Election Fraud in New Hampshire: Significant Evidence that Hillary shouldn’t have Won

January 10, 2008

    Firstly, I’d like to thank Jason for bringing this issue to my attention.

This is the U.S.A right? The country that invades countries and funds foreign governments in the name of ‘promoting democracy’ right? (Or not). Maybe America’s taking tips from Kenya.

Let’s skip to the point. In the New Hampshire primary, some votes were counted by hand and some were counted with the aid of a machine. You’d expect the percentage of votes won by each candidate to be roughly the same in the hand-counted votes and the machine-counted votes right? Wrong.

In the hand-counted votes, (which are harder to rig) Clinton won 34.7% whereas Obama won 38.8% – he won. However, in the machine-counted votes Clinton won 40.1% and Obama won 35.8%. Suspicious no? The machine-counted votes gave Hillary 5% more and Obama 3% less. I find it hard to believe that there should be such significant differences with both candidates – especially if both difference benefit the candidate favoured by the establishment. Here is a page with a whole bunch of figured detailing the differences between machine and hand counted cotes.

Of-course, just like Kenya, it’s not like anything will happen. After all, it’s America – land of freedom and democracy. How could the elections have been rigged?

– Nishant


Woman who led to the ‘Crying Clinton’ incident voted for Obama

January 9, 2008

    The title says it all; for more information, I’d like to direct you to the original article.

Of particular interest (at least to me) is this comment by Ms Young, the freelance photographer who caused the incident.

Read the rest of this entry »


Clinton takes New Hampshire – but Equal in Delegates and Losing in Educated Votes

January 9, 2008

It’s old news by now, but Clinton has won the popular vote in New Hampshire. Jason is right – it’s time New Hampshire changed their motto. The former president’s wife beat Obama by 2% of the vote to win the early state. On the Republican side, McCain beat Romney by a comfortable 6%; as Errington Thompson says, Romney is the real loser here.. Getting back to the primaries, are the two victories unconnected? I think not. Obama and McCain both benefit from the support of a majority of independent voters. That the media portrayed Obama as the clear favourite before the election must have resulted in these independents deciding that he didn’t need their support, and instead shifting their votes to McCain. The good news here is that Obama hasn’t lost the support of these voters that carried him in Iowa, they simply thought he could win without their support. Optimism with a dash of hope leads me to believe that these voters will return to back Obama in the coming primaries, (e.g. South Carolina). The bad news here is that independents cannot vote in the Democratic primaries in many states to come.

Hillary’s made a lot of ruckus about the parallels between her victory in New Hampshire and that of her husband, which resulted in him winning the nomination. However, the opposition that she faces is very different from what her husband faced – voters have a clear figure to rally around this year in Obama, (Edwards’s definite defeat in this primary might result in some of his supporters shifting their support to Obama simply to keep Hillary out). Clinton the First did not face such a unified opposition.

Finally, and perhaps very importantly, both Hillary and Obama walk away from this election with 9 delegates, meaning that Obama is still ahead in elected delegates. See this post for videos of the post-primary speeches of both candidates. And if you want more on the New Hampshire primary, see this informative analysis.

– Nishant

PS: 39% of college graduates voted for Obama, 5% more than those who voted for Hillary.


So Hillary’s sad about falling behind – big deal.

January 8, 2008

    The title might sound a bit rough, but seriously, what does it matter that Hillary shed some tears when asked a question by a voter in New Hampshire? (Unless you’re living under a rock, you should know that New Hampshire has its primaries today – here’s a page that updates at intervals). Does her crying in front of a voter provide any information about her political policies? No. Does it give any reason that we should vote for her? No. Heck, it doesn’t even attack her opponents, (something that Hillary is not averse to doing when behind in polls). Therefore, whether her tears were sincere or not, the only purpose they served was to attempt to emotionally influence voters – a pretty hard task when you consider the public view of her as a cold and hard person – JT’s implication that Clinton is a robot created in the 1960s pretty much hits the spot.

If she wants to pull ahead in the polls, maybe she should stop resorting to underhanded tactics; I don’t care if those tears were sincere, a president should have enough control to hold back tears in public. Instead, focusing on what she’s doing wrong would be a good step – although frankly, I’m in full support of her blundering away and handing the nomination to Obama or Edwards.

– Nish


Obama Carries Iowa Democratic Caucus; Worldwide Celebrations as Hillary Comes Third

January 4, 2008

As most of you have probably heard by now, Obama won the Iowan Democratic Caucuses with 37.58% of the votes. This I expected, but the next bit of news surprised be: Edwards came second with 29.75%, inching out Clinton, who had 29.47%. That’s right, Clinton came last – party time! (This post has results for every candidate).

However, although this might make for good media fodder, Obama wont actually get too many more national delegates from Iowa. Due to the way in which they’re allocated, Obama will only claim 16 potential delegates from Iowa – and Hillary will claim 15, one more than Edward’s 14. Boo. (No other Democratic candidate got enough votes to claim national delegates). That’s right, an almost 8% winning margin in votes will translate to only one additional delegate for Obama compared to Clinton. Obama’s victory is something to celebrate, but the primaries are far from won, and it will take more hard work to keep Hillary out.

The record turnout is probably what clinched the victory for Obama – 220,588 voters participated this year, compared to 2004’s 124,000. A large percentage of the voters were people under 30 and independent voters, two groups that mainly supported Obama. And women, the support of which Clinton was banking on, split the vote between Clinton and Obama. Maybe they know that a woman running for president isn’t as big a deal as the media make it out to be.

Oh, and finally, here’s a story that is being swamped by the Iowa Caucus results – Democrats in Minnesota have captured a vacated Republican seat. A good day for the Democrats.

Onwards to New Hampshire!