Exit polls in GA Primary - did they match the votes like they did in CT?

[helderheid]

[helderheid]

1. Reason I ask - McKinny is claiming election fraud w/evote machines

[loudsue]

21. "That's the Night that the Lights Went Out In Georgia"

Her defeat by the Diebold machines keeps reminding me of that song.

There were many people who had problems with the voting -- in addition to NOT HAVING MCKINNEY'S NAME ON THE BALLOT in one of her precincts (NOT the redistricted precinct, as the media/elections officials would try to have people believe).

Yes, helderheid, we have GOT to get rid of Diebold, and all electronic/hackable voting machines.

It's too bad we can't file suit on another state -- one that we don't live in.
Georgia (and Florida and Ohio, by the way) is too corrupt to allow in national elections.

:kick::kick::kick:

[WI_DEM]

2. I think they had exit polls in CT only because of the interest in that

race. I think the loss of McKinney was so large in her primary that it wasn't stolen. She just lost touch with her constituents. Remember too she was defeated in a primary in 2002 as well.

[leftchick]

3. well since it is 100% Diebold in GA

I am betting not.

[Atman]

Yeah, you don't need exit polls with Diebold, because you know going in

who is going to win.

[Horse with no Name]

4. In the towns where her name was left off the ballot?

Or the other towns?:eyes:

[helderheid]

5. are you serious????

[Selatius]

6. There have been reports her name was left off some of the machines

We don't know to what extent that problem existed, but if there are no exit polls, it's quite difficult to trust the elections results in any case.

[slackmaster]

8. There was ONE report and it wasn't verifiable

n/t

[slackmaster]

7. Precincts that weren't in her district didn't have her name on the ballot

It was horrible.

Also the Republican ballots in District 4 mysteriously didn't have her name on them either.

:tinfoilhat:

[helderheid]

9. I suspected as much.

[SPKrazy]

18. LOL

I had to read your post twice before I got it!

a little slow

[Horse with no Name]

12. Yes.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/elections/entries/2006/08/08/mckinney_allege.html

[helderheid]

13. thanks for the link!

[cyclezealot]

10. With Repugs crossing over in mass

I doubt she lost in her own constituency. She would have won overwhealmingly come November if not for Repug meddling.She has been a fresh voice of freedom. This makes Lamont's victory slightly less joyous.

[helderheid]

11. We have GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THESE MACHINES!!

[DemFromMem]

14. Advance polls showed her getting trounced

Don't have the cite anymore, but a friend who lives in her district emailed me a poll from a few weeks ago showing she was in big trouble. This wasn't exactly shocking. Given her behavior in the past, there was no way she was going to accept defeat with dignity.

[helderheid]

15. Well I wouldn't be surprised about that. I am just very disturbed

these machines are stealing elections and I would like to have exit poll info to compare with vote results.

[slackmaster]

19. How would the machines know which candidate is which?

Lists of candidates are supposed to be presented to voters in a pseudo-random order to prevent giving an advantage to the first or last name on the list.

I'm aware of vulnerabilities and deficiencies that have been reported in the machines, as well as lack of a paper audit trail. All that is bad, but nobody has yet presented a convincing explanation of how the mysterious vote riggers could actually carry out a plot to influence an election, and do so repeatedly without word leaking out.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

16. I'm Pretty Sure This Outcome Was The Outcome The Constituents Wanted.

Diebold ain't responsible for no 18% spread.

She dug her own grave in a lot of ways. I respect much if not most of what she's done in her career, but I feel she blew it in many ways this past year. I know she is quite popular amongst many here, and I respect her as well, but I don't think it's of sound and rational mind to question the results of her primary. We can't really say the results don't make sense or that this comes as a big surprise. And besides, Johnson is not really bad and is still a dem we can be proud of.

She lost but could always try and run again down the road. But for now I hope she doesn't turn this into some overdrawn battle with accusations of fraud. It just isn't responsible here and undermines greatly the real issues of the voting machines in races where the results really are in question.

If we start doing it for a primary that meant little to most with an 18% spread then when a serious instance arises people will just say "oh please, you guys cry that foul every time, even when you lose in a landslide!". Our voting concerns are legitimate and immensely important, but we do them a great disservice when we choose to forsake legitimacy and probability for an inability to let go.

[longship]

17. Sorry. McKinney lost big.

And I am *very* sorry for this. Johnson looks like a milque-toast compared to Cythia.

But McKinney needs to do what Lieberman needs to do. Concede gracefully and move on to other things.

I don't think that she has a credible case that her opponent received an over 9 point swing from electoral skullduggery.

[11cents]

20. As mentioned above, the results matched polls taken a week or two ago.

They showed her getting blown away, and she was.

I've heard the following from someone who used to be a Congressional staffer for another Democrat: McKinney was terrible at constituent services, unstable, and abusive to her staff. She made the same mistake as Lieberman, catering to a national audience (obviously not the same as Lieberman's!) and neglecting her own voters.