MSM Failed to Note “Hackable Diebold Red Flags” in New Hampshire Primary Results


Syndicated Tribune Media Services columnist Bob Koehler bumps up our serious concernsuntransparent, and still-uncounted (by anything but a hackable Diebold computer, and a company with an executive criminal past, to say the least) New Hampshire Primary election results, from “blogger conspiracy theory” to mainstream media concern.

Some excerpts:

By Robert C. Koehler
Tribune Media Services

As the breathless sports coverage of the presidential primaries bursts around me this morning, I’m doing my best to resist surrendering to the contrived drama about “comeback kids” and the flying shrapnel of numbers and hold onto my troubled skepticism about the electoral process, or at least most of it.

First of all, before we get too enthusiastic about feminist solidarity or wax knowingly about New Hampshire Democrats’ traditional soft-heartedness toward the Clinton family, let’s ponder yet again the possibility of tainted results, which is such an unfun prospect most of the media can’t bear to remember that all the problems we’ve had with electronic voting machines — and Diebold machines in particular, which dominate New Hampshire polling places — remain unsolved.

Problems which have existed at least since 2004, and which persist, leaving any election results in doubt.

Did the Hillary campaign really defy the pollsters? She had been trailing Barack Obama by 13 percentage points, 42 to 29, in a recent Zogby poll, as election watchdog Brad Friedman pointed out. And the weekend’s “rapturous packed rallies for Mr. Obama,” as the New York Times put it, “suggested Mrs. Clinton was in dire shape.”

So when she emerged from the Tuesday primary with an 8,000-vote and 3-percentage-point victory over Obama, perhaps — considering the notorious unreliability, not to mention hackability, of Diebold machines — the media might have hoisted a few red flags in the coverage, rather than immediately chalk the results up to Clinton’s tears and voter unpredictability. (Oh, if only more reporters considered red flags patriotic.)

Our MSM, so in love with the feel-good and comeback kid stories, they are apparently willing to ignore the unreliability of Diebold machines, and any possible tampering with our election process.

The fact is, whatever actually happened in New Hampshire voting booths on Tuesday, our elections are horrifically insecure. For instance, Bev Harris, of the highly respected voting watchdog organization Black Box Voting, recently wrote that the Diebold 1.94w optical scan machines used in some 55 percent of New Hampshire precincts (representing more than 80 percent of the state’s voters) are “the exact same make, model and version hacked in the Black Box Voting project in Leon County (Florida)” a few years ago. They haven’t been upgraded; the security problems haven’t been fixed.

National, or at least media, denial about this situation doesn’t say much for the strength of our democracy.


Read the rest of Koehler’s column here.

2 thoughts on “MSM Failed to Note “Hackable Diebold Red Flags” in New Hampshire Primary Results

  1. Here in Saint Johns county, Florida, we use an electronically scanned hand-marked ballot. If your make a double choice or fail to identify a candidate in any race, the ballot scanner will flag that and you have an opportunity to submit a new ballot before your ballot is recorded. All recoded paper copies are saved into a box that is transferred to the board of elections for a possible recount. The electronic tallies and the paper ballots are transferred to county offices immediately after polls are closed. Electronic totals are generally available within one hour after the time polls close. Random precincts are re-tallied at the county seat in order to assure some semblance of consistency before the initial results are released. In the end, the accuracy is extremely acute. This process has been in place for at least sixteen years. We had no hanging chad problems which was why Gore did not demand a recount in our county and that was cited as one foundation for W’s appointment by the Supremes.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s