HOPKINTON, N.H. — Like the old saying about March itself, an orchestrated effort to get rid of vote-counting machines in New Hampshire this month came in like a lion and went out like a lamb.

“Electronic machines will face the wrath of New Hampshire voters in March!” Mike Lindell, the MyPillow founder and ally of former President Donald Trump, crowed in a January fundraising pitch.

Not quite. After initially targeting 55 towns, Lindell’s supporters gathered enough petitions to bring the topic up at 23 of the annual town meetings held this month to adopt budgets and settle other matters. Only Danville, N.H. — population 4,500 — voted in favor of hand-counting ballots, and only for presidential elections in a decision that both the town’s attorney and the secretary of state say is unlikely to stand.

“There was a lot of misinformation that was being spread,” Secretary of State David Scanlan said Thursday. “I think the general public saw through it, and the votes at those town meetings reflect that.”

The push for hand-counting ballots has been gaining popularity across rural America in response to unfounded claims of widespread fraud tied to ballot-counting machines following the 2020 election. There is no evidence that machines were tampered with, and such claims have been repeatedly rejected by election experts, prosecutors and judges.

In New Hampshire, sinister flyers sent to some households described vote-counting machines as “flawed and hackable” and warned of manipulation. Most town officials disagreed, saying there was no evidence of any problems and that returning to hand counts would have been labor intensive and costly.

In Hopkinton, N.H., Selectboard Chair Sabrina Dunlap referenced the “baseless claims” made by outside groups in arguing against the hand-counting measure that was recently defeated.

“The ballot machines are tested before every election, and this process is open to the public, as is the ballot-counting process,” she said. “The town has been using these machines for many, many years and our election officials confirm they are secure and accurate.”

Danville Selectman Shawn O’Neil, who championed the issue in his town, said he has faith in local election workers but has broad concerns about vote-counting machines. He limited the question to the presidential race because it’s the nation’s top office.

The problem? Two months before the vote, Danville’s town attorney, Matt Serge, had advised O’Neil and the other selectmen that the vote likely wouldn’t stand. He said that is because under state law, “the town cannot pick and choose which votes are machine-counted and which are counted by hand.”

While hand counts have been largely limited to smaller towns, particularly in the Northeast, a few counties elsewhere have ditched machines in recent years. But hand-counting ballots in large, urban counties would take weeks. Experts say that studies have shown that machines are not only faster but more accurate than hand counts. Many election officials do rely on some measure of hand-counting, however, as part of their post-election process to verify that the machines worked correctly.

It’s not the first time the issue has surfaced in New Hampshire. Two years ago, the Legislature killed a bill that would have mandated hand-counting statewide, and nine towns rejected returning to hand-counting for their communities.

In the latest go-round, many of the towns that debated the issue swiftly rejected it. In Meredith, N.H., not a single person spoke in favor of eliminating vote-counting machines.