Looks like Ron Paul won, with Tancredo in second if you look at the results posted here town by town, but when you scroll to the bottom the numbers literally do not add up.
Now they changed their website to show McCain winning. Did The Boston Globe make a huge mistake in their journalism, or did they accidentally report the truth?
I am glad I saved and uploaded this to youtube. Hopefully youtube does not delete my video.
YouTube - Ron Paul - Now The Boston Globe Changed Their Story
The Boston Globe's website, Boston.com just last showed Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo winning every town, but the totals did not makes sense.
Now they changed it.
They do not even mention Ron Paul on their "New Hampshire Primary Candidate Tracker".
Are they biased against Ron Paul? Even more importantly, was their any voter fraud at the New Hampshire election? We need a recount of the PAPER ballots.
"New Hampshire Townships with more then 50 votes for “OTHER”"
"By IG | January 9, 2008
Barrington - 1,530 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 149 votes = 9.74%
- Huckabee = 208 votes = 13.59%
- Hunter = 11 votes = 0.72%
- McCain = 576 votes = 37.65%
- Paul = 130 votes = 8.50%
- Romney = 363 votes = 23.73%
- Thompson = 28 votes = 1.83%
- Other = 65 votes = 4.25%
—————————————
Bedford - 6,048 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 579 votes = 9.57%
- Huckabee = 434 votes = 7.18%
- Hunter = 16 votes = 0.26%
- McCain = 2148 votes = 35.52%
- Paul = 263 votes = 4.35%
- Romney = 2479 votes = 40.99%
- Thompson = 51 votes = 0.84%
- Other = 78 votes = 1.29%
————————————–
Belmont - 1,261 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 96 votes = 7.61%
- Huckabee = 180 votes = 14.27%
- Hunter = 11 votes = 0.87%
- McCain = 456 votes = 36.16%
- Paul = 102 votes = 8.09%
- Romney = 329 votes = 26.09%
- Thompson = 30 votes = 2.38%
- Other = 57 votes = 4.52%
———————————–
Claremont - 1,631 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Hand Counted Paper Ballots
- Giuliani = 113 votes = 6.93%
- Huckabee = 309 votes = 18.95%
- Hunter = 7 votes = 0.43%
- McCain = 593 votes = 36.36%
- Paul = 120 votes = 7.36%
- Romney = 398 votes = 24.40%
- Thompson = 22 votes = 1.35%
- Other = 69 votes = 4.23%
——————————–
Concord - 6,439 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 565 votes = 8.77%
- Huckabee = 781 votes = 12.13%
- Hunter = 24 votes = 0.37%
- McCain = 2684 votes = 41.68%
- Paul = 601 votes = 9.33%
- Romney = 1577 votes = 24.49%
- Thompson = 49 votes = 0.76%
- Other = 158 votes = 2.45%
——————————
Dover - 4,268 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 388 votes = 9.09%
- Huckabee = 458 votes = 10.73%
- Hunter = 16 votes = 0.37%
- McCain = 1779 votes = 41.68%
- Paul = 369 votes = 8.65%
- Romney = 1102 votes = 25.82%
- Thompson = 59 votes = 1.38%
- Other = 97 votes = 2.27%
——————————-
Gilford - 1,922 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 139 votes = 7.23%
- Huckabee = 139 votes = 7.23%
- Hunter = 8 votes = 0.42%
- McCain = 740 votes = 38.50%
- Paul = 78 votes = 4.06%
- Romney = 735 votes = 38.24%
- Thompson = 21 votes = 1.09%
- Other = 62 votes = 3.23%
——————————-
Goffstown - 3,561 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 308 votes = 8.65%
- Huckabee = 417 votes = 11.71%
- Hunter = 19 votes = 0.53%
- McCain = 1212 votes = 34.04%
- Paul = 260 votes = 7.30%
- Romney = 1258 votes = 35.33%
- Thompson = 30 votes = 0.84%
- Other = 57 votes = 1.60%
——————————-
Hooksett - 2,862 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 309 votes = 10.80%
- Huckabee = 295 votes = 10.31%
- Hunter = 14 votes = 0.49%
- McCain = 994 votes = 34.73%
- Paul = 169 votes = 5.90%
- Romney = 991 votes = 34.63%
- Thompson = 29 votes = 1.01%
- Other = 61 votes = 2.13%
——————————
Hopkinton - 1,491 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 103 votes = 6.91%
- Huckabee = 140 votes = 9.39%
- Hunter = 10 votes = 0.67%
- McCain = 616 votes = 41.31%
- Paul = 80 votes = 5.37%
- Romney = 365 votes = 24.48%
- Thompson = 17 votes = 1.14%
- Other = 160 votes = 10.73%
——————————–
Hudson - 4,160 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 326 votes = 7.84%
- Huckabee = 454 votes = 10.91%
- Hunter = 21 votes = 0.50%
- McCain = 1395 votes = 33.53%
- Paul = 307 votes = 7.38%
- Romney = 1518 votes = 36.49%
- Thompson = 57 votes = 1.37%
- Other = 82 votes = 1.97%
———————————-
Keene - 2,807 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 218 votes = 7.77%
- Huckabee = 374 votes = 13.32%
- Hunter = 19 votes = 0.68%
- McCain = 1089 votes = 38.80%
- Paul = 204 votes = 7.27%
- Romney = 738 votes = 26.29%
- Thompson = 48 votes = 1.71%
- Other = 117 votes = 4.17%
————————————
Lebanon - 1,681 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 122 votes = 7.26%
- Huckabee = 212 votes = 12.61%
- Hunter = 6 votes = 0.36%
- McCain = 726 votes = 43.19%
- Paul = 137 votes = 8.15%
- Romney = 391 votes = 23.26%
- Thompson = 34 votes = 2.02%
- Other = 53 votes = 3.15%
———————————–
Lisbon - 340 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Hand Counted Paper Ballots
- Giuliani = 28 votes = 8.24%
- Huckabee = 59 votes = 17.35%
- Hunter = 1 votes = 0.29%
- McCain = 106 votes = 31.18%
- Paul = 19 votes = 5.59%
- Romney = 47 votes = 13.82%
- Thompson = 3 votes = 0.88%
- Other = 77 votes = 22.65%
————————————
Londonderry - 5,685 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 418 votes = 7.35%
- Huckabee = 544 votes = 9.57%
- Hunter = 19 votes = 0.33%
- McCain = 1757 votes = 30.91%
- Paul = 288 votes = 5.07%
- Romney = 1989 votes = 34.99%
- Thompson = 52 votes = 0.91%
- Other = 618 votes = 10.87% (WTF???)
————————————–
Manchester - 15,067 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD:
- Giuliani = 1454 votes = 9.65%
- Huckabee = 1640 votes = 10.88%
- Hunter = 94 votes = 0.62%
- McCain = 5119 votes = 33.97%
- Paul = 1230 votes = 8.16%
- Romney = 4935 votes = 32.75%
- Thompson = 139 votes = 0.92%
- Other = 456 votes = 3.03%
—————————————
Merrimack - 5,806 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 524 votes = 9.03%
- Huckabee = 561 votes = 9.66%
- Hunter = 41 votes = 0.71%
- McCain = 2046 votes = 35.24%
- Paul = 385 votes = 6.63%
- Romney = 2075 votes = 35.74%
- Thompson = 71 votes = 1.22%
- Other = 103 votes = 1.77%
—————————————
Nashua - 12,195 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 992 votes = 8.13%
- Huckabee = 1120 votes = 9.18%
- Hunter = 62 votes = 0.51%
- McCain = 4294 votes = 35.21%
- Paul = 979 votes = 8.03%
- Romney = 4447 votes = 36.47%
- Thompson = 128 votes = 1.05%
- Other = 173 votes = 1.42%
—————————————-
Plaistow - 1,516 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 124 votes = 8.18%
- Huckabee = 97 votes = 6.40%
- Hunter = 4 votes = 0.26%
- McCain = 482 votes = 31.79%
- Paul = 99 votes = 6.53%
- Romney = 641 votes = 42.28%
- Thompson = 15 votes = 0.99%
- Other = 54 votes = 3.56%
—————————————
Portsmouth - 2,827 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 325 votes = 11.50%
- Huckabee = 196 votes = 6.93%
- Hunter = 10 votes = 0.35%
- McCain = 1219 votes = 43.12%
- Paul = 221 votes = 7.82%
- Romney = 728 votes = 25.75%
- Thompson = 26 votes = 0.92%
- Other = 102 votes = 3.61%
—————————————-
Raymond - 1,829 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 160 votes = 8.75%
- Huckabee = 241 votes = 13.18%
- Hunter = 10 votes = 0.55%
- McCain = 618 votes = 33.79%
- Paul = 165 votes = 9.02%
- Romney = 527 votes = 28.81%
- Thompson = 18 votes = 0.98%
- Other = 90 votes = 4.92%
————————————–
Rochester - 4,339 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 379 votes = 8.73%
- Huckabee = 712 votes = 16.41%
- Hunter = 31 votes = 0.71%
- McCain = 1498 votes = 34.52%
- Paul = 348 votes = 8.02%
- Romney = 1123 votes = 25.88%
- Thompson = 87 votes = 2.01%
- Other = 161 votes = 3.71%
————————————-
Salem - 5,020 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 416 votes = 8.29%
- Huckabee = 402 votes = 8.01%
- Hunter = 17 votes = 0.34%
- McCain = 1566 votes = 31.20%
- Paul = 270 votes = 5.38%
- Romney = 2245 votes = 44.72%
- Thompson = 34 votes = 0.68%
- Other = 70 votes = 1.39%
————————————-
Swanzey - 1,062 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 88 votes = 8.29%
- Huckabee = 145 votes = 13.65%
- Hunter = 7 votes = 0.66%
- McCain = 413 votes = 38.89%
- Paul = 69 votes = 6.50%
- Romney = 248 votes = 23.35%
- Thompson = 17 votes = 1.60%
- Other = 75 votes = 7.06%
————————————-
Windham - 3,367 votes
VOTE COUNT METHOD: Diebold Accuvote optical scan ; contractor: LHS Associates/John Silvestro
- Giuliani = 266 votes = 7.90%
- Huckabee = 233 votes = 6.92%
- Hunter = 8 votes = 0.24%
- McCain = 1065 votes = 31.63%
- Paul = 148 votes = 4.40%
- Romney = 1514 votes = 44.97%
- Thompson = 28 votes = 0.83%
- Other = 105 votes = 3.12%"
Other = Ron Paul votes?
"Clear Evidence Of Widespread Vote Fraud In New Hampshire; Paul and Obama cheated out of 3rd and 1st by voting machines, hand count fraud"
by Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
There were several major vote fraud issues to arise out of the New Hampshire primary revolving mainly around Ron Paul and Barack Obama, who were both seemingly cheated out of third and first places respectively as a result of rigged Diebold voting machines and deliberate malfeasance in the counting of hand-written paper ballots.
- Obama had a 13 to 15 point lead over Hillary Clinton heading into the primary. Nothing occured that boosted Hillary’s numbers immediately before the election, in fact immediately after the staged crying incident, many pundits argued it could only have harmed her chances. And yet Hillary somehow managed to instigate a near 20 point swing to defeat Obama by three per cent. If not for her 7% swing as a result of Diebold voting machines, Hillary would have lost to Obama. If Obama was struggling he would probably contest this bizarre outcome, but he is likely to accept the results simply to save face.
- Going into New Hampshire Ron Paul was polling in the early teens and was a strong bet to take third place behind McCain and Romney. Four days before the vote, Rasmussen had Paul at 14% - a significant lead over Huckabee on 11% and Giuliani on 8% - and yet Ron Paul finished with just 8%. Proof of clear vote fraud, allied with the fact that Paul’s numbers show a 6% swing from normally accurate pre-polling forecasts, clearly indicate chicanery was at hand, especially considering the fact that Paul lost those crucial few percentage points to Giuliani as a result of electronic Diebold voting machines which are known to be wide open to tampering and fraud.
- Going purely on hand-counts, which as we saw in Sutton were by no means angelic but at least harder to cheat on than Diebold voting machines without getting caught, Ron Paul would have won 15% of the vote and finished third. This figure would have more accurately correlated to the pre-primary polls rather than the ridiculous 8% he was eventually given.
- Numerous districts reported totals of anything up to 22% for "other candidates". What on earth does this black hole of "other candidates" mean? How can one vote for a candidate that is not on the ballot without spoiling the ballot paper? The district of Lisbon reported 22.5% votes for this mysterious "other" candidate, while in the large district of Londonderry, the "other" candidate received 10%. Many are now alleging that these "other" votes were merely siphoned from Ron Paul to keep his final number low.
- Rudy Giuliani, the 9/11 candidate who beat Ron Paul thanks to the aid of a 3% swing on Diebold voting machines, received 9.11% of the vote in three different towns. Coincidence or somebody’s idea of a sick joke?
- The New Hampshire town of Sutton admits that it voided every vote Ron Paul received. The Congressman got 31 votes and yet due to a "human error," Sutton reported zero votes for Ron Paul. How "human error" can explain not counting 31 votes in succession for one single candidate is beyond the pale and Ron Paul’s campaign should ask for a recount across New Hampshire immediately.
- As soon as people went public with the fact that their votes in Sutton had not been counted, other districts where Paul had supposedly received zero votes, such as Greenville, suddenly changed their final tallies and attributed votes to the Congressman."
New Hampshire's Polling Fiasco"There will be a serious, critical look at the final pre-election polls in the Democratic presidential primary in New Hampshire; that is essential. It is simply unprecedented for so many polls to have been so wrong. We need to know why."
Yeah, and the MSM is trying to say the polls were wrong and the FIXED and RIGGED MACHINE COUNTS are correct!
So if the POLLS DON'T MEAN SHIT, then WHY IS RON PAUL EXCLUDED?!?!
WHY SO MUCH FOCUS on the POLLS in the LEAD-UP COVERAGE?!
Can't have it BOTH WAYS, shitbag-lying MSM!!!!!!!!
Good-bye, American democracy!
