Windham NH results show voting machines can’t be trusted

Republished with permission from Granite Grok, a New Hampshire news website

by Ken Eyring

I believe the preliminary results of the forensic audit of the Windham, NH voting machines as configured on November 3, 2020, show the aging Diebold ES2000 Model A Voting Machines cannot be trusted.

And by extension… potentially the elections across the state of New Hampshire as well.

RelatedARROGANT ELITISTS? Windham Board of Selectmen Show Contempt for Their Subjects!

And based on the actions and demeanor of high-ranking government officials from the AG’s office over the first few days of the audit – I have a long list of concerns that I’ll share in another post.

But for now, let’s focus on the preliminary results of the vote totals that were produced by running all of the ballots from Windham’s November 3, 2020 general election, through all of Windham’s four voting machines as configured on November 3rd.

The first table and graph show some disturbing results of the Rockingham District 7 State Rep race.  This is the race that triggered the recount that produced the largest unexplained numerical discrepancy in the state of NH.

The audit results of each machine are significantly different from the results produced on 11/3/20.  Why?  The audit results are closer to the results of the hand recount that was overseen by the Secretary of State’s office that took place on 11/12/20, but those results are also significantly different for five of the  candidates. This could be due to the fact that some of the counted votes during the 11/12/20 recount were tallied based on clear voter intent that was acknowledged by everyone observing.

Another disturbing observation is the variation of between 2 – 44 votes when the results of each candidate are compared across each machine’s audit results.  There’s a miniscule difference of 2 votes for Ioana Singureanu between all four machines, and a massive number of 44 votes for Bob Lynn between AccuVote #2 and AccuVote #4. A potential error of 44 votes is unacceptable in any election – because it could cause the wrong person to be declared the winner and subsequently sworn into office.

Regardless of what the hand recount shows, it looks like it is time to get rid of the aging Diebold machines. I believe consideration should be given to hand-counting every vote on election night.  This is not as monumental a task as it may first appear.  I have been told that Canada, the U.K., and Australia each hand count their votes.  If entire countries can do it, then each of our towns and cities can as well.

There are only a few cities in NH where their large number of voters would dictate a need to add additional polling places to reduce the number of ballots that would need to be counted at any one location.  That’s a simple logistical process that could be put into place in order to ensure the accuracy and integrity of our elections.

For those interested in the other races, the tables below contain the machine results from the 11/3/20 general election and the machine results from the audit on Friday. The table on the left shows the breakdown of machine vote totals for each of the machines on election day + the 80 UOCAVA ballot votes in the Totals column.  UOCAVA (Uniformed And Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act) ballots cannot be processed through the machines so they need to be hand counted.

The table on the right shows the audit results of all the ballots for each machine number.  The TOTAL columns for each machine includes the UOCAVA votes that were counted on election day.  Keep in mind, this is a preliminary results – and the audit team has not yet counted the UOCAVA ballots yet – so in order to compare “apples to apples” results with the general election, the small number of UOCAVA votes from November are being temporarily used.  These numbers will be updated using the UOCAVA votes after the audit team has hand-counted those ballots.

One more thing that you need to be aware of when you look at the charts below… the forensic audit team assigned different numbers to each of the machines when compared to how Windham election officials number the machines.  In order to accurately compare the machine results from election day to the same machine in the audit, the machines numbers in the audit table below match the election day machine numbers.

Please donate to the Government Integrity Project. I am the Chairman, and we need your help!  The GIP is a new organization pushing for transparency in election integrity from the beginning of this issue.  We are in the process of implementing the latest technology to take our government back from those who subvert the will of the people.


You can open up and magnify the table below by clinking on this link, or you can zoom in on your screen and view the table below to look at the results of each race.

Categories: Elections

2 replies »

  1. Just can’t wait for those dominos!! Where’s all the comments? Getting real people…

  2. Thank God for Windham NH. Since there were Voting Irregularities in Windham NH and the State of Vermont uses the same Company for their Voting Machines that Windham NH does, there might be a chance that there were Voting Irregularities in My Election that took place on March 2, 2021. I ran for the Ward 2 Seat for the Barre City Council and lost by 38 votes, or did I ? On Machine #1 I lost by a margin of 177-109. On Machine #2 I won by a margin of 100-70. I wonder if Machine #2 was the machine that counted the Mail In Ballots ? Now You Know Why I Contested The Conduct of the Election. On March 4th I asked the City Clerk if I could pay for a Hand Recount of the Ballots, I was denied. In the City Clerk’s answer to my complaint dated April 9th it’s stated that there is no provision in 17 VSA Section 2683 that allows a losing candidate to pay for a hand recount of the paper ballots. That is true. What’s also true is that there is no provision in the statute that says a losing candidate Cannot be allowed to pay for a hand recount of the paper ballots. There was no law or rule to be broken. This was Barre City’s choice. They chose to Not allow me to pay for a hand recount of the paper ballots. Citizens of Barre, you really have to ask yourselves why ? On March 17th I filed a Complaint Contesting the Conduct of the Election. On March 26th Barre City was served this Complaint. On April 9th Barre City answered my Complaint and asked the Court to dismiss the case. On April 20th I filed a document asking the Court to deny Barre City’s request to dismiss the case. On May 12th the Court Denied Barre City’s request to dismiss the case and set a Hearing dated for May 27th via zoom at 3:15 pm. On May 20th Barre City filed for a continuance to get the hearing postponed. Citizens of Barre City, you really have to ask yourselves why ? On May 24th the Court granted Barre City a continuance with a court date some time in the next 2-3 weeks. Also on May 24th I filed a motion with the court to keep Barre City from throwing out the paper ballots. There’s only One way to Truly know if a voting machines count of paper ballots is accurate or not. You Have To Hand Count The Paper Ballots and then compare that count with the machine count. The citizens of Windham NH found that out and the citizens of Barre City Deserve to find that out. We have to have Integrity and Transparency in our elections. Thank you all for your continued support. God Bless You. God Bless The City Of Barre, God Bless The State Of Vermont and God Bless The United States Of America !

    Brian Judd
    Ward 2