So far, N.H. recount reveals no surprises

[sled]

So far, N.H. recount reveals no surprises

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2004/11/19/so_far_nh_recount_reveals_no_surprises/

November 19, 2004

CONCORD, N.H. -- There is no chance to affect the outcome of the
election, but a piecemeal recount of presidential votes began
yesterday in New Hampshire at the request of independent candidate
Ralph Nader, who was acting on behalf of activists who are attempting
to establish ''baseline data" on the accuracy of various vote-counting
technologies.

Preliminary results from the tally, however, showed virtually no
change in the result. The counting is tentatively scheduled to resume
next week.

Nader spokesman Kevin Zeese, who observed the recount, said there
''was no significant difference" in the results from one ward in
Manchester and the nearby town of Litchfield. Democrat John F. Kerry,
who carried the state by 9,274 votes out of 678,000 cast, gained six
votes, President George W. Bush picked up three, and there was no
change for Nader, Zeese said. Nader received less than 1 percent of
the vote in the state. A recount of other Manchester wards was
continuing into the early evening.

Two organizations, the National Ballot Integrity Project and Democracy
for New Hampshire, asked Nader to initiate the recount ''to collect
baseline data comparing hand-counted with machine-counted ballots."
Since the disputed 2000 presidential election, a number of
organizations have been closely monitoring and raising questions about
vote-counting methods, particularly electronic machines that leave no
paper trail for recounts. New Hampshire does not use the ATM-like
electronic voting machines.

[booksenkatz]

1. So, is it a phenomenon unique to the swing states that Repub voters

left the polls, told those inquiring that they voted for Kerry, and then went "tee-hee-hee" all the way home? I don't get it.

[Warren Stupidity]

8. just wait a while

the NH recount is just starting.

Exit polls are accurate. Exit polls, everywhere else on the planet, are used as an independent validation of the official election results. Exit polls in this country started to be inaccurate in 2000. Wonder why?

[progressiveBadger]

10. Blame it on the Dixiecrats!!!

Yeah, that's why. They suddenly changed voting patterns in 2000! Nothing to see here, move along....

[AP]

13. According to the Berkeley team, the Dixiecrats did NOT change voting

patterns.

The presumption that they changed is based on registration and not voting history.

Historically, those dixiecrats, although heavily democratic by registration, have voted for the Republican for president.

[progressiveBadger]

18. I think the whole Dixiecrat thing is hogwash

It's not like this (or 2000 for that matter) was the first election with these demographics. It's just another "get out of jail free" pass that the press is using so that they can move on to something more "important", like the Pederson trial.

[orangeotter]

11. exit polls were accurate, thats why recount wont change

if you look at the exit polls. kerry should have won in nh by like 2 percent more at the most. those early polls were flawed they had badly weighted samples and by the end had evened out. i find it odd that people still expec tthings to change. They are gathering valuable data on vote-counting, but exit polls arent a reason to expect the outcome to change, they already line up with the vote totals within margin of error

[newyawker99]

14. Hi Warren Stupidity!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[orangeotter]

22. delete

[uhhuh]

24. This reply was not to you

If you notice, the reply above was for a new poster,Warren Stupidity, who posted in post 8. It was a sincere welcome, and not a dig at you. You may want to edit your post, since this was a misunderstanding on your part. It sometimes takes a while to get the hang of this board. Welcome to you too!

Newyawker99 welcomes everybody.

[Warren Stupidity]

30. Hi Back!

People frequently misunderstand my name. Sometimes they try to insult me by calling me an idiot. Duck off the water's back, if you ask me :-)

[Atlant]

2. Nader-requested recount in N.H. moving slowly

Nader-requested recount in N.H. moving slowly

Nader-requested recount in N.H. moving slowly

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/evoting/20...

By Erik Stetson, Associated Press

Posted 11/19/2004 2:07 AM

CONCORD, N.H. — A recount Ralph Nader requested for some New Hampshire
towns went slower than expected Thursday and won't resume until next
week, state election officials said.

"It's impossible," said Secretary of State Bill Gardner, declining to
predict when the recount would end.

Assistant Attorney General Bud Fitch said recounts in Nader's targeted
precincts would not resume until at least Wednesday, virtually
ensuring they won't end until after Thanksgiving.

Nader, an independent presidential candidate this year, paid $2,000 to
begin a recount of 11 of the state's 126 precincts after an analysis
showed wide differences in voting trends between the 2000 and 2004
presidential elections.

[Francesca]

3. thank you the original post in the thread

had me nervous.... I am in Peterborough by the way!

[Atlant]

5. (Nashua here.)

> I am in Peterborough by the way!

Nashua here.

Atlant

[Francesca]

7. Hi neighbor (ish)

[Iceburg]

29. Recount costs Rep Dario Carrara House seat in District 2

hmm ... more
programming problems manifest themselves
Note: This recount was not part of the planned Nader recount but rather a recount initiated by officials in areas where the House and Senate results had been disputed. I will trie to find out what technology was used in these counties. Look for an update later.

http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showfast.html?article=47294

CONCORD — In a recount, Democrat Claudia Chase of Francestown beat out Republican Dario A. Carrara of Greenfield by four votes in the New Hampshire House District 2 election, officials announced.

