February 17, 2008

The sore subject of botched vote counting rears up in the Democratic primaries.

As reports show "about 80 election districts among [New York City's] 6,106 where Mr. Obama supposedly did not receive even one vote." There is disarray ahead as every delegate matters now. And it's not just a question of ascertaining the true vote count, but why the dramatically wrong count every occurred. If there was a plot to steal the primary, it was poorly devised with glaringly suspicious results like 0 votes for Obama in Harlem. (And that election district lies within the congressional district of Charles Rangel, a longtime supporter of Hillary Clinton.) But fears of election theft will spur thoughts of conspiracy to tilt the nomination, and rumors of conspiracy themselves are tools that can be used to affect the minds of voters.

ADDED: This story throws a ton of water on the old theory that charges of vote fraud are a phony ploy to suppress the black vote.


rhhardin said...

It might just be a digital effect.

A digital thermometer in the basement is likely to record such temperatures as 63, 63, 62, 65, 2884763, 64, 62, ...

Improbability is no barrier to modern digital techniques.

Fraud would be done better, like cattle futures for example.

Synova said...

You would think that someone cheating would be smarter about it.

And it happened in 80 election districts? EIGHTY?

Bob said...

A 100% result for Hillary in Harlem? I know black voters tend to vote monolithically, but wasn't there even one individual willing to vote to Obama?

The last time I remember a 100% result like that, Saddam Hussein was the beneficiary.

oldirishpig said...

Having grown up in Chicago, the idea of Democrats incompetently committing voter fraud is not unthinkable. Indeed, I would expect it; they automatically perform fraud even though there are so few Republicans in the city. The one difference here is that someone noticed and that was because they did it against one of their own.

rastajenk said...

Sic the Black Box gang on 'em! Or, er, do they only investigate Republican tricks?

Headless Blogger said...

This was a hypothetical asked at the Badger Blog Alliance on Tuesday. We now have the answer.

"My question was and is which side, Obama or Hillary, will benefit from all the Voter Fraud the left in Wisconsin is known for? (save me your denials we all know you are some ballot box stuffing Mothers)"

George said...

Accounts of the campaign’s “Camp Obama” sessions, to train volunteers, have a revivalist flavor. Volunteers are urged to avoid talking about policy to potential voters, and instead tell of how they “came” to Mr. Obama.


"We have to sacrifice for one another. I am here because Barack Obama is the only person in this race who understands that...that before we can work on our problems we have to fix our souls. Our souls are broken in this nation....I am married to the only person in this race who can heal this nation....[Barack] is going to demand that you shed your cynicism.... Barack will never let you go back to your lives as usual!"

-Michelle Obama (audio)

Slim999 said...

Botched vote counting?

LOL. Nice euphamism. Should keep the rioting down once Hillary and the rest of the DNC finishes stealing the nomination from the blacks.

And it will happen.

I noticed the other day that, of all the senior DNC officials, of all the senior officials in the House of Representatives, of all the senior officials in the US Senate, there's not one black person.

How could one explain that without coming to the conclusion that the Democrat Party is inherently racist?

Should people belong to a Party that keeps blacks down this way? And if they do, are they perpetuating racism in America?

Chip Ahoy said...

Let's watch Mrs. Bill Clinton momentarily turn off her shrieking shrill harridan voice and turn on her soft and tender understanding mother's voice to kindly explain how something like this could happen. I like her soft voice, it makes me feel good. Obama too, he da bomb. I'm certain they'll sort it all out, it is about power and sharing, after all.

Best primary evah! I'm so glad they got an early start on all this.

Fen said...

It telling though. In one corner, we have a candidate who came up through the corrupt political world of Chicago. In the other, a candidate with eight years experience playing hardball [Bimbo Eruptions, TravelGate, WhiteWater billing documents, etc].

And Obama falls for a sucker punch! Sure, he may have been cheated, but what does it say about this man's judgement, that he didn't see it coming and didn't counter it?

We are at war. We are going to be IN a war for a long time now, whether we want to or not. This is not the time to elect a celebrity as the one to lead us through it.

As much as I dislike McCain's betrayal of conservative principles, and despite that I left the party over his amnesty sham, he's the only candidate qualified to handle whats coming.

Fen said...

I'm coming across alot of voters that are like-minded: we know McCain is not the conservative we want to nominate, but the other two choices are much worse. In fact, we don't even consider McCain be a faithful member of the GOP - he's our Joe Lieberman.

So, if there are Conservatives for Obama, then there must be a need for a Conservatives for McCain PAC. Think that would get the point across to moderates and Independents? Our logo could be McCain's face on a dart board ;)

And BTW, does Condi still have her sights set on being a baseball commissioner? Her daily experience [good & bad] puts her in a good position to be a war time consigliere.

And I don't want to hear anything about Dr Rice's race or gender, I want to hear about her longterm strategy to defeat 1) rogue states like Iran 2) who seek WMDs 3) to hand off to terrorist groups like Al Queda for anonymous proxy attacks against the West.

And yes, people mock McCain's age, but the irony is that POTUS is a primary AQ target - the President is more likely to die from a terrorist attack than from a stroke or seizure. So who is the Democrats VP choice? He/she better be worth more than a few key electoral votes. Or do we really want someone like John Edwards stepping up if the worst should happen?

Elliott A said...

Vote fraud among democrats? How could that be? No dead people voting, nobody voting early and often? Just not counting the votes of one candidate? The party of the people? Michigan and Florida? Why use dirty tricks as they blame the republicans for when you just fix the elections after it is held?

Jim Hu said...

Well, she did signal her admiration for Landslide Lyndon.

Fen said...

Now taking bets:

Obama's Dead Voters VS Hillary's Illegal Voters Obama +3

Original Mike said...

Maybe the ballot was "confusing" (ala Broward county).