Kucinich Calls for Recount in New Hampshire


In the past few days, the Internet has been buzzing with rumors and speculation about "irregularities" with the voting in the Democratic primary in New Hampshire. But that's all it's been so far. New Hampshire election officials are standing behind the results, despite the difference between what the polls were showing the day before - Barack Obama with a large lead - and the ultimate outcome: a victory for Hillary Clinton.

But now Rep. Dennis Kucinich has entered the fray. The Associated Press reports that he wants a recount to ensure that all ballots in his party's contest were counted. The Ohio congressman cited what he called "serious and credible reports, allegations and rumors" about the integrity of Tuesday results.

Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan said Kucinich is welcome to have a recount, but that he will have to pay for it. Candidates who lose by 3 percent or less are entitled to a recount for a $2,000 fee. Candidates who lose by more must pay for the full cost. Kucinich's campaign said it was sending the $2,000 fee to start the recount. Scanlan says he stands by Tuesday's results.

Scanlan said that New Hampshire's use of electronic voting machines is different than states like Ohio or Florida. The electronic machines are not linked, and all the electronic votes are backed by paper ballots.

"Perhaps the best thing that could happen for us is to have a recount to show the people that ... the votes that were cast on election day were accurately reflected in the results. And I have every confidence that will be the case."

Another important factor when looking at the possibility of manipulation of the vote is that the exit polls exactly matched the final totals.

If there had been substantial differences between the tallies and what people thought they had done (exit polls), you could at least imagine some kind of skulduggery. But if the exit polls match the tallies, you would have to theorize that after rigging or mishandling the vote, the same malefactors somehow did the same to the exit polls.


Officials in N.H. agree to recount primary vote

Associated Press / January 12, 2008
CONCORD, N.H. - New Hampshire officials agreed yesterday to conduct complete hand recounts of Tuesday's Democratic and Republican presidential primaries.

Representative Dennis Kucinich, who received less than 2 percent of the Democratic vote, and Albert Howard of Michigan, who received about 40 votes in the GOP primary, each paid a $2,000 fee to start the process, officials said.

Both candidates agreed in writing to pay the full cost of the recounts, Secretary of State William Gardner said. Both could back out when they get the estimates, expected next week. Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan said recounts could start Wednesday.

Kucinich cited "serious and credible reports, allegations and rumors" in requesting the Democratic recount. Howard did not explain his request. In a letter Thursday, Kucinich said he does not expect significant changes in his vote total, but wants assurance that "100 percent of the voters had 100 percent of their votes counted." Kucinich alluded to online reports alleging disparities around the state between hand-counted ballots, which tended to favor Barack Obama, and machine-counted ones that tended to favor Hillary Clinton, who narrowly defeated Obama.

Scanlan said he is confident recounts will verify the accuracy of the results. He said his office had received several phone calls since Tuesday questioning the results.


New Hampshire vote fraud evidence elicits calls for recount TomFlocco

Evidence of vote fraud in Tuesday's New Hampshire Primary has inflamed the internet with reports that disparities exist between swapped precinct percentages regarding Diebold electronic optical scanning machines versus hand-counted ballots involving presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

...There is also evidence that at least one cable television network may have already known about vote count and percentage anomalies given the manner in which coverage was affected according to one authority with strong U.S. intelligence connections.

...a single private entity contracted by the state astonishingly had control over coding for every memory card in New Hampshire while requiring a right of access to any Diebold voting machine at any time, services the machines, maintains the machines and handles repairs, replacements and troubleshooting on Election Day.

A U.S. intelligence authority alleged the virus was placed into the Diebold computer on election night at 8:00 p.m. EST, utilizing cell phones, emails and Westar satellites in conjunction with a Chicago-based brokerage firm and CNN network satellites.


January 8, 2008 at 02:55:05

ALL Diebold ALL the Time - It's the New Hampshire Primary

by Michael Collins

It's the New Hampshire Primary

(c) 2004-06 Rand Careaga/salamander.eps

"1st in the Nation" with Corporate Controlled, Secret Vote Counting

By Nancy Tobi
Democracy for New Hampshire

Introduction. The more things stay the same, the worse they smell

By Michael Collins
"Scoop" Independent News
Washington, D.C.

Tomorrow's New Hampshire primary represents a major turning point in the presidential primaries. We've got the rising star of Obama, the stunned Clinton camp, and the populist efforts of the fast moving Democrat, John Edwards, just off a 9% increase in the national polls. At this juncture, the Republican race is less compelling unless you happen to be John McCain or Mitt Romney.

Does Obama's highly favorable corporate media image stack up against reality? Is this the end of Hillary, or at least the beginning of the end? Can Edwards kick in the door with a strong showing and demand coverage? Will Ron Paul embarrass Giuliani by edging him out for fourth?

We'll never know for sure.

Why? It's been nearly eight years since the debacle of Florida and nearly six since the miracle Chambliss win against Cleland. Surely we have reliable, verifiable voting systems in place? It's been almost four years since the nationwide disaster of the 2004 election with irregularities still emerging.

Hasn't all this been fixed?

You'd think so. But, the answer is definitely no. Votes are still taken by voting machines produced by vendors highly sympathetic to the Republican Party. The machines are still off limits to those who want to examine how they operate and observe real vote counting. And good luck if your candidate loses and there's fraud or voting machine problems suspected.

You're out of luck. You can't hire outside experts to look at the mission critical software in the optical scanners (Sec. 1.5). You'll have a great deal of difficulty examining the paper records with voter marked choices. Don't count on seeing any recounts either. Almost all the states have high hurdles before you can request and get one of these simple verification tools (See Appendix 2).

Even with a relatively accommodating state like New Hampshire, only candidates can request a recount, but recounts are almost unheard of in presidential primaries. Citizens are not allowed to request and get recounts in the "granite state."

We may have 'paper records' with the paper forms counted by New Hampshire's optical scan voting machines, all made by Diebold. We surely don't have access to those forms unless there's a recount. The presence of 'paper records' with optical scans means nothing if citizens can't examine them directly; if citizens can't request and get a recount quickly. It's all in the hands of the candidates and parties despite the fact that the election belongs to the citizens.

Here's voting rights activist Nancy Tobi with an incredibly succinct analysis of New Hampshire's primaries and the 81% of votes counted by Diebold optical scanners.

NH: First in the Nation with Corporate Controlled Secret Vote Counting

81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as "Premier"). The elections run on these machines are programmed by one company, LHS Associates, based in Methuen, MA. We know nothing about the people programming these machines, and we know even less about LHS Associates. We know even less about the secret vote counting software used to tabulate 81% of our ballots. People like to say "but we use paper ballots! They can always be counted by hand!"

But they're not. They're counted by Diebold. Only a candidate can request a hand recount, and most never do so. And a rigged election can easily become a rigged recount, as we learned in Ohio 2004, where two election officials were convicted of rigging their recount. (Is it just a funny coincidence that Diebold spokesman is named Mr. Riggall?)

We need to get the count right on election night. Right now, nobody in New Hampshire, except the programmers at LHS Associates and Diebold Election Systems, knows if we are getting it right or wrong. Our state officials and representatives know this. They learned all about it when computer security specialists Harri Hursti and Bruce Odell testified before the legislative subcommittee on e-voting in September 2007 (Hursti's testimony is shown in this video). Scientific reports about the vulnerabilities and risks with Diebold optical scanners have been available since 2003.

We love our state. It takes courage and strength to admit where we are going wrong and to fix it. May our state officials and representatives find that courage and strength soon. Before we lose the other 19% of our votes.


This article may be reproduced in whole or part with attribution of authorship and a link to this article.

Appendix 1:

Citizens Gone Wild: Taking Control of Our Democracy
PowerPoint File

Nancy Tobi, Democracy for New Hampshire
Election Defense Alliance

Appendix 2: Recount Triggers

Below find a summary of the survey (p. 3) on recounts across the country.

Candidate-initiated recounts: Losing candidates: 14 states, recounts only if race is very close; 25 states, requests allowed whatever outcome, usually with a cost per ballot.
Voter-initiated recounts: In 11 states, voter requests honored for candidates or ballot initiatives. In 7 states, voter requested recounts for ballot initiatives only.
Close election: 16 states have automatic recounts when the race is within 1%.
Automatic recounts: California, Kentucky, New York and West Virginia sample a small percent of ballots to check voting machines.
No recount provisions: Hawaii and Mississippi. Depends on litigation.

Appendix 3: Voter Attitudes Toward Electronic Voting and Honest Elections

New Zogby Poll on Electronic Voting Attitudes

Scoop: Zogby - Voters Question Outcome Of '04 Election

Michael Collins is a writer who focuses on clean elections and voting rights.  See summary oif articles and "Election 2004:  The Urban Legend" 

Contact Author

Contact Editor

View Other Articles by Author

Please distribute widely, Digg, Blog, reprints, get this to the media, etc.

A YouTube video from Black Box Voting that you won't soon forget:


John Silvestro and his small private business, LHS Associates, has exclusive programming contracts for ALL New Hampshire voting machines, which combined  will count about 81 percent of the vote in the primary. And as to Super Tuesday and beyond: Silvestro also has the programming contracts for the states of Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Vermont.

Silvestro IS the New Hampshire chain of custody in New England -- Or at least, a very large component in it.

Last fall, with the help of citizens like you, Black Box Voting began working on "Chain of Custody" projects, in which we identified some of the
areas of concern that might affect many jurisdictions at once. First on the list for the Northeast U.S. is LHS Associates, a vendor with inside access to every memory card, as well as to the chips containing the "brain" of the Diebold optical scan machines.


In an unusual confluence of available video, we obtained footage of Silvestro grappling with Harri Hursti, the master hacker who had his way with the Diebold optical scans in Leon County, Florida in the famous exploit that was showcased in the film Hacking Democracy.

The exact same make, model and version hacked in the Black Box Voting project in Leon County is used throughout New Hampshire, where about 45 percent of elections administrators hand count paper ballots at the polling place, with the remaining locations all using the Diebold version 1.94w optical scan machine. Because the voting machine locations tend to be urban, this represents about 81 percent of the New Hampshire voters.

The video shows Harri Hursti testifying on Sept. 19 before the New Hampshire legislature, attempting to explain significant vulnerabilities requiring urgent mitigations; throughout his testimony, Silvestro inserted his own comments, opinions, misstatements and speculations.


One area of disagreement between Hursti and Silvestro was the amount of expertise needed to exploit the Diebold 1.94w optical scan system. Silvestro claimed (in a strange contortion of reasoning) that he doesn't hire very skilled programmers, implying that this makes New Hampshire elections more secure.

Hursti pointed out that hiring programmers with a lack of knowledge is generally not considered a security feature, and also that an average high
schooler can learn to exploit the system in two days to two weeks.


Black Box Voting purchased a Diebold optical scan with 1.94w firmware, and chose a computer repair shop out of the phone book, took it in, grabbed the first available technician. It took him less than 10 minutes to zero in on the memory card as a point of critical vulnerability -- and oh my, did he point out some other interesting things!


Silvestro tries to claim that the security problems have been fixed in newer editions. Whether or not they have been, it's a moot point in New Hampshire where the upgrade is not made unless the Ballot Law Commission meets, and they have not met for ages.

Silvestro then points to extraordinary measures taken by other states to enact special procedural safeguards, but of course none of those were
implemented in New Hampshire either, because the Ballot Law Commission has not bothered to meet since March 2006.


Not only that, they have turned all the programming over to a sole source private company, taking vote counting for 81 percent of New Hampshire citizens out of the public domain.

LHS is not subject to public records requirements, as the government is, at least, not in New Hampshire. The control over memory card contents is absolute; when cards malfunction or get lost, LHS brings the replacements.


Since LHS maintains the machines, repairs the machines, and replaces the machines -- often on Election Day -- when they malfunction, they have
intimate access to the chips, sockets, ports, communications devices and other electronic components.

Silvestro stated that the chip has "read only memory" and cannot be reprogrammed without frying it under ultraviolet light overnight.

Hursti never had a chance to examine the hardware, nor have most of the recent university studies had access. But our friendly neighborhood computer repair guy differed with Silvestro on the point of plug & play reprogramming of the guts of the machine.

After I push the button to send this message out to the media and the citizenry, I'll work on getting a short YouTube video of the Accuvote
checkup by our local computer repairman. And before you say, "But wait! He's not a world class expert!" -- That's just the point.

Our local computer repairman may hit or miss on some of his analyses. You'll all be able to try your hand at second guessing him as soon as the next video is up. But if he hits even one of his ideas for how to exploit the machine to steal votes, that's all it takes. From someone who is not,
certainly, a world class hacker or even a hacker at all.

I'll post the link to that in a follow up here: , and invite you techs to weigh in.

Please feel free to distribute, reprint or excerpt, with link to Black Box 
Voting and the video link above.

Bev Harris
Black Box Voting

* * * * *

This is the year to support Election protection actions:
or mail to:
Black Box Voting
330 SW 43rd St Suite K
PMB 547
Renton WA 98057

Voter Fraud Against Paul Confirmed in Sutton, N.H.

By admin | January 8, 2008

Kurt Nimmo
Truth News
January 8, 2008

According to a post this evening on the Ron Paul Forums, vote fraud occurred in Sutton, New Hampshire:

Sutton with 100% reporting reported 0 votes for Paul but poster in Sutton posted:

My mom, aunt, and dad all voted for RP today in my hometown, My mom and aunt both work passing out ballots, and checking them off.
I just looked at the politico map and it says their town has ZERO votes for Ron. Now I know that there isn't corruption on voting in that
little town, so where they reported it must be. What do I do, anyone know?

