Not sure what the source is, or if the numbers are accurate.
(1) the treatment of Clinton in the press after her "crying" incident, and (2) the determination of her volunteers to fight it out after being pretty shaken up by Iowa.
Even if it were possible, I don't see why Diebold would steal it for Clinton. Where's your motherf*%&ing flag pin?
Even if it were possible, I don't see why Diebold would steal it for Clinton.
Cos Clinton could lose in November ? keep to the Fen Causeway
Granted, it's possible. But, still, I think a lot of people were (rightly) offended by the behavior of much of the press in recent days.
I'm mindful of the greater probability of losing with Clinton, though, setting aside Diebold. And with McCain winning last night, I'm very concerned we're going to see a justifiably rejuvenated, -- again, love her or hate her (and assuming there's no Diebold issue), major props to the folks on the ground for Clinton -- but even more hawkish, Hillary Clinton.
O and E had better get their shit together real quick. If they weren't collaborating before, they'd better start. Where's your motherf*%&ing flag pin?
I think a lot of people were (rightly) offended by the behavior of much of the press in recent days
wtf has that got to do with who will be the better candidate for President ? Crikey, is it down to a pity vote ? Next up, richardson's new kitten dies, surge of support expected. Yech !! keep to the Fen Causeway
Then, even if the difference is significant it still doesn't constitute evidence of tampering. I can imagine a socioeconomic correlation underlying this effect, going roughly like this:
(Diebold voting machines) correlate with (Republican control of local government) correlates with (certain socio-economic veriables) correlate with (support for Clinton vs. Obama) We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
You're effectively suggesting there's a strong DINO element in the urban areas, made up of nominal Clinton Democrats, and Independents with Republican sympathies.
But all the exit polls showed the Indies breaking for Obama, and also a significant Obama lead among registered Dem voters - not up to the double digit lead from the run-up, but still enough for an easy Obama win.
Those were the exit polls, not the run-up polls. So it's hard not to see a discrepancy, especially if these graphs are correct.
Pre-election polls are of likely voters. They don't report the number of people who say they are "not likely to vote" and they also don't report the number of Likely voters who are "undecided". At least there's nothing of the sort in the Real Clear Politics poll tables. So those are two sources of unpolled voters that could have gone for Hillary.
As for exit polls, I want to see an exit poll broken down by vote-counting method before I believe that Soros has uncovered vote-rigging in the Democratic primary. We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
