Stolen election?

[Canceled.LTroll.29]

In New Hampshire, according to the totals, HillBilly Clinton won over Barack Obama 39.4% to 36.8%. When the voting machine count for each candidate, was taken, HillBilly took 52.95% of the votes, compared to 47.05% for Obama. However, when the paper ballots were counted, Obama took 52.93% of the votes compared to 47.07% for Hilldebeast. By no stretch of the imagination can you make the argument that in all of the voting precincts where machines were used, HillyBilly actually won, and that Obama only won in the districts using paper ballots.

It is more logical to assume that someone switched the names in the voting machines, and credited the Obama hits to the Hildebeast.

The Hildebeasty wants the DNC to seat the delegates from the non-election that happened in Florida after the state's Dems willfully violated DNC rules, knowing full well what would happen if they did.

Now Hillary wants all those delegates seated, so she can steal that election from Obama too.

Is she that desperate to keep a black man out of the White House?

Remember what happened to Ron Brown?

[Little-Acorn]

Voting machines were used predominantly in larger urban areas, while paper ballots were used mostly in suburbs and out in the sticks. I don't find it surprising that the different areas registered different voting trends.

Why do you?

BTW, it's not a bad idea to link to a reference when you give percentage numbers like that. Makes it look less like you made them up.

[Canceled.LTroll.29]

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/m..._technolo.html

http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle19050.htm

[Minister of Truth]

Don't really care. I'd love to see Hillary walk away from Denver with the nom.

[Blackflag]

Yeah I remember Ron Brown. Isn't he the guy that died in a plane crash....Stupid conspiracy theorist tards. lol

[Care4all]

In New Hampshire, according to the totals, HillBilly Clinton won over Barack Obama 39.4% to 36.8%. When the voting machine count for each candidate, was taken, HillBilly took 52.95% of the votes, compared to 47.05% for Obama. However, when the paper ballots were counted, Obama took 52.93% of the votes compared to 47.07% for Hilldebeast. By no stretch of the imagination can you make the argument that in all of the voting precincts where machines were used, HillyBilly actually won, and that Obama only won in the districts using paper ballots.

It is more logical to assume that someone switched the names in the voting machines, and credited the Obama hits to the Hildebeast.

The Hildebeasty wants the DNC to seat the delegates from the non-election that happened in Florida after the state's Dems willfully violated DNC rules, knowing full well what would happen if they did.

Now Hillary wants all those delegates seated, so she can steal that election from Obama too.

Is she that desperate to keep a black man out of the White House?

Remember what happened to Ron Brown?

I suppose you did not read the article that you posted as reference?

• With respect to Hillary Clinton’s surprise victory in the Democratic Primary and the differences across vote tabulation technologies in Clinton’s and others’ votes, our results are consistent with these differences being due entirely to the fact that New Hampshire wards that use Accuvote optical scan machines have voters with different political preferences than wards that use hand counted paper ballots.