A blogger does some research — easily replicated — and discovers a statistical oddity in the NH Primary.
In districts that use hand-counting of ballots, Obama ended up with a 7.5% advantage. In districts using Diebold’s notorious “Accuvote” machines, Clinton ended up with a 5.5% advantage. If you apply the hand-count rate to the entire state, Obama would have won with a lead near to what the polls, exit interviews and such were claiming.
Hanky panky? Or just wonky machines? Who knows — regardless of the reason, there’s certainly been enough evidence presented over the past 4 years to indicate that the Diebold voting machines are unreliable — not only prone to error, but also easily hacked. And yet, they’re still in use.
EDIT, FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN’T YET FIGURED IT OUT: The thesis statement of this post is the final paragraph. I’m not shouting “tampering!!” I think that if anything, this points (yet again) to the need to use only verifiable paper balloting.