz of Hactor Factor, said it was full of low quality visual and audio splices, a likely fake. Striking also was bin Laden's beard that was gray in recent images. In this video, it's black. In addition, the footage has him dressed in a white hat and shirt and yellow sweater, precisely his same attire on an October 29, 2004 video. In addition, the background, lighting, desk and camera angle are the same.
Krawetz noted that "if you overlay the 2007 and 2004 videos, bin Laden's face is the same (unaged). Only his beard is darker, and the picture contrast was adjusted. Most important are the edits showing obvious splices, at least six video ones in all. Even more audio ones were used that appear to be words and phrases spliced together making Krawetz suspect a vocal imitator was used.
Now the latest "incident" and video making headlines. They involve a supposed Persian Gulf confrontation between Iranian and US vessels in open waters. A subsequent Pentagon video shows small Iranian boats v. US warships in the Strait of Hormuz earlier this week. The Pentagon and major media reported a fleet of high-speed small craft charged at and threatened to blow up a three-ship convoy of US warships. George Bush called it a "dangerous" provocation and warned of "serious consequences" if there are further incidents.
Iran's response came swiftly and called the Pentagon video and audio "fabricated." The incident was routine and something "normal that takes place every now and then for each party" to identify the other....Iran Navy units always put questions to passing vessels and warships at the Strait of Hormuz and they need to identify themselves. This is in accordance with the normal procedures." The Tehran spokesman said its Navy units "asked (the US ships) to identify themselves. They responded accordingly and continued on their (non-agressive) path."
On January 9 (according to Agence France-Presse - AFP), Iran's Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) accused Washington of fabricating footage of the incident it described as routine and non-confrontational. The country's state-run Al-Alam Arabic language international channel and English language Press-TV both quoted an IRGC spokesman with similar comments. This hardly needs elaborating. It's unimaginable that lightly armed small craft would challenge heavily armed warships from any nation, let alone likely nuclear-armed ones flying US flags. The very notion borders on the absurd. Imagining where this may lead, however, recall the August, 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident. No further comment needed.
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 lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sj.lendman.blogspot.com.
http://www.countercurrents.org/lendman100108.htm
Chartreuse
Yellow Solar Sun
They should not hesitate to recount in elections. If the recounts are done fairly for all candidates then the more the better IMHO
I agree.
In practical terms, though, the only person I really see this conceivably benefitting is Barack Obama - he and Hillary were only separated by a few thousand votes.
Still, if they uncover some votes for Paul that weren't attributed to him...there's gonna be a lot of 'splaining to do...
Melodi
Disaster Cat
I don't think it matters if they only find a couple of hundred missings votes or even less than a hundred in a small state. What matters is, is their an obvious pattern to "how" they are missing. It would be very hard to be sure of deliberate fraud if say a few votes for different candidates were missing here and there. That I could believe was "human error." If it turns out that repeatedly the same candidates (Republican or Democrat) are found to have missing votes (or in Ron Pauls case votes just not being reported all together sending in 0 instead of 30 something) then that may be enough of a shock wave for the public to demand answers. It is a long shot, but it seems like there may be such obvious fooing around that it would be very hard to ignore.
Twenty five years ago, this story might have taken several days to break with the recount deadline past. But now, a family can see their town has not recorded their votes, report it the county clerk and the media and have the results out there in a matter of hours.
And while I can understand (but not approve) vote riging in a very tight race such as Obama and Clinton why in the world do this to a "minor" candidate like Ron Paul? It simply makes no sense unless eithe the Repulican Party or the powers that be are very worried about him. As it is, they are calling more attention to him that he would have gotten if they had just treated him like a "lesser" candidate.
If this was fraud, it was pretty dumb (at least in the Republican race). A close call like Obama/Clinton can be hard for even a good pollster to call. But lots of towns and villages with "o" votes looks mighty funny. The more so when in those small towns voters are willing to stand up and say "wait a minute, I voted for so and so why does it say 0? A smart fraud would simply skim off a few votes i each district and spread out the "errors." A "0" results in a lot of obvious questions, 27 instead of 33 may not raise an eyebrow because everyone that voted just figured they are one of the 27.
I hope they really seriously look at this, this could shine a light in some very nasty corners.
Melodi
Twenty five years ago, this story might have taken several days to break with the recount deadline past. But now, a family can see their town has not recorded their votes, report it the county clerk and the media and have the results out there in a matter of hours.
And while I can understand (but not approve) vote riging in a very tight race such as Obama and Clinton why in the world do this to a "minor" candidate like Ron Paul? It simply makes no sense unless eithe the Repulican Party or the powers that be are very worried about him. As it is, they are calling more attention to him that he would have gotten if they had just treated him like a "lesser" candidate.
If this was fraud, it was pretty dumb (at least in the Republican race). A close call like Obama/Clinton can be hard for even a good pollster to call. But lots of towns and villages with "o" votes looks mighty funny. The more so when in those small towns voters are willing to stand up and say "wait a minute, I voted for so and so why does it say 0? A smart fraud would simply skim off a few votes i each district and spread out the "errors." A "0" results in a lot of obvious questions, 27 instead of 33 may not raise an eyebrow because everyone that voted just figured they are one of the 27.
I hope they really seriously look at this, this could shine a light in some very nasty corners.
Melodi
Fisher
Has No Life - Lives on TB
NH: "First in the nation" (with corporate controlled secret vote counting)
Fair use
http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/5307
81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as "Premier"). The elections run on these machines are programmed by one company, LHS Associates, based in Methuen, MA. We know nothing about the people programming these machines, and we know even less about LHS Associates. We know even less about the secret vote counting software used to tabulate 81% of our ballots. People like to say "but we use paper ballots! They can always be counted by hand!"
But they're not. They're counted by Diebold. Only a candidate can request a hand recount, and most never do so. And a rigged election can easily become a rigged recount, as we learned in Ohio 2004, where two election officials were convicted of rigging their recount. (Is it just a funny coincidence that Diebold spokesman is named Mr. Riggall?)
We need to get the count right on election night. Right now, nobody in New Hampshire, except the programmers at LHS Associates and Diebold Election Systems, knows if we are getting it right or wrong. Our state officials and representatives know this. They learned all about it when computer security specialists Harri Hursti and Bruce Odell testified before the legislative subcommittee on e-voting in September 2007 (Hursti's testimony is shown in this video). Scientific reports about the vulnerabilities and risks with Diebold optical scanners have been available since 2003.
We love our state. It takes courage and strength to admit where we are going wrong and to fix it. May our state officials and representatives find that courage and strength soon. Before we lose the other 19% of our votes.
Fair use
http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/5307
81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as "Premier"). The elections run on these machines are programmed by one company, LHS Associates, based in Methuen, MA. We know nothing about the people programming these machines, and we know even less about LHS Associates. We know even less about the secret vote counting software used to tabulate 81% of our ballots. People like to say "but we use paper ballots! They can always be counted by hand!"
But they're not. They're counted by Diebold. Only a candidate can request a hand recount, and most never do so. And a rigged election can easily become a rigged recount, as we learned in Ohio 2004, where two election officials were convicted of rigging their recount. (Is it just a funny coincidence that Diebold spokesman is named Mr. Riggall?)
We need to get the count right on election night. Right now, nobody in New Hampshire, except the programmers at LHS Associates and Diebold Election Systems, knows if we are getting it right or wrong. Our state officials and representatives know this. They learned all about it when computer security specialists Harri Hursti and Bruce Odell testified before the legislative subcommittee on e-voting in September 2007 (Hursti's testimony is shown in this video). Scientific reports about the vulnerabilities and risks with Diebold optical scanners have been available since 2003.
We love our state. It takes courage and strength to admit where we are going wrong and to fix it. May our state officials and representatives find that courage and strength soon. Before we lose the other 19% of our votes.
Hippie Chic
Inactive
Yeah! They are scrambling!
Aardaerimus
Anunnaku
Well that's... eh.. peculiar.
Ender
Inactive
ds-
The Granny Warriors are cool! Check them out at www.grannywarrior.com
Norma,
I saw that video and I believe that some is rotten in New Hampshire.
Even if Obama is the biggest winner in a recount, it should be done.
Thanks, SouthernGal.
The Granny Warriors are cool! Check them out at www.grannywarrior.com
Norma,
I saw that video and I believe that some is rotten in New Hampshire.
Even if Obama is the biggest winner in a recount, it should be done.
Thanks, SouthernGal.
sassy
Veteran Member
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/...d=news_view&newsId=20080110006236&newsLang=en
Kucinich Asks for New Hampshire Recount in the Interest of Election Integrity
DETROIT--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, the most outspoken advocate in the Presidential field and in Congress for election integrity, paper-ballot elections, and campaign finance reform, has sent a letter to the New Hampshire Secretary of State asking for a recount of Tuesday’s election because of “unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots.” .............
{click on link for rest of story}
Kucinich Asks for New Hampshire Recount in the Interest of Election Integrity
DETROIT--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, the most outspoken advocate in the Presidential field and in Congress for election integrity, paper-ballot elections, and campaign finance reform, has sent a letter to the New Hampshire Secretary of State asking for a recount of Tuesday’s election because of “unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots.” .............
{click on link for rest of story}
I think that a number of us Ron Paul supporters are extremely annoyed that Ron Paul didn't ask for the recount. This election is not about HIM, but about OUR vote, OUR right to be heard.
As for Albert Howard --
from his website
"The Angel of the Lord told me in January of 1992
that Hillary Rodham Clinton and I would meet
and be running against each other
and that she would lose".
He could in fact end up causing Clinton to lose. If it's proven that vote fraud got Hillary the win, that could do her in. Makes you go hmmmmm.
Howard for President !!!
As for Albert Howard --
from his website
"The Angel of the Lord told me in January of 1992
that Hillary Rodham Clinton and I would meet
and be running against each other
and that she would lose".
He could in fact end up causing Clinton to lose. If it's proven that vote fraud got Hillary the win, that could do her in. Makes you go hmmmmm.
Howard for President !!!