Originally Posted by sstjean View Post

This was posted to ronpaul-801 tonight: "This town numbers are wrong, wrong, wrong, on this map. I am from Sutton originally and my
parents and one aunt all voted for Ron Paul today, and Sutton says 0. So this is wrong. This is a town that had 20 people counting the
ballots and I have no reason to believe that they cheated. Small town and I was born and raised there. The real numbers will come in
by morning. The electronic machines in the big towns are the ones we have to worry about."

Earlier in the day, Brad Blog reported other suspicious behavior:

Our Spidey sense started tingling before going to bed last night and hearing reports, on MSNBC, that there were 17 paper ballots cast
in Dixville Notch, NH's midnight, first in the country voting. The report said that there were only 16 registered voters in the tiny voting
precinct, yet 17 votes had been cast, suggesting that somehow, paper ballot "voter fraud" skullduggery was afoot.

Brad, however, believes the story is easily debunked:

Given that one of those reports seems to have begun on The DRUDGE REPORT earlier today, we're not particularly surprised that
the MSM kept repeating the easily debunked stories running all day.

That, even while there are reasons to be concerned about how the paper ballots used in the New Hampshire Primary will actually be
counted by the hackable Diebold optical scan systems used in the state, as controlled and programmed by an outrageously bad private
contractor there.

Subject: The Silence of the Scams: Psychological Resistance to Facing
Election Fraud
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008

The Silence of the Scams: Psychological Resistance to Facing Election Fraud
Monday, April 11, 2005


Invisible History -

Few Americans know about the historic event that happened on January 6, 2005, the official date for counting electoral votes.

For the first time since 1877, congress members challenged the electoral count.

Representative Stephanie Tubbs-Jones of Ohio, accompanied by the lone senator, Barbara Boxer of California, led the challenge
to the Ohio vote count. Although massive fraud was reported around the country, only Ohio was officially cited. It is curious that an
issue so profound and consequential is barely on the radar screens of most Americans, especially those who supported Kerry.

Though we are not certain of the actual outcome, statistically impossible discrepancies exist between results of exit polls and official
counts in counties without paper trails. Also documented are patterns of anecdotes about corrupted procedures and accounts of strange
 behaviors, phenomena and illegal interventions in Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and other places. Many say there is fraud in every
 election, but there was far more in 2004 than in any previous year, and if the errors were random, about half would go in Kerry's favor.
Virtually all went in Bush's favor. But rather than demanding a thorough investigation, the many Americans seem eager to forget the
incidents and put the election behind them, thus implicitly supporting such corruption.

In my conversations, I observed that white, US born males were more emphatic about accepting the outcome and the futility of
challenging it, while others were more willing to recognize being dominated and open to questioning what happened. White males
may be more susceptible to obeying patriarchal authority, and the fish does not know it is swimming in the water. This difference
was reflected in congress. Women and members of the Congressional Black Caucus were most active. Representative John Conyers
lead the investigation and press conferences, and women, Stephanie Tubbs Jones in the House and Barbara Boxer in the Senate led
the historical challenge.

A Political Psychological Puzzlement Under what conditions do millions of allegedly "free" people knowingly acquiesce to being
deceived, dominated and deprived of their own political will? How is it that even those who were politically engaged for the first time
resign themselves to an unjust fate, refusing even to consider what happened to our country?

Why do progressive citizens actively dismiss and even malign a small group of courageous, devoted people working day and night
on their behalf to uncover, calculate, analyze, and evaluate the extensive, varied forms of criminal sabotage that undermined their
democracy? How are Americans becoming complacent with escalating fraudulent activity? In other words, how do so many people
live with the knowledge that they have been tricked before, were just tricked again--and then submit to life under the power of those
who tricked them?

Why were hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians out for days in the freezing cold, refusing to accept fraud, while Americans helplessly
colluded with forces of domination? Granted, we face a conspiracy of silence in the media, a propaganda campaign discrediting exit polls
(which are accurate in counties with paper trails and other countries), and a dismissal of those who challenge the vote as nuts, sore losers
and "conspiracy theorists."

Censorship, brainwashing and intimidation create an environment of  passivity and fear in subtle yet powerful ways that keep the system
going with the complicity of those who have been robbed. Another significant reason, pointed out by readers commenting on an earlier
version of this article, was that Yushchenko himself was bold and courageous about challenging the vote.

