Why does the hand count favor Obama and the machine vote goes to Hillary?

[Emit]

I have seen one thread after another since Texas hybrid primary caucus here accusing Obama supporters of intimidating caucus goers, having hired plants in various caucuses, etc.

But, why isn't anyone considering what alternative theories may apply? Why, for example, does the hand counted caucuses and primaries favor Obama, and the machine counted primaries favor Clinton?


I'm really curious about this.

We have touch-screen counted votes and hand counted votes, but we also have something entirely new. In fact this new factor is ( as far as I’m concerned ) the definitive evidence.

Let’s start with Rhode Island. Unfortunately, the state is entirely touch-screen voting. No real paper trail, and no chance of arguing with the machine. However I will point this out. If you exclude the imaginary results we’ve been given, this margin in Rhode Island coincides nicely with the margins we have seen consistently over the previous 11 contests. 58% - 40% is an Obama margin we’ve seen repeatedly.

To illustrate that point, let’s look at Vermont. Here we have an almost identical margin ( 59% - 39% ) except this time it is for Obama. The difference in this state - as you might expect - is that Vermont uses hand counted ballots in the majority of it’s municipalities.

The Texas two-step gives a look at both machine count and hand count. The primary in Texas is all machine count and it gives the win to Clinton 51% - 47%. However the caucus results ( hand count ) reflect the opposite and then some ( 56% - 44% Obama ).

~snip~

But without question, the Ohio results are by far the most interesting.

~snip~

As you can see from the map, the only counties where Obama won are also the counties that had secured, centrally counted, paper ballots.



~snip~

So here we are once again with a situation we’ve seen several times before. Underneath the smokescreen of the kitchen sink strategy we see the real problem. Once again ( when viewing all four contests ), the machine vote goes to Hillary and the paper ballot ( or hand count ) goes to Obama. The fact that Hillary’s actions and reactions have coincided so seamlessly with the Republican, Rovian, Limbaughvian philosophy and tactics, could actually lead one to question if it is coordinated.

~snip~

So before anyone questions whether I wear a tin foil chapeau, ask yourself why United Technologies Corporation is so determined to purchase Diebold ( a company currently under investigation by the DOJ and SEC ) before election day. You can bet Charlie Black ( McCain’s Campaign Director and lobbyist for United Technologies ) has a very good reason for this arrangement.

~snip~

http://billnoxid.wordpress.com/2008/03/06/clinton-comeback-courtesy-of-diebold /


Posted previously, but nobody seems to care who's counting the votes this time:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5012530&mesg_id=5012530