The original count had Carrara defeating Chase 1,555 to 1,523 votes. The recount recast 36 votes, and showed Chase to be the winner by a 1,523 to 1,519 margin over Carrara.

"There are a number of scenarios that could have caused that to happen, but we think that a number of straight ticket ballots being miscounted is the most likely answer," said Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan.

The other winner emerging from the House District 2 race was incumbent Republican Jarvis Adams of Greenfield. His recounted total was 1,772 against an original count of 1,777 votes.

http://www4.fosters.com/november_2004/11.20.04/news/nh_ap1120a.asp
House recount turns up new Hillsborough County winner
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — A recount of a New Hampshire House race turned up a new winner in Hillsborough County.

Democrat Claudia Chase of Francestown was down 34 votes going into the re-count. She came out four votes ahead, making her Francestown’s newest state legislator.

Chase’s race was the first of several disputed state representative races to produce a new winner in a re-count. Last week, state elections officials predicted it would about two weeks to re-count disputed House and Senate races. Also started this week was a re-count of 11 precincts at the request of independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader, who is concerned about voting machine accuracy.

[papau]

4. One out of 11 precinct recounts completed and we have a conclusion!

wow

:-)

[TexasChick]

6. And, this even might be a Diebold precinct, not an ES&S optical scanner

precinct, where I think they'll mostly likely find something.

[Ducks In A Row]

12. anyone know if/which counties are diebold and/or es&s?

[Atlant]

15. New Hampshire doesn't report by county.

We report by locality (City/Town). Having said that, I don't
know which localities use which equipment. I have heard, though,
that is a state law here that all votes must be done using paper
ballots,m even if those ballots are then counted by machine.

Radical idea, ehh?

Atlant

[AP]

16. You report by precinct, no doubt. But no precinct crosses a county line.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

20. my trusty list of Diebolds...

shows they're used in about 50 places in NH, including Manchester and Litchfield:
http://www.why-war.com/features/diebold-campaign.pdf

[Carolab]

25. Your list

only shows how many total touch screen machines are in use in certain counties in certain states.

I see NO touch screens listed in NH at all on that list.

[indigolady]

17. doesn't diebold also make the tabulater that the es&s scanner uses?

[dfnh]

27. purpose of the recount

some clarifications:
1. the first five precincts being counted are all diebold accuvote machines, which use paper ballots that have ovals that voters fill in. if the recount continues beyond these precincts, we will be able to collect data on the ES&S Optech machines, which use a much more confusing ballot (the arrow ballot). It is up to the Nader folks if they will decide to continue or not. I hope they will.
2. there was also a state senatorial race being recounted for the same precincts at the same time, which slowed things down. That's why it is taking so long. There is nothing nefarious going on.
3. NH has good historical data, which is published and preserved by the secretary of state's office, which shows very accurate counting done by these machines.
4. NH uses older machines that are not centrally networked. each voting precinct tallies its votes, and sends the number to the sec of state office.
5. we wanted to initiate the recount in nh not to prove fraud but to gather baseline data that compares hand and machine counted paper ballots.
6. we also wanted to demonstrate to the rest of the country what nh has known for a long time: under the guidance of a trusted secretary of state, it is not only possible but manageable to conduct hand counted paper ballot recounts in an orderly, systematic, and verifiable manner.

While there is room for improvement in NH's systems, there is much to be learned from how we do things. Hand counts and paper ballots are feasible no matter where you live. The key is in making it happen everywhere in the country. Our election officials and the systems they design are subject to the oversight of the people if we want them to be.

[daleo]

9. It sounds like someone wants to lull this story to sleep

Like you say, it is hardly a surprise that there is little change so far.

On edit - I notice they don't say how big the ward(s?) that have been counted so far are - a few hundred votes or a few thousand?. That in itself raises a red flag for me.

[ElementaryPenguin]

19. Gee. They counted 20 votes - and Kerry only picked up 6!!!

That proves it. There was no fraud. I know I'm totally convinced! End of story.

[PatsFan2004]

21. Thanks for the post.

Boston.com is affiliated with the Boston Globe newspaper and is considered here in MA as progressive as the NY Times.

Hopefully, when the recount is done, we will have a good picture of the real vote and the exit poll. I look forward to solid evidence.

[KAZ]

23. "as progressive as the NY Times."

The Gray Lady wouldn't know the "P" word if it bit her in the ass.

[signmike]

26. "No Surprises" meaning

...only the expected amount of chicanery?

[dfnh]

28. meaning no surprises

please see my posting above that explains the purpose of the recount. if you have any further questions about what we are doing here in nh, please check our website (www.democracyfornewhampshire.com).

it's important to stay focused. we do not suspect nefarious activities and chicanery here in new hampshire. in fact, we have an excellent documented record of the overall integrity of our voting system.

we initiated the recount request because in new hampshire you can obtain verifiable data through hand counted paper ballots. we see this as a control group, if you will, in that we have a controlled situation in which we can obtain baseline data. Compare that to Florida and Ohio, for instance.

if we want to change things around the country, we need to have something to work towards. the systems in florida and ohio are outrageous. they shouldn't be legal. new hampshire provides a viable alternative.

if we find defects in the election here, so be it. if we don't, that tells us something too. this is our contribution to a rational and systematic study of how our democracy is working (or not) around the nation.