One of Miller's correspondents performed some number-crunching of the Diebold counties and concluded:The probability of scoring twice the expected average county % could charitably be construed as the upper limit of the possible. Some candidates exceed that figure in Diebold counties by a four or five fold margin. If you have done statistics, you know that is so far beyond what might be expected that you would reject it as defective data. If it happened to one candidate in this election, I would be surprised but might accept it. There are a large number of candidates who have this same systematic pattern of receiving skimmed votes.
The California recall shows Diebold trying to affect the election outcome by moving votes from high ranked candidates to low ranked candidates.
By doing this, Diebold keep the total number of votes cast constant but rob some candidate of their votes.
At this remove, it's impossible to assess the accuracy of the analysis, but it certainly appears valid, and moreover bears investigating.
I'm sure the California media will get right on it.
The Diebold story gets curiouser and curiouser. More on this here