Scatablog

The Aeration Zone: A liberal breath of fresh air

Contributors (otherwise known as "The Aerheads"):

Walldon in New Jersey ---- Marketingace in Pennsylvania ---- Simoneyezd in Ontario
ChiTom in Illinois -- KISSweb in Illinois -- HoundDog in Kansas City -- The Binger in Ohio

About us:

e-mail us at: Scatablog@Yahoo.com

Saturday, February 16, 2008

The Clinton Machine at work?

This morning I read this in the Times:

Black voters are heavily represented in the 94th Election District in Harlem’s 70th Assembly District. Yet according to the unofficial results from the New York Democratic primary last week, not a single vote in the district was cast for Senator Barack Obama.

That anomaly was not unique. In fact, a review by The New York Times of the unofficial results reported on primary night found about 80 election districts among the city’s 6,106 where Mr. Obama supposedly did not receive even one vote, including cases where he ran a respectable race in a nearby district.

City election officials this week said that their formal review of the results, which will not be completed for weeks, had confirmed some major discrepancies between the vote totals reported publicly — and unofficially — on primary night and the actual tally on hundreds of voting machines across the city.

In the Harlem district, for instance, where the primary night returns suggested a 141 to 0 sweep by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the vote now stands at 261 to 136. In an even more heavily black district in Brooklyn — where the vote on primary night was recorded as 118 to 0 for Mrs. Clinton — she now barely leads, 118 to 116.

They're treating this as though it's some sort of accidental error, but really, 118 to 0? I mean, if you were a poll worker and sent this sort of report off to the press, wouldn't you think something was just a bit awry? In the first place, every polling district keeps a tally of the total number of voters voting in addition to adding up the numbers for each candidate. So, if you saw that 234 people voted but came up with a count of only 118 to 0, wouldn't you wonder why 116 people came to the poll but failed to vote? And wouldn't any sensible person say that a vote of 118 to 0 between two relatively evenly balanced candidates was odd?

I don't buy that this was just accidental oversight, particularly when it happened in at least 80 different districts. That's too much coincidence for me.

I'm not saying that Hillary orchestrated this or even that her campaign did without her knowledge, but I think somebody did. And, for all the districts that had zero votes for Obama, how many others were sharp enough to say, we can't get away with zero, so let's just cut his vote in half?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home