and as seen in an Emmy-nominated documentary film.

We rented Tropic Thunder the other night and this reminds me of the line:

“It’s kind of political. You gotta take ads out..”

Split my sides. And the Hollyweird agent stuff was the best..

Brad, I don’t really want to go through the blizzard of crap you slung around New Hampshire.

Given your previous comment, and the embarrassing points made in the agove, I suspect you wouldn’t.

All the paranoia about “chain of custody” and “memory cards”

Yes. Tin-hattery, all of it! Why worry about “memory cards” (enjoyable “quotes” there, btw), when manipulation of memory cards by computer scientists and security experts in one academic and/or state-sponsored study after another has found them among the easiest way to manipulate the results of an election — on the very machines used in NH, btw — and as seen in an Emmy-nominated documentary film. Paranoia, that. Why bother to be concerned about it? Especially when nobody to date has been able to explain the disparity between pre-election polls and election results in NH (or, have they, but just haven’t told me about it, because all I’ve seen is conjecture — of the paranoia-type you mention, actually). And when the company with a criminal record that handled the memory cards, LHS, has admitted to having done so illegally during elections, why worry?

And why concern oneself with that silly “chain of custody” thing, when ballots were stored in open boxes and such. Conspiracy theories! All of it! Democracy protects and oversees itself, don’t ya know? Where do you think we live, Iran? Afghanistan? Florida? Ohio? New Hampshire?

the implication that Diebold rigged the opscan vote

Who implied that? I didn’t.

the complete bullshit about “reversed counts” between hand-counted and opscan towns.

What bullshit about it? Perhaps you’re confusing me with another Brad?

I used to live and vote in New Hampshire, and I know that they run a top-notch and verifiable election procedure. Every single ballot is on paper, whether it’s counted by a scanner or a bunch of people.

You seem to be completely uninformed about the problems with computer tabulated paper ballots. If you’re determined to be, I suspect I won’t be convincing you otherwise in a single comment, in anycase. And if you think the NH elections are “top-notch”, I’d hate to see what you consider to be disastrous.

The bullshit about differences between machine-count and hand-count towns was refuted from the very start.

Yeah, I know. By me. You sure you’re talking about the same Brad? Have you ever actually read my blog? Or do you just rely on what fools like Dana Houle (DHinMI at dKos, a former NH official) lies to you about? If so, you’d get more reliable information from Sean Hannity on these matters, amigo.

The phenomenon was clearly one of regional differences, not due to voting machines.

I never reported otherwise. But that makes me a conspiracy theorist?!

The recount demonstrated that the small errors in the count were human errors. Nothing malevolent, just mistakes made by fallible humans. It happens.

“Small errors” in a partial recount where variances of 4 to 10.6% occurred?! I’ll just hope and pray you’re not an election official, and thank god that there are folks out there who actually give a damn about accurate, transparent, citizen-overseeable democracy, even as you appear not to. Such enormous disparities, whether by malevolence, fallible humans, or merely equipment error all result in elections which do not reflect the will of the voters.

I’m sorry to hear those issues are not important to you, but good luck with that. Don’t worry, we’ll pay attention, if you won’t and don’t seem to care about your own self-governance. You’re welcome. Good lord.

I used to live and vote in New Hampshire, and I know that they run a top-notch and verifiable election procedure. Every single ballot is on paper, whether it’s counted by a scanner or a bunch of people.

The bullshit about differences between machine-count and hand-count towns was refuted from the very start. The pattern — the same one that occurred in 2004 — was that the cities in the southeastern part of the state (Manchester, Nashua, Derry, and such) are both the more conservative areas and the areas where scanners are more likely to be used. The phenomenon was clearly one of regional differences, not due to voting machines.

The recount demonstrated that the small errors in the count were human errors. Nothing malevolent, just mistakes made by fallible humans. It happens.

What “conspiracy” did I allege in New Hampshire? Or any time or anywhere for that matter?

And, as long as we’re on the subject, what was I either incorrect or destructive about in terms of my coverage of the abhorrent version of “democracy” as carried out in NH’s primary last year?

I look forward to your reply, unless you prefer to simply offer unsubstantiated ad homimen attacks instead of actual substance.

And finally, “With their ravings, they’ve both set back the cause of real voting reform by years.” Really? How so? Was it due to the actual changes in NH’s election procedures that resulted from my, Bev and scores of other EI advocates watchdogging and advocacy during that horribly run election?

How has “real voting reform” been set back by the various policies that have changed, and voting systems decertified due, etc. due to such reporting, be it in NH or anywhere else in the nation??

I’m not offended by your silly attacks, but I would welcome your substance to back them up because I’m unaware of what the hell you’re talking about.

Thanks!
Brad

whay the hell are people leaving voting until the last minute

First of all, why NOT vote on election day?

Second, a deadline means you have to finish the task before a certain time. If your teacher marked you down for not turning in your term paper today even though it’s not due until tomorrow, you’d be irate.

And finally, getting fast results is nice, but it’s way down on the list of things required for a fair election.

In the NY 23rd one of the three candidates withdrew from the race, which might have an effect on which of the remaining candidates voters would choose. This sort of situation happened pretty often in the presidential primaries, frustrating to those who had cast their vote early and now felt like their vote had been “wasted”.

And a candidate does die from time-to-time. Depending upon state law, this might affect the outcome.

Brad Friedman might be even more of a self-important conspiracy theorist than Bev Harris when it comes to electoral issues. It’s a close call.

His idiocy, incorrectness, and outright destructiveness in the 2008 New Hampshire primary were absolutely outrageous.

With their ravings, they’ve both set back the cause of real voting reform by years.

Waiting to see which candidate might get caught in a scandal? Waiting for the very latest and most desperate of the attack ads?

If you don’t know what you believe in and which candidate best represents those points of view, screw you.

You don’t know how happy it makes me to see that you follow Brad Blog. I wish more people and more political bloggers would do the same.