Tundra Gypsy
Veteran Member
I think I read on this site a number of years ago that the head of Diebold told Bush he would get him elected. Yes, Diebold voting machines CAN be manipulated.
Kucinich has requested a recount --
http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=1038#more-1038
http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=1038#more-1038
Aardaerimus
Anunnaku
It's a two edged sword.
If, on the one hand, Paul cries "foul" and there's a large discrepancy then it makes him look really good and also scores those votes back...
But, on the other hand, if he cries "foul" and very few votes are recovered it makes him look like a "petty whiner".
He may just be playing it safe in this regard so as not to lose future votes as well.
lectrickitty
Great Great Grandma!
Ron doesn't need to be the one to demand a recount. Every candidate that has called for a recount has been labeled by the media as a cry baby. We are fighting to win, not to have him labeled as an unelectable cry baby.
TECH32
Veteran Member
Why do you doubt that Norma? It seems pretty impossible for Paul to have gotten the numbers this guy claims given his poll numbers just prior to the election.
sassy
Veteran Member
He can't. He can only ask for recount for his party (Dems)
But, there is a candidate named Howard who was one of the "others" that filed a compaint as well. He is headed to NH now for a Republican recount.
Note: they charge "by the vote" for the recount. For Ron Paul to do it, it would be around $69K. For Kucinish to do it, it is costing $2K. Not sure how much Howard will have to pay. Paul will not ask for a recount. There are people who raised the money to do so but only a candidate can ask for the recount.
My guess is that Obama and Paul will come out with more votes?
kemosabe
Doooooooooom !
from ronpaulwarroom site
NOTE:
THE PRECEDING IS QUOTED FROM [link to www.ronpaulwarroom.com]
Hand Count Shows
15% For Ron Paul
From Devvy Kidd
By zooamerica
1-10-8
Ron Paul needs to get his attorney to file an injunction today to stop certification of the vote.
This would have placed Dr. Paul in 3rd place, just as the polls were showing before the primary
[link to www.dailypaul.com]
The computer counted votes are the problem.
Not a single hand count township showed less than 10%
Supposedly, Ron Paul got 8% - this does not make sense.
richmond is hand count 34% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
lyman is hand count 28.7% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Orange is hand count 25% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Harts location is hand count 25% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
wentworth is hand count 24% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
goshen is hand count 17.68% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
marlow is hand count 16.6% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
cornish is hand count 14.8% for dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Rumney is hand count 14.5% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
croydon is hand count 14 % for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
dorchester is hand count 13.89% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
effingham is hand count 13% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
albany is hand count 12.9% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
antrim is hand count 12% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
south hampton is hand count 12% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
sullivan is hand count 12.61% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
troy is hand count 12.21% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
mason is hand count 11.88% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
newport is hand count 11.45% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
charlstown is hand count 11.3% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Allenstown is hand count 11.16% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
bristol is hand count 11% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
warren is hand count 11% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Strafford is hand count 11% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
washington is hand count 11.02% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
lancaster is hand count 10.9% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
springfield is hand count 10.6% for Dr.Paul - 100% reporting
wilton is hand count 10.37% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Northfield is hand count 10.3% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
mont vernon is hand count 10.25% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
NOTE:
THE PRECEDING IS QUOTED FROM [link to www.ronpaulwarroom.com]
Hand Count Shows
15% For Ron Paul
From Devvy Kidd
By zooamerica
1-10-8
Ron Paul needs to get his attorney to file an injunction today to stop certification of the vote.
This would have placed Dr. Paul in 3rd place, just as the polls were showing before the primary
[link to www.dailypaul.com]
The computer counted votes are the problem.
Not a single hand count township showed less than 10%
Supposedly, Ron Paul got 8% - this does not make sense.
richmond is hand count 34% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
lyman is hand count 28.7% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Orange is hand count 25% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Harts location is hand count 25% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
wentworth is hand count 24% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
goshen is hand count 17.68% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
marlow is hand count 16.6% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
cornish is hand count 14.8% for dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Rumney is hand count 14.5% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
croydon is hand count 14 % for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
dorchester is hand count 13.89% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
effingham is hand count 13% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
albany is hand count 12.9% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
antrim is hand count 12% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
south hampton is hand count 12% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
sullivan is hand count 12.61% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
troy is hand count 12.21% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
mason is hand count 11.88% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
newport is hand count 11.45% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
charlstown is hand count 11.3% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Allenstown is hand count 11.16% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
bristol is hand count 11% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
warren is hand count 11% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Strafford is hand count 11% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
washington is hand count 11.02% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
lancaster is hand count 10.9% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
springfield is hand count 10.6% for Dr.Paul - 100% reporting
wilton is hand count 10.37% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
Northfield is hand count 10.3% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
mont vernon is hand count 10.25% for Dr. Paul - 100% reporting
kemosabe
Doooooooooom !
peep this out... as it turns out.. anyone can vote in NH even those who technically dont live there... per this article i found with a transcript of a call between Rush Limbaugh and a state representative from NH
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_112807/content/01125110.guest.html
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_112807/content/01125110.guest.html