Unlike Gore, who discouraged a challenge, and Kerry who backed down easily after Edwards promised to count every vote, Yushchenko,
who was poisoned and scarred, provided a powerful model of leadership, inspiring his supporters to be brave as well. The Democratic
party itself, except for the few who lead the challenge, acted cowardly, hardly inspiring the public. Why should they rise to the challenge
if their maligned leaders wimped out? Another reason is that citizens of the Ukraine know their history of oppressive, deceptive government. Unlike Americans, they are not inclined to trust the integrity of their leaders and system, and hunger intensely for justice and the freedoms
that we have enjoyed.

Even with these explanations, we must still wonder what is going on in the collective psyche that allows mass submission to the systematic
and progressive usurpation of power. The Dance of Domination The psychology of electoral domination has two parts--what is being done
to people and how they allow it. Psychological techniques, used deliberately, allow many tricks to go unnoticed and unchallenged. For
example, "mystification" is a plausible misrepresentation of reality in which forms of exploitation are presented as forms of benevolence.
Like magic and the use of distraction, the issue of voting reform was manipulated and misrepresented, so people felt calmed by the
illusion that the problems from the 2000 election were being corrected. In fact, the exact opposite is true.

Elements of the Help America Vote Act, HAVA (a name as Orwellian as the Clear Skies Initiative, should be more accurately called
"Hide America's Voting Anomalies"), includes intrusive identity checks, the introduction of the "provisional ballot" most of which were
not counted, and the use of electronic voting machines. Each of these was brilliantly misused for the opposite intention--to corrupt and
deny votes to Kerry in ways people wouldn't notice. The subterfuge was successfully accomplished with use of censorship, illusion,
distortion, brainwashing, propaganda, misinformation, disinformation, mystification, intimidation, shaming, and domination.

As Bush might say, it was a "catastrophic success." These techniques combine to form something like a collective hypnotic induction,
which creates an illusion of a consensus that cannot be challenged. Few have the specific training, insight, or tools to see through the
manipulation. Even fewer have the courage to risk taking on the challenge. For many, responses to domination may include disbelief,
learned helplessness, psychic numbing, fear, cowardice, conformity, denial, cognitive laziness, avoidance, and submission to authority.
These items are inter-related and the list is not exhaustive. Before the psychological explanations, it is necessary to acknowledge a
basic factor: the overwhelming ignorance of the facts. This can be exacerbated by a lack of desire to know the facts, and an avoidance
 of the awesome responsibility that comes with this potential knowledge. Of course if the facts were accurately reported in the mainstream
media, the  collective psychological climate would be conducive to a healthier public response. People accept fraud for reasons, which
may be conscious or unconscious.

Some of the ways that they do this are described below.

Confusing Outcome with Process

Many don't want to deal with the corruption because they believe that challenging fraud won't change the outcome, so there's no point.
This might be a self-fulfilling prophecy. It represents a kind of simplistic, black-and-white thinking, and confusion, as the outcome is a
separate issue from the process. Even if it doesn't affect the outcome, voter suppression is criminal. Paradoxically, refusal to examine
the process prevents discovery, which might change the outcome.

The January 6 Ohio vote challenge required two-hour debates in the House and Senate.

Most Democrats, who supported the challenge, emphatically stated that they didn't expect it to change the outcome, as if they were
 intimidated into making that point first or they would be ridiculed and dismissed. Most Republicans ignored their actual words and
made emotional, even hysterical accusations of them not accepting the outcome, being sore losers, and worse. Republicans ignored
the issue of voter suppression and praised Kerry highly for not making a big deal out of this.

Numbers, Imagery and Perceptions

People believe that Bush won by 3,500,000 votes--a margin too large to challenge, compared to Gore's 500,000.

They are not aware of the long list of dirty tricks, and knowing of one or two, don't believe they can add up to 3,500,000. To bring the
popular vote to a tie, it only has to add up to half that, 1,750,000, or an average of 35,000 votes per state.

Correcting for Ohio's fraud could change the electoral vote.

People may believe subliminally that even if Ohio went to Kerry, the difference in the popular vote is too great. The report of the
Conyers Committee may be the best single summary that we have at this time to suggest estimates of the numbers affected.

Ignorance of Extent of Dirty Tricks

If people knew about the amount and extent of dirty tricks, 3,500,000, or 1,750,000 may not seem so insurmountable.

