For the record, I disagree 100% with Nancy Tobi's efforts to stop the recount in NH.

For the record, let me say that I personally disagree 100% with Nancy Tobi's efforts to stop the recount. I disagree with the reasoning completely. To say no recount right now is like saying there should NEVER be any recounts because we can't recounts. And for that matter it's like saying there should never be any audits because we can't trust them either. That's ludicrous - as long as the scanners are here and we have paper ballots we need to push for audits and recounts. That's why the ballots are there - so we can count them if there is any question of a problem. If we're not going to count them now, we might as well just throw them all away as soon as the scanner reads them. Is that what Nancy wants us to do?

We need to show that with an un-audited election - ANY suspicious results are valid reason to request a recount. Why? Because with optical scan systems, we have no idea if the machines counted properly, unless there is an audit or recount.

You have to ask, with her outright *begging* us to not call for a recount, what is she so afraid of? Nancy says the Nader 04 recount hurt our cause and she thinks this could be a setup to discredit election activists who want hand counts. This is not the same as Nader 04 and even if it were I disagree that it was so damaging to our cause. We're all still here. We've had the Brennan Report (and others), several films, new SoS's in some states doing good things, new state legislation, and the downfall of the DRE... measurable progress since Nader's recount in 04, and all due to many people's hard work. We're not going to all go running home with our tails between our legs if the NH recount matches the machine count. It would change nothing as far as I'm concerned. Personally I'm not worried about being discredited by a recount showing the machines were right. No recount will change what all the independent studies show - that we need audits on every election, and without them our democracy is in question. Even if the count was right, maybe this will show the SoS of NH that it would be a good idea to institute some audits in his state, so he doesn't have to have a recount every 4 years. We have very little to lose, and if in fact the machine count does not match the hand count, this could be the big break we've all been praying for.

To be honest, her cry to stop the recount is reminding me of the people during the Gore 2000 debacle, holding up signs to "stop counting the votes". It made no sense then and it makes no sense now.

Gary Beckwith
-----------------------------------
the solar bus
ELECTION JUSTICE CENTER
your home for updated information on the fight for democracy in America
http://election.solarbus.org
------------------------------------

I have followed you and trusted your insight since the 2004 national election debacle. (In fact, a link from your solarbus website introduced me to D.U.!) I'm all for a recount in NH--they have a paper trail (let's just verify things once and for all!) Who knows--nothing may change at all and then we all can be more comfortable in accepting future machine tabulated results.

I know I will be far less suspicious of the machines (if nothing changes and the paper ballots were truly secure and tamper proof) once a recount is conducted.

I had the honor of being part of a very "tiny" hand recount of paper ballots fed through diebold optical scanner machines in my community a few years ago. We only checked the results of a local election, but I was heartened to see that the machine results and our hand recount matched completely in many cases and in others we were only a few votes off (didn't change the results) and the reason was generally stray marks on the ballot. (So I learned that the machines can count correctly if they are programmed right!) And in my family this was huge--because I was so anti-machines that no one wanted to be around me. After the recount--I owed a lot of apologies...but, I still have my suspicions!

And you should keep them alive and well. Just because on OpScan recpunt "apparently" showed no mischief does not mean they are trustworthy.

HAND COUNT PAPER BALLOTS !!

Audits should be done as a matter of course. You may dig up evidence of some problem you never expected. I check my lab scales every morning with a set of standard weights. It is rare that any properly maintained scale ever fails the check. I do not under any circumstances just wait until some final result looks odd.

they set us up, Hillary "the come back kid" comes back to win.

Election reform activist go crazy demanding a recount. Why? BECAUSE WE LISTENED TO THE MEDIA (ONCE AGