The release below comes from Kathy Dopp (Utah) of USCountVotes and Election Archive. As usual, Kathy makes a very good argument, solid and professional. The only point NOT touched on below—that there were anomalies on the GOP side in NH, also--would only reinforce what she writes. There is, after all, no ‘race’ or ‘women’ factor among the Republican candidates, all of whom are white and male.

 
QUOTED MATERIAL FOLLOWS:

“RELEASE:  NEW HAMPSHIRE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY – WERE VOTES COUNTED ACCURATELY?

Park City, UT January 14, 2008
CONTACT: Kathy Dopp kathy@electionarchive.org 435-658-4657

NEW HAMPSHIRE'S DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY ELECTION RESULTS ARE SUSPICIOUS

Pre-election polls projected that Barrack Obama would win the New
Hampshire Democratic primary election. An average of seven opinion
polls predicted that 38.8 percent were going to vote for Obama, while
30 percent would vote for Clinton. The opinion polls came close to
predicting the final results for New Hampshire's hand-counted votes -
39.2% for Obama and 34.9% for Clinton - but New Hampshire's
Diebold/Premier machine-counted votes reversed the outcome.

The reversal of the machine and hand counts is consistent with
programming errors counting votes cast for Obama, for Clinton and
votes cast for Clinton, for Obama.

To see this consistency of New Hampshire's election results with
programming error, analysts examined Clinton and Obama vote shares out
of votes cast only for Obama and Clinton.  Overall, Clinton's hand
count share of such votes is 47.07% to Obama's 52.93% share and a
virtually exact reverse pattern occurs with machine counts where
Clinton's share is 52.95% to Obama's 47.05%.

A statistical analysis of New Hampshire's Democratic primary by the
National Election Data Archive rules out precinct-size and seems to
rule out demographic factors as possible causes for the reversal of
Obama and Clinton's machine and hand-counted results; and shows that
the pattern is consistent with vote miscount favoring Clinton.

The National Election Data Archive's New Hampshire analysis and raw
data is posted on the Internet at ElectionArchive.org

http://electionarchive.org/ucvData/NH/DemPrimary2008-PairedPrecinctStudy.pdf
and
http://electionarchive.org/ucvData/NH/

About 80% of New Hampshire ballots were counted by Diebold/Premier
optical scanning machines without any post-election manual audits to
verify the machine count accuracy.

Press reports hypothesized theories for why Clinton beat Obama in New
Hampshire including:

1.  the "Bradley effect" (closet racism) that white voters lie to
pollsters and "say" they'll vote for a Black, but given a secret
ballot don't,

2. the "damsel in distress" theory that Clinton's tears brought women
voters out for her,

3. the "good weather" theory, and

4. the "economy was key" theory.

It would be interesting to know why these effects would only occur
when ballots are counted by Diebold/Premier voting machines but not
when ballots are counted in public view by hand. [emphasis added]

The "electronic miscount" theory could be a more plausible explanation
for the discrepancies between the opinion polls and the
machine-counted results.

Could someone have mis-programmed – by accident or on purpose – the
optical scan machines such that Hillary's votes went to Obama and
Obama's votes went to Hillary?

UPCOMING RECOUNT OF THE TUESDAY, JANUARY 8, 2008 NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY ELECTION

The Secretary of State (SOS) of New Hampshire announced that there
will be a statewide recount of the paper ballots beginning on
Wednesday, January 16, because presidential candidates Democrat Dennis
Kucinich and Republican Albert Howard requested it.
http://www.sos.nh.gov/recount%20press%20release.pdf

The full analysis of the National Election Data Archive is available
at ElectionArchive.org
http://electionarchive.org/ucvData/NH/DemPrimary2008-PairedPrecinctStudy.pdf”