What is Digg?108 Comments
- Zaeyde, on 05/11/2008, -1/+78This was in February. Why is this on Digg now?
- Hrodrik, on 05/11/2008, -2/+51Dugg for the Obama mention.
- fakekevinrose, on 05/11/2008, -12/+41Published: February 16, 2008
Will you people stop digging anything that says Obama on it - 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....
- rkho, on 05/11/2008, -1/+29This is months old.
- 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.
- Fritzed, on 05/11/2008, -1/+20It doesn't surprise me, but maybe it's because I read this IN FEBRUARY.
- 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. - SaintStryfe, on 05/11/2008, -0/+14I live in Brooklyn, and nearly every business has an Obama sign in it's windows. Not a single hillary. if I could find results for the Clinton Hill neighborhood I'd love to know what happened.
- 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.
- 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.
- tumatakuru, on 05/11/2008, -0/+10because electoral fraud never goes out of style
- Kas70, on 05/11/2008, -0/+8You don't really believe that an area with a demographic like Harlem had few to no votes for Obama do you?
- PhantomPhoenix, on 05/11/2008, -2/+10This is old...but still very disturbing. Is this still a Democracy?
- dagamer34, on 05/11/2008, -4/+10Months old? This is pretty lame.
- ZenMojo, on 05/11/2008, -4/+10Hell, I posted this on Digg in February.
- ablacksunrise, on 05/11/2008, -1/+7It took 3 months to break through all of the MrBabyMan articles and get to the front page...
- MommaKatz, on 05/11/2008, -11/+19Why does this NOT surprise me? Just don't kid yourselves that this is isolated to NY!!
- Triskozko, on 05/11/2008, -1/+6"City election officials said they were convinced that there was nothing sinister to account for the inaccurate initial counts, and The Times’s review found a handful of election districts in the city where Mrs. Clinton received zero votes in the initial results."
- 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.
- 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.
- xobecide, on 05/11/2008, -1/+5I'm behind kilts. Oddly aggressive on men. Peculiarly attractive on schoolgirls.
- inactive, on 05/11/2008, -1/+5
- kipmartin, on 05/11/2008, -4/+7same.
- SteveIsTheDude, on 05/11/2008, -2/+6The people does not control grammar where you are from, however.
- 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.
- TinternAbbot, on 05/11/2008, -7/+12VOTE FOR PANTS
- 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..... - Joe_rigby, on 05/11/2008, -2/+5Different.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- bernos, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3hey wasn't this article ftrom feb
- enronias, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3BREAKING: Bible the New Testament is Released!!!
- 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.
- onyxcoltrane, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2Maybe because it's an important story that didn't get covered appropriately in February
- 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.
- junkwheel, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2Hillary is responsible for fruit going bad when you turn your back.
- rdoger6424, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2only when she drops out
- kipmartin, on 05/11/2008, -1/+3if it sucks, why not leave? 'worst posts ever' always question Digg's algorithms.
- biotch, on 05/11/2008, -1/+3Its from Feb.
- explnx, on 04/27/2009, -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.
- 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.
- 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. - Spoomeister, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1shhh - pipe down - survivor's on
- 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. - 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.
- 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. - 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.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 108 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is