Should Kucinich call for a hand count of the NH ballots?

Examination of the New Hampshire Clinton-Obama results reveals discrepancies between counties that use paper ballots and those that use optiscan machines. Some say these differences are easily explained, but a hand count of the optiscan ballots would definitively settle the question of whether the electronic counting machines accurately counted the vote.

Only a candidate in a given election can call for a hand count of the optiscan ballots. That candidate would have to pay the state a fee of $80,000.

Would you urge Dennis Kucinich to call for a hand count? Would you contribute to a fund to pay the costs?

ON EDIT: Please keep kicked to get a large sample. (No text changes.)

There's plenty of whining and screaming in GD-P to keep even you happy. We're trying to work here.

They even consider themselves High Rationalists for acting this way. Sad, isn't it?

trying to do the math. That's worse than posting while intoxicated.

lol

Why can't we see what the general membership thinks on this?

Anyway, forward...

and people actually talk to each other.

lol

But whom do we talk to? Not that present company isn't wonderful, you're one of the great people at DU. But why should a sense of the general membership be gained? WHo has anything to lose from that?

I like the absence of screaming "THAT'S BS!!11" posts here, myself.

This story isn't finished breaking and, the decision could be reversed.

The thing is, election fraud is very threatening to most people. People seem not to be able to think about it without going ballistic. The discussion was upsetting the board more than it was moving ahead. None of us would really gain from that.

See DU thread on my OpEdNews article on the topic.

Kucinich seems like the right one because basically it's all he has left to do. It's not like he has even the remote chance of Edwards. Whoever does this will be pilloried without mercy. Even if the hand-count reveals the machines were wrong, by the time it's complete the candidate who leads on this issue may suffer irreperable damage.

It's the last house on the block. The scary one with the black drapes and gargoyles.

He's not winning and he only has his own dedicated group of followers, that's pretty clear after five years of running for president. This would make him (yet again) a hero to them. And depending on the results, a hero to posterity.

And he's up for re-election.

Or is this just speculation by a member unaffiliated with Kucinich's campaign? (I'm a little confused.) If Kucinich is considering it, just tell me how to contribute and I will!

One note of caution, though, is that election reform advocates have to be very careful about the battles they choose. If a recount is demanded and it turns out that it doesn't make a difference, critics are going to say every time in the future, "you guys pulled this same conspiracy theory stuff in NH and it was garbage then, and it's garbage now."

That's the goal of election reform activists -- to have a system that works.

The spinners will spin, regardless.

It just occurred to me this morning. A recount only happens if someone who was on the ballot asks for it. Obama obviously won't ("too much to lose" and he's not exactly a boat-rocker), Edwards probably not for the same reasons. And then there is Kucinich... depending on the results this could spark a revolution. At any rate, he should be standing up for guaranteed election integrity.

Whether or not there was a fix doesn't matter: verifiability is all. All the more so in a system that long ago went corrupt. We should not be allowing any votes to be counted by clearly manipulable machines, as has been proven in the case of Diebold and in fact this particular model.

1) They won't. You know they won't. Dennis might.

2) If they do, they'll be subject to universal attack, wrong as that is. If the results show the count was clean, they'll be declared dead.

3) They both feel they have something to lose.

this time, I think Dennis has done that on numerous occasions already.

:evilgrin:

him personally, but is in the best interests of the people.

http://www.dennis4president.com/go/homepage-items/kucinich-asks-for-new-hampshire-recount-in-the-interest-of-election-integrity/

would hate for another big let down tho. Probably some specific rule like keeping Kucinich out of th debates that will be drummed up to avoid a recount.

I have some questions, please

1. When was a call for a recount similar to this been done last and with what results?

2. Is there any certain time frame that the recount has to be done after the initial request?

3. Am assuming that the recount will be of the Paper that was scanned into the Optical reader?

4. what % of the total votes does a recount involve?

thanks in advance. huge subject that I am only on the edges of

The American voter I'm sorry is not DUMB!

:)

are more than the total votes he's received in Iowa and NH.