Results are in from New Hampshire

You probably knew this, but I didn't. A recount is going on in New Hampshire.

Following the primary you may recall that there were allegations of vote fraud, with dark mutterings that the Clintons had somehow stolen the election.

These were inspired partly by the gap between the polls and the result, partly by the difference (wholly unremarkable given the demographics) between Obama's vote in hand counted areas and machine counted ones, but mainly by ludicrous paranoia about Hillary and Bill's machine.

So Democratic candidate Dennis Kucinich and Republican candidate Albert Howard (who scored 44 votes in the Primary) have asked, and paid, for a recount in some parts of the state. Here's what Howard has to say on his blog about his decision:

The Holy Spirit revealed to Albert Benjamin Howard on Sunday, January 20, 2008 at 15:58P.M. EST that within 58 days the corruption of the New Hampshire Primary Recount will be exposed and defeated.

My source isn't as good, only being the recount website of New Hampshire Secretary of State William M. Gardner. God isn't returning my calls and I have a deadline.

But I still say with confidence that Howard is wrong. Hillary won fair and square. There was no fraud. Of course.

There is a discrepancy between the hand count and machine count, but it is small, producing a tiny adjustment. And it is not clear, of course, that the hand count was the more accurate.

There is obviously a strong case for an automatic partial audit of all machine counted votes. If you have this fraud would be very difficult with such votes (although there would remain an issue with votes cast by machine).

In the meantime we can put stories of vote theft to rest.

Comments

[Linda]

Of course there's an issue with votes cast by machine - if they used the new ones the Feds pushed the states into buying with the concept that this would prevent future chads and make it easier for those with handicapping conditions to vote. Instead, unfortunately, the new electronic machines don't work any better than the old mechanical ones. In fact they don't work as well as the hundred-year-old lever machines in New York State - which the Feds are making us jettison in favor of the new substandard machines, even though they don't meet the criteria New York has established. Makes you wonder if the manufacturers have anything to do with the rush the Feds are in.

[Anthony L. Milano]

If anyone believes in the prediction of the outcome of an election vote by a devine voice; then I would like to sell them some ocean front property in Wyoming cheap.

[SidViscous]

Vote theft okay.

But there are still many reports of voter fraud. i.e. people registering that are not eligible, and fraudulently registering the names of other people, and voting those names, of people that own vacation homes there and are not eligible to vote.

[David]

Daniel, did you happen to see the newsmax.com article posted monday January 7, 2008 9:29 A M? HILLARY BUSING IN SUPPORTERS TO NEW HAMPSHIRE. It basically says that union activist from outside NH came there to "fill out the crowds". And did you know that anyone can vote in the NH primary by simply telling the officials in charge that they are thinking about moving to NH. Now this in itself may not be fraud but what happens in the states these activist came from. Will they vote again?

[Pace en terra]

In the long run its not your vote that counts, but who counts the vote that really counts. And it is the Almighty himself. Sorry. Hillary and all those who have stolen elections since 2000 and before. Your Votescam number is up!

[Pace en terra]

In the long run its not your vote that counts, but who counts the vote that really counts. And it is the Almighty himself. Sorry. Hillary and all those who have stolen elections since 2000 and before. Your Votescam number is up!

[Suzanne]

Although he seems to be a nice man, Obama does not have the experience or intellect to be president of the most powerful nation in the world.

[Joe Melnick]

Where was the media's calm and rational response to Florida in 2000? They could take a cue from you, although maybe your sang-froid is only when republicans contest election results (although you didn't mock Kucinich...). The New York Times and Boston Globe did recounts in Florida and found that Bush won fair and square. There was no fraud. Of course.

[Debra]

To Suzanne,your comments on Obama are absurd.How can you judge the man's intellect? He's done in a short time what it took some members of congress years to accomplish.My question is,Will an African-American ever be experienced enough or intelligent enough to be president?

[Andrew]

It would make no sense for the Clintons to try to cheat in New Hampshire. It would have looked far too suspicious due to previous polling (although polling right up to the vote started to show Hillary moving up). I agree that there may be a problem with voting counting - BUT I don't think the recount was really done to look at the proces and more likely a way to try to discredit Hillary Clinton. Look at that - she withstands another attack. This woman could have 5000 rocks trown at her and she'd still be standing.

[Frederic]

This highlights how badly we need an election process that features proper auditing procedures and great transparency.

We need to be able to trust the results, otherwise at every election from now on we'll have tons of people finding "weird" patterns and stirring up repetitive and unproductive debate over the results.

As it stands, you can bet that on the day when there indeed is fraud somewhere, it will just be lost in the storm of debate over "suspicious" but valid results.