Some of the tricks documented include

Throwing out of  Democrat voter registration forms,
broken machines,
misplaced machines,
machine errors,
reduced numbers of machines in Black and predominantly Democratic areas, less than in 2002, causing long lines,
unmailed absentee ballots,
absentee ballots requesting 86 cents,
insufficient postage, which were returned,
certification of more votes than registered voters in some areas,
reversal of percentages of registered Democrats and votes for Bush in many counties,
modem connected voting machines and tabulators,
different standards for provisional ballot recounts in different areas,
many provisional ballots, also called  a *placebo ballot*, not counted at all,
voting machines defaulting to a Bush or 'jumping' by recording a vote for Bush when Kerry's button was pushed,
phony companies registering voters and then tearing up the registrations of Democrats but not Republicans,
exit polls not corresponding with reported votes in counties with no paper trail, while exit polls matched reported votes in counties with paper trails,
voting elections officials creating what look like phony election machine poll tapes and tossing original, signed tabulations in the garbage,
people posing as technicians coming in and tampering with machines,
Republicans posing as Democrats,
a lock down, refusing to let observers in, with the excuse of terrorist alert to observe the counting of votes in a country in Ohio,
misinformation about the date and location of voting in Black neighborhoods,
threats of arrest for voters with traffic tickets or any record,
unusual discrepancies between numbers of votes for Kerry and Democratic candidates on same ticket,
and widespread refusal of media to report on any of these,
and a media campaign trashing exit poll data with made up reasons.

And these are just the ones we know about.

Discomfort with Numbers

The best evidence for fraud in the 2004 election is statistical, according to Josh Mitteldorf of Temple University's Statistics Department.
Many are uncomfortable with numerical and statistical science that quantifies judgments about likelihood. For example, statistician
Dr. Steven F. Freeman of University of Pennsylvania, and graduate of MIT found discrepancies between exit polls and the actual vote
count in each of three states, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. The likelihood of all three states being discrepant in the same direction
is 1 in 662,000. What people heard in the news was a smear campaign invalidating the credibility of exit polls, even though they are
considered highly accurate, are used in many countries as indicators of fraud, and that exit polls in counties with a paper trail matched the
official vote count, and in counties where there was no paper trail and evidence of computer irregularities, the official count was different
than the exit polls and always favored Bush. They even made up fake reasons for this discrepancy regarding response bias--which did
not exist where there were paper trails. Disbelief Many people don't believe the allegations of fraud because they didn't read about it in
the New York Times or hear it on CNN. (The only mainstream media to report it was Keith Olberman on Countdown, MSNBC.) We
might wonder about the media censorship on this story and intentions to promote disbelief in the populous, in addition to ignorance.
Conformity and Herd Mentality Because of the media blackout, ignorance, and emotional tone of reporting, Americans have a false
perception of consensus about objective reality. Most people correctly believe that most people accept the results as valid. The majority
conforms to this misperception and most do not have the psychological make-up to challenge the status quo. The few that are courageously
 addressing this are not heard, dismissed, or are severely shamed, ridiculed and viciously accused of causing problems. Thus, even the
 thought of questioning is suppressed.

Learned Helplessness

Psychologist Martin Seligman's theory of learned helplessness explains how when one's repeated actions have no effect, people learn that
what they do doesn't make a difference and give up, even in situations where they can potentially make a difference. People worked hard
on this election and believe that they lost. They are burned out. They feel all their hard work, time, energy and money didn't help so they
don't want to put any more energy into it.

Learned helplessness is also associated with elevation of levels of cortisol and immune suppression--suggesting it is ultimately not adaptive
or healthy to give up. Conversely, taking action in the face of injustice is a sign of health, enhanced immune response and can be an antidote
to depression. Cowardice It is reasonable to fear sticking one's neck out and challenging the powers that be.

There may be legitimate  reasons to be afraid of individual action, but this becomes part of the problem and rewards domination. As long
as people remain silent and isolated from one another, we don't realize the safety implicit in concerted collective action. The safety in
numbers can reduce individual danger and fear.

Denial and Psychic Numbing

We are comforted with the belief that our leaders are good people who are protecting us. Many decent, well-meaning people believe the
best about our system of government and democracy and can't believe that corruption is going on. It is unexpected, frightening, unsettling,
and intolerable for many Americans to question these core beliefs about our leaders and to accept the reality of extensive fraud. Also,
ignorance is bliss in the short -term, but problematic in the long-term. Knowledge implies responsibility, which may be feared and avoided,
in part because people don't know what to do. Denial and numbing--not knowing and not feeling--protect us from this painful awareness in the present, but they cannot protect us from the real effects of these hidden realities which render us vulnerable to increasing domination and
danger in the long term. If one is in an impossible situation, these habits serve as survival mechanisms to avoid the pain of awareness.

However, if one can do something to make a difference, then psychic numbing and denial are maladaptive.

Submission to Authority

The thought of challenging powerful, dominating authority with the prospect of losing is overwhelming. Increasing authoritarianism
reinforces this dynamic in gradual, subtle ways. Some may also be afraid of challenging a president during a war and falsely believe it will
harm national security.

Political Egocentrism

Many feel that there is no action that they can personally take on this level. They may be active in local political issues, but this is too big
for them, so they don't even seek out information or support or value the work that others are doing on their behalf.

Avoidance and Compartmentalization

People want to retreat, to focus on their own survival, family, daily life and pleasure, which are manageable. They are less focused on the
scary bigger picture. This is completely understandable and even enviable. Furthermore, those struggling with high unemployment, lower
wages, and other hardships created by the Bush administration are too preoccupied with their survival issues to pay attention to politics.
In this way, disempowerment of certain segments of the population works to the administration's advantage.

The Spiral of Silence

I am grateful to readers of an earlier version for informing me about Elizabeth Noelle-Neumann's theory, The Spiral of Silence, which
describes the spread of public opinion. All of the elements described above can be understood as interacting and potentiating this spiral.
It refers to perceptions of public opinion. When people perceive themselves to be in the minority, their sense of pressure to conformity,
their fear of isolation and the tendency to conceal one's views, and the role of the mass media fueling this spiral of silence.

Evolution, Adaptation and Survival

All of these reactions are understandable, but all become part of the problem. In the short run, they may minimize pain, but in the long run
they are counterproductive and serve to magnify and multiply problems that are not being faced. Such avoidance mechanisms are not
adaptive, as they play into the game of the destructive forces, allowing them to dominate. The continuation of the processes of systematic
 domination requires the ignorance, passivity and complicity of the majority of decent people, including the millions who supported Kerry.
 These people are colluding with their own domination.

The Courageous Minority

The reactions listed above are completely natural. Carl Jung said that consciousness is a work against nature. To go against the collective
tide of ignorance, conformity and cowardice is a work against nature taken on by the courageous few. This collective, archetypal drama
described by Jung was popularized by Joseph Campbell in The Hero's Journey.

The Hero is the one who is willing to take on challenges that most people fear. According to Jung, the hero archetype represents the
progressive force in society. The people I have witnessed working intensely to investigate and challenge voter fraud, have a particular
 psychological profile. They are courageous and willing to face pain and fear. They call up their strength to challenge authority, as our lives,
our freedom and democracy depend on it. They are unable to deny what is going on or remain silent. They are heroes in our mythical,
archetypal Hero's journey, willing to face the dragons who are guarding our "National Treasure." They are acknowledged in a piece by
William Rivers Pitt called "Heroes" on Pitt quotes Bob Dylan: "I think of a hero as someone who understands the degree
of responsibility that comes with his freedom." Only by facing the pain can we transcend it. Consciousness is the first step.

Action is an antidote to depression. It would be a sign of health, freedom, and conscious evolution if more people could muster up the
courage to face the painful truth of what is happening in our country and support the great work of those courageous souls--who are not
nuts or conspiracy theorists, but evolved, conscious, healthy leaders taking personal risks and sacrifices to elevate our democracy, restore
 our integrity and ultimately to increase our security on the world stage ... if we let them.


Some Links for Detailed Accounts of Voter Fraud For a proper psychological understanding of suppression, it is necessary to recognize
the quantity and quality of information being suppressed. The extent of fraud and ignorance of it are mind-boggling.

Below are some links with detailed information about voter fraud  A Guide to Ohio and New Mexico Recounts: Statistical Anomalies and Evidence of Voting Machine Malfunction and Fraud in the 2004 Presidential Election January 5, 2005 By:  Audit the Vote and Help America Recount  Analysis of 2004 Election Irregularities  TV Networks Officially Refuse to Release Exit Poll Raw DataBy Gary Beckwith, The Columbus Free Press, 22 December 2004  Thom Hartmann in *Dialing for Democracy-Now Is Critical January 3, 2005,  20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA  Partial list of incidents reported in the news  by Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman All text and images Newtopia
Magazine unless otherwise noted. SOME RIGHTS RESERVED. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike License
Diane Perlman, PhDWashington, DC202 775 0777


Date: February 07, 2008 at 15:31:15
From: Tehachapi Dawn
Subject: Ballot design glitch may cancel votes



In what voter advocates describe as the "double bubble" election fiasco, Los Angeles County Acting Registrar-Recorder Dean Logan said Wednesday up to 94,500 votes - and potentially tens of thousands more - cast by independent voters for president were not counted due to a confusing ballot design.

Logan, during questioning by the Board of Supervisors, said about half of the 189,000 nonpartisan and decline-to-state voters who cast ballots on Super Tuesday did not fill in a party box at the top of the ballot required for their vote for a Democratic presidential candidate to count. In addition, Logan said he still has several hundred thousand absentee and provisional ballots left to count that may have the same problem.

The voter turnout for Los Angeles County, as reported by the Registrar-Recorder's office Wednesday, was 1,820,758 ballots cast out of of 3,951,957 registered voters, or 46 percent. The absentee total was 287,038.

In response to concerns raised by campaign officials for presidential candidate Barack Obama, Logan said he will conduct a 1 percent manual recount during the 28-day election canvass to determine the actual number of disenfranchised voters and then determine how many of those votes can be added to the counts for Obama and Hillary Clinton. He also plans to convene various interested parties to come up with ways to ensure the ballots used in the June and November elections are less confusing to voters.

More at link

Los Angeles election officials review confusing 'bubble ballots'

Thursday, February 7, 2008

(02-07) 19:10 PST SACRAMENTO, (AP) --

Pressure intensified on Los Angeles County elections officials Thursday to quickly address the "double bubble" controversy over ballots given to independent voters in this week's presidential primary.

Potentially at stake is the county's final delegate allocation for Democratic presidential contenders Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, who are locked in a tight race for the party's nomination.

Independent voters in California were allowed to vote in the Democratic Party or American Independent Party primaries.

In Los Angeles County, independents who requested one of those ballots had to fill in an extra bubble stating which party's primary they were voting in. They then made their selection for president.

If they failed to do both, the county's scanning machines would not record their selection for president. Los Angeles is the only one of California's 58 counties to use that particular ballot.

It also is the most populous and has the state's greatest share of voters, lending greater weight to any election challenge.

Concern over the county's so-called double-bubble ballot arose on Election Day, when the Courage Campaign, a Beverly Hills-based voting rights group, challenged the balloting process for independents.

The group has been inundated with complaints from independent voters who said they were not told to fill in the second bubble and fear their votes might not be counted, chairman Rick Jacobs said.

"People took the trouble to vote and they deserve to have their votes counted," he said Thursday.

He has asked the Los Angeles County Registrars Office for a full review of the ballots where the presidential race was rejected because the extra bubble was not filled in. There are about 94,500 such ballots.

Any review would not change the outcome of the race Clinton beat Obama by 396,168 votes statewide and 162,745 in Los Angeles County. But it could affect the allocation of delegates, which is done on a proportional basis by congressional district.

About 190,000 ballots were cast by decline-to-state voters in Los Angeles County. About half of those voters correctly filled in the extra bubble.

County elections officials will now sample 1 percent of the flawed ballots to see how many were supposed to be counted in the Democratic or American Independent presidential primaries.

If the number is significant, there may be a way to count some of those flawed ballots, said Eileen Shea, a spokeswoman for the county elections office.

"We take it very seriously," she said.

The ballots have been used in Los Angeles County since 2002, Shea said. But this year's close presidential contests brought out a higher number of nonpartisan voters who wanted to vote in party primaries.

State lawmakers also weighed in on the controversy Thursday.

State Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero, a Los Angeles Democrat, complained in a letter to Registrar Dean Logan that the double bubble ballot "is unnecessary, confusing, duplicative" and may have disenfranchised thousands of voters.

State Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, said Los Angeles County's "double bubble trouble" echoes Florida's hanging chad debacle of 2000.

"We don't want voters to have to fill out any bubble," Florez said at a Capitol news conference. "There ought to be some very clear rules in what the ballot should look like and how the voting should work."

Independents, who account for nearly 20 percent of registered voters in California, also ran into problems elsewhere. In some counties, poll workers improperly turned away independents who wanted to vote in a party primary.

"The entire integrity of the voting process is at stake," Florez said. "We need to get it right."

He introduced legislation Thursday to make it clear that independent voters can cast ballots in the Democratic Party or American Independent Party primaries. The bill would require poll workers to post signs and hand each decline-to-state voter a list of party primaries in which they can participate.

They are prohibited from voting in the Republican Party primary in California.

Florez also called for a state audit of poll worker training and a Senate oversight hearing to investigate balloting problems. Los Angeles County supervisors also have ordered an investigation.

The state's top elections official, Secretary of State Debra Bowen, acknowledged some flaws in Tuesday's balloting but was generally satisfied, a spokeswoman said.

"Overall, Secretary Bowen is pleased that things went very smoothly, given the record turnout," spokeswoman Kate Folmar said.

The secretary of state's office fielded 500 voter complaints, out of 20,000 calls to the office's voter assistance line, Folmar said.

Most of the complaints dealt with the rights of independent voters.