digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at nytimes.com

Unofficial Tallies in City Understated Obama Vote

nytimes.com — Unofficial results from the New York Democratic primary reported that not a single vote was cast for Senator Barack Obama in about 80 election districts.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • motivatedmama, on 05/11/2008, -6/+35A big, fat goose egg for Obama huh? I think not. Grist for a conspiracy indeed! I hope they tear this bitch down and give him what he earned.
    • d03boy, on 05/11/2008, -8/+2Bunch of conspiracy theorists and wackos and nut jobs if you ask me... yeah... something like this can't really happen.
      • EtherGnat, on 05/11/2008, -2/+6Comment abuse to point out this story was from February 16 and involved unofficial results, which are unofficial for a reason.
        • EtherGnat, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2While I'm abusing the comment system anyway I might as well post the response. Sorry for the wall of text, but this entire story should be buried anyway.

          For Immediate Release: March 11, 2008

          STATEMENT ON THE PRELIMINARY NATURE OF ELECTION NIGHT TALLIES
          The preliminary election “results” complied on election night are produced by a combination of poll workers manually recording the results and the New York City Police Department (NYPD) collecting the materials containing these results, compiling them, and entering the information into its computer system for tabulation.

          After the polls close on election night, more than 30,000 poll workers transcribe the number of votes for each candidate from the face of the voting machines onto Return of Canvass forms. These poll workers, who receive a very small compensation in return for working a 17 hour day and who are essentially volunteers for the agency, then hand the Return of Canvass sheets to the NYPD Officer assigned to that polling location. The candidates and/or members of their respective campaigns are permitted by law to assign poll watchers to observe and record the preliminary results (See NYS Election Law, Section 9-126).

          Once collected, the NYPD Officer delivers the Return of Canvass sheets to his or her police precinct to be transcribed into its computer system by civilian employees of the NYPD. The computer records are then transmitted to the Associated Press and a copy of each Return of Canvass form is delivered to its office at 55 Washington Street in Brooklyn . The Associated Press then shares the preliminary results with its colleagues in the news media. These preliminary results, however, do not include thousands of absentee and affidavit ballots (See NYS Election Law, Section 9-102).

          New York State has one of the most meticulous recanvass procedures in the country. State Election Law requires all Board of Elections to recanvass every voting machine used within 15 days of the election. During this process, bipartisan teams of Board employees record the results for official tabulation. As an extra layer of oversight, representatives of all the campaigns are notified of the recanvass schedule and invited to monitor the official recanvass and ensure its accuracy. The absentee and affidavit ballots are then opened and tabulated after staff review. The campaigns are once again invited to monitor the opening and counting of these paper ballots (See NYS Election Law, Section 9-208).

          The Board of Elections is required to promptly complete its official certification of the election results. Board of Elections staff completed and certified the 2008 Presidential Primary Election within 21 days of the vote on February 26, 2008 (See NYS Election Law, Sections 3-222, 9-200, 9-208).

          In response to media inquiries during the recanvass procedure for the 2008 Presidential Primary election, the Board conducted an investigation into several Election Districts that showed zero votes for Senator Barack Obama on the preliminary election night results. The Board’s investigation revealed that there were 35 instances of inspector error where the results were written incorrectly on the Return of Canvass sheets, 20 instances of NYPD error entering the data to its computer system, and 27 instances where the reported results were correct.
        • TheDiggAbides, on 05/11/2008, -2/+1wall of text alert! get the battering ram!
    • jana67, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Yea, goose eggs are good for geese http://www.squidoo.com/obamavideoshowcase
  • MommaKatz, on 05/11/2008, -11/+19Why does this NOT surprise me? Just don't kid yourselves that this is isolated to NY!!
    • gsxrjason, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2'establishment' is code for 'work the system'
    • Fritzed, on 05/11/2008, -1/+20It doesn't surprise me, but maybe it's because I read this IN FEBRUARY.
  • ExplosivesWTC, on 05/11/2008, -30/+12Some ***** from the NY Times with 34 Diggs gets on the front page but Alex Jones websites like prisonplanet.com and infowars.com stories get hundreds of Diggs and never reach the front page. Disgusting censorship. Good story but it pisses me off that Digg censors the truth all the time from Alex Jones. By the way this happened to Ron Paul is many areas not just New York. Complete election fraud.
    • Zaeyde, on 05/11/2008, -4/+4You had me 'till the Ron Paul part.
    • Lukesed, on 05/11/2008, -5/+8Yeah, it's called burying. Everybody on digg seems to like Obama so his stories get loads of diggs in a short time and few buries. Alex Jones is a complete nutjob and while he is funny the first time he isn't interesting enough for the front page.
      • 7righthandedmen, on 05/11/2008, -5/+3not interesting at all that he called the sept. 11 attacks four months early?

        or that more recently D.C. Madame was on his programme saying she would love to go to court with what she knows and that she would not settle out of court ~ it was ONLY funny the first time he made sure to ask her if she had any plans to kill herself

        i thinks that there is not enough 'nutjobs' out there, alex seems to be the only one with the scoop once in a while and the cameo in WL is a tearjerker
    • ArchangelZLT, on 05/11/2008, -1/+4I'd say that's because a lot of people go to nytimes on their own and some of them may have went to the digg article (using the share button). Remember that digg counts page visit as a factor to popularity.
    • biotch, on 05/11/2008, -1/+3Its from Feb.
  • Zaeyde, on 05/11/2008, -1/+78This was in February. Why is this on Digg now?
    • arw371, on 05/11/2008, -5/+6seriously
    • ZenMojo, on 05/11/2008, -4/+10Hell, I posted this on Digg in February.
    • tumatakuru, on 05/11/2008, -0/+10because electoral fraud never goes out of style
    • kipmartin, on 05/11/2008, -1/+4it probably wasnt meant to see the light of day at all, but things changed a bit last week.
    • ablacksunrise, on 05/11/2008, -1/+7It took 3 months to break through all of the MrBabyMan articles and get to the front page...
    • zenmasher, on 05/11/2008, -2/+2This was on Digg in February.
    • rb329503, on 05/11/2008, -1/+1Why is your mom old?
  • rkho, on 05/11/2008, -1/+29This is months old.
  • lazerfred, on 05/11/2008, -4/+32Ummm... why in the world was an article from February 15 submitted? (3 months ago!) And why is it being dugg right now? This isn't news, this is "olds." In related news, John Kerry has announced that he's running for president in '04....
  • TinternAbbot, on 05/11/2008, -7/+12VOTE FOR PANTS
    • pilot3033, on 05/11/2008, -1/+13Don't be fooled by Pant's propaganda and dogma! Pant's political platform is weakly built on the false idea of 'snug comfort,' everyone knows life is much better pantsless.
      • xobecide, on 05/11/2008, -1/+5I'm behind kilts. Oddly aggressive on men. Peculiarly attractive on schoolgirls.
    • jonathantneal, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Liar Liar Pants on Fire
  • Hrodrik, on 05/11/2008, -10/+3Do you people realize what this tells about America? Your vote system is a fraud. Democracy? What exactly does the People control?

    Nothing.
    • SteveIsTheDude, on 05/11/2008, -2/+6The people does not control grammar where you are from, however.
      • Micktion, on 05/11/2008, -2/+2Grammar aside, he's right. I think there's more than enough anecdotal evidence around to be extremely suspicious of the electronic voting system in the US. There is a continuous and steady trend to the results of polls conducted on these machines and you really don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to think there might be some fire behind the smoke.

        I suspect if Obama does win the democratic nomination, McCain is going to win the election, and it won't be by popular vote.
  • fakekevinrose, on 05/11/2008, -12/+41Published: February 16, 2008

    Will you people stop digging anything that says Obama on it
  • Farmer77, on 05/11/2008, -12/+3Wow, let this Obama/Clinton thing die already.
  • knumbknuts, on 05/11/2008, -9/+7To paraphrase Steve Martin:

    "Waiter, bring us some fresh whine! No more of this old stuff!"
  • SilverBlade2k, on 05/11/2008, -6/+4I'm not surprised at all....Hilary is doing everything in her power to cheat, including paying off people or 'making sure these ones are discarded'.

    They want to keep the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton dynasty in tact..
    • Joeyrev, on 05/11/2008, -1/+4Why don't you read the article, it says that the same thing happened to Clinton in certain districts.
  • vicsvenge, on 05/11/2008, -6/+13and this is why digg is really starting to suck. how does a 3 month old story get on the front page? a repeated digg nevertheless. buried.
    • kipmartin, on 05/11/2008, -1/+3if it sucks, why not leave? 'worst posts ever' always question Digg's algorithms.
    • onyxcoltrane, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2Maybe because it's an important story that didn't get covered appropriately in February
  • dagamer34, on 05/11/2008, -4/+10Months old? This is pretty lame.
  • hiimcliff, on 05/11/2008, -4/+6i worked the polls super tuesday in a school on coney island avenue and newkirk. our count was pretty damn close between obama and clinton. it weirded me out how in a predominately persian/indian neighborhood obama could do well but in certain districts in harlem and other all black neighborhoods he got nothing. i smell a rat. i'm looking at you charlie.
  • atb12688, on 05/11/2008, -2/+18It's on Digg now because it implies the following question: In how many other states did this occur, and, if it did, what possible effect could it have had upon following contests. Now in this case, it had no effect on the actually primary results in New York: HRC still won the popular vote and got more delegates than Obama. He may be getting more delegates from NY than originally thought, but he is still the winner.

    Regardless of however little difference these discrepancies may have had on the overall nomination process, they are a serious threat to our political system and way of life, and should not be tolerated under any circumstances.
  • arw371, on 05/11/2008, -9/+9dug: anyone who pointed out this was from february
    buried: everyone else
  • Think4urself, on 05/11/2008, -7/+9dugg: anyone who points out that this is the first time many of us are seeing this (thanks to the MSM)
    buried: everyone who bitches about it being old
    • Joeyrev, on 05/11/2008, -2/+3I'm pretty sure the New York Times is considered mainstream media. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean they haven't covered it.
  • shawnanigans, on 05/11/2008, -2/+18Excuse me, just a question for Americans from an outsider. Uh, how are you not absolutely revolting against the government, you have a President that was elected by the supreme court because of nominees his father helped put on the bench, while his brother was governor of the state that held the balance of electoral votes, you have a primary where one candidate is obviously trying to hijack the election and you use voting machines that have been proven to be easily and readily hackable.
    • Kas70, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4Complete conflict of interest when the state in question is run by the brother of the selected president. I don't understand why people didn't throw a bigger fit either. All this space travel and we can't make better voting machines. And I believe if it was anyone other than a Clinton acting like this there wouldn't be so much humoring going on.
    • Mpwns, on 05/11/2008, -1/+5because ever since 9/11 middle America has been living in a state of fear and is willing to let there government do what ever they want. the rest of us just gave up on our government and stooped complaining about it since it never did any thing Iraq war is still going on.
      • monroylobo, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2Umm...the elections in question happened in 2000, pre-9/11/01.
        • Mpwns, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1well i was answering why we are not revolting question. not what happened in 2000.
      • shawnanigans, on 05/12/2008, -0/+2Can I ask why middle America is afraid of terrorism? It's not like terrorists are going to blow up a building in Arkansas.
        • Mpwns, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1because most of middle america is in the bible belt.those of us to poor know god won't have the answers and those of us that are rich don't think they need god since they have money for anything they want.
    • Lamadave222, on 05/11/2008, -1/+0Back to reality. The 2000 election was cool beans because of the accelerated pace of what happened but the fools who suggest the election was "stolen" through Republican machinations are kooks. The percentage of uncounted votes was not atypical, the election commissions in the counties that the Democrats wanted to selectively recount were, in fact, Democrat dominated boards, the ballots were approved by both parties, the Supreme Court rules on matters of law, David Boise (attorney for Gore) was a fool in not letting the process go forward earlier it might have given him enough time to "win" his case, and finally, the Florida Supreme Court was Democrat dominated and an embarrassment to the judicial process.
    • Spoomeister, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1shhh - pipe down - survivor's on
  • PhantomPhoenix, on 05/11/2008, -2/+10This is old...but still very disturbing. Is this still a Democracy?
    • evilpoptart, on 05/11/2008, -2/+3its a democratic republic, never was a democracy.
      • PhantomPhoenix, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Well, actually your right, but it can be described as a Democracy, or as a Republic, or as a Democratic-Republic. The Democratic part describes our voting system, while the Republic part describes our legislature (because a Republic just means that the people are represented, not how the representatives are chosen). Rome was a Republic; Greece (more specifically Athens) was a Democracy.
  • bovox, on 05/11/2008, -5/+6Question: How stupid do you have to be to Digg a 3 month old article? Seriously. I'm actually an Obama supporter, and I'm not trying to be mean or anything like that, but it takes a special kind of idiot to post something this old.
  • lazerfred, on 05/11/2008, -2/+5Ha! Amen to your thoughts. When you look up the submitter's record, she's basically dugg and submitted all pro-Obama and anti-Hillary stuff. She actually joined Digg a month AFTER the NY Times article in question originally appeared. As a major Obama supporter myself, people like this make me a tad bit embarrassed.
  • Somedude2137, on 05/11/2008, -1/+5 
  • Disgod, on 05/11/2008, -2/+2I'd like to know what came of the investigation, I realize it's months old, but I would like to see some follow up on something like this. I'm not naive enough to think that anything would come of it, but it'd still be interesting because it'd show how utterly ruthless Hillary has been, especially considering it was her "home" state which she knew she was going to win in any case, by a decent, possibly overwhelming, lead.
  • 3141592653589, on 05/11/2008, -3/+3 Great! Now for next time, instead of throwing out ALL of the opponent's votes, they'll keep a few in there to make it look natural.
  • SpoBo, on 05/11/2008, -3/+2lol if this is true and there is a single person willing to believe this is actually the truth (0 obama votes in harlem) .... that man (or woman) is clearly the most retarted person in the entire world.
    • EtherGnat, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1This was never the truth. It was errors on preliminary election results that were fixed a long time ago. Maybe when you see a story is three months old you ought to look for a follow up before you go telling other people they're retarded.
  • deadbaby, on 05/11/2008, -2/+1It would be kinda nice if we could run a legitimate election in this country. People like Bush like to preach democracy, and in fact use it as a justification for war, but they don't seem too concerned that we can't even make our own democracy work most of the time.
  • Aidenag, on 05/11/2008, -1/+5I posted this article in Feb.... and its been fp multiple times since(this being the 5th submit using this exact same title even).... There is no way Diggs dupe checker didnt tell the submitter of this one, that he was duping multiple submits....

    Buried.....
    • tomjm5000, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2Even if it wasn't a duplicate, it's months old...
  • veersite, on 05/11/2008, -2/+2We are the NY Times. We must see that Obama is elected... We must destroy John McCain... We must leave no vote uncounted (uh, unless it's FL or MI)


    MORE BRAINS!!!!!
  • ayiticherie, on 05/11/2008, -2/+4Everyone here needs to stop bitching about this being old. There is nothing wrong with submitting something that has received no followup in MSM. I remember when this happened and I thought where is the outrage??? I could not for the life of me understand why NY'ers would ever pick this woman. I remember when she first ran for senate and ny'ers openly wondered where she came from and what was she doing there. She had to set up a residence in NY just to prove that she was a New Yorker. What a crock.
    But I say digg and re-digg until this is addressed. I have seen old articles dugg before and I did not take umbrage. If you don't like it then don't digg it. Its really that simple.
    • netant, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1'I could not for the life of me understand why NY'ers would ever pick this woman"

      The answer is obvious, silly. Lazio, her Republican opponent, was a bigger tool. I didn't vote for her in 2006.
  • bjs3171, on 05/11/2008, -1/+1so whatever happened?
  • motivatedmama, on 05/11/2008, -2/+1If anyone cares, this is the first I had heard of it (fairly new to digg) and when I mentioned it to my Husband (who is a uber blogger to the nth degree) he didn't come back with the usual, "oh yeah, that was months ago...I heard about that" So, either we live under a rock or some Obama haters are over emphasizing this articles exposure because?
  • yourfoxygrandma, on 05/11/2008, -2/+2Whatever, it's over.
  • glossNglow, on 05/11/2008, -3/+0Practice run perhaps? I don't think this is the work of the Clinton camp - it's classic Republican tactics - cheat steal lie cheat steal and lie some more.
    • Lamadave222, on 05/11/2008, -0/+0You must be wright. Must be Republicans 'cause NY elected Democrat senators, Democrat governor and it was a Democrat party primary. And it was Republicans not Al Gore who released the information on Willie Horton during the Democrat primary race with Mike "Tank Commander" Dukakis. Kennedy won Chicago with dead people votes, hell the Democrats can run dead candidates and win. How about some facts for a refreshing change?
  • averagejoesgym, on 05/11/2008, -2/+0Nothing to see here.....move along....Big Brother knows what's good for you
  • Lamadave222, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Unofficial results....what, did they ask some wino in the Bowery how he voted? "All the news that smells like ..it"
  • frascellyboy273, on 05/11/2008, -1/+1incompetence in our government... no waaaay
  • junkwheel, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2Hillary is responsible for fruit going bad when you turn your back.
  • johnnyfistfight, on 05/11/2008, -5/+2Does anyone have the official tally in the imaginary 57 states in Obama's *****-up peanut sized head?
    http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0508/ ...
  • enronias, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3BREAKING: Bible the New Testament is Released!!!
  • bernos, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3hey wasn't this article ftrom feb
  • sultanknish, on 05/26/2008, -0/+1No news is old news if it promotes Obama. Can we digg some articles from 2007 too?
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.