Tuesday, February 19, 2008

OBAMA "Robbed" In NYS Primary: Not "IN" (Enough) With the "Corrupt Establishment"

NYS election officials are as inept or corrupt as the rest of the state bureaucracy. That's the kindest way I can frame this story. It looks like "clerical error" is the current excuse for corrupt bureaucrats. In NYC, it was warring factions of the Democratic party practicing their "dark arts" against each other, with Clinton being more powerful on her home turf, of course. Still, this is pretty blatant stuff, and if it is just "clerical error," the statewide returns need to be examined for similar "errors." That probably won't happen, but this story exposes one of the dirtiest political operations in the free world. (link)

Barack Obama's primary-night results were strikingly underrecorded in several districts around the city - in some cases leaving him with zero votes when, in fact, he had pulled in hundreds, the Board of Elections said yesterday.

Unofficial primary results gave Obama no votes in nearly 80 districts, including Harlem's 94th and other historically black areas - but many of those initial tallies proved to be wildly off the mark, the board said.

In some districts getting a recount, the senator from Illinois is even closer to defeating Hillary Clinton.

Initial results in the 94th, for example, showed a 141-0 sweep for Hillary Clinton, but the recount changed the tally to 261-136.

As yet, none of the results have been certified, but a ballot-by-ballot canvassing of all voting machines has begun, a board spokesperson said. Many of the mistakes were chalked up to human error -- and some Clinton tallies were wrong as well. In several congressional districts she was shown as having received zero votes when in fact she got hundreds, Boe said.

Pretty widespread, for "clerical error," don't you think? I got a real laugh from the fact that Hillary got shorted on votes in "several districts," while Obama got shorted in "almost 80." This shows that Obama has made real inroads with some of the corrupt NYC political eastablishment. Of course, it could just be an "anti - Hillary" faction of the NYC Dems, and not afraid to act on it.

I can't resist quoting two of our local lawmakers on this, even though Barron's a joke, and Perkins is wrong in his opening facts, though not necessarily his conclusion:

Brooklyn City Councilman Charles Barron called the understated figures "outrageous."

"I think this is an all-out effort to stop a campaign that is about to make history and render America's first black president," he said. "We need some kind of independent or federal agency to investigate this."

"Every election has problems, but in this case, all the problems seem to have been his," said state Sen. Bill Perkins (D-Harlem). "He got all the zeroes and undercounting.

"Some gross mistakes have been made. Very often, there are clerical errors. In this case, it was strictly with regards to Obama." Perkins told The Post the issue is more than the "one or two delegates" that could be added to Obama's tally, noting that if the results were accurately represented, there would not have been a "false momentum" for Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"It reflects the popularity and the weakness to her in her home state. It contributes to a false momentum," he said.

The story containing the Perkins quote (link) continues:

A spokeswoman for the Board of Elections, Valerie Vasquez, stressed that the reported numbers are "unofficial." Official results will be announced on Feb. 26.

There you have it. We won't know anything until the 26th, so consider this a "preview." NYS has a certain "shape" to our political scandals, of late. I'm sure the NYC elections people will find an explanation for this that will be quite satisfactory to their Albany superiors, and no-one will be punished, much less held accountable. There will be an outcry from "new media" outlets, while the MSM will ignore it. Election fraud is only a big issue when committed by Republicans.

There is a difference, this time. Many MSM outlets have started treating Hillary the way they usually treat Republicans. It would be interesting to see them "turn their attention" to this story, after the 26th. That's still over a week before her Mar. 4th "firewall" primaries in Texas and Ohio (VT and RI vote that day, as well). I wish her "lotsa luck" in that scenario, though it's highly unlikely.

The real issue is the corrupt, or inept, election officials. More of them back Hill in NYC, but some back Barack. Will either of them decry these tactics being used in their names? More to come on this story, for sure.

No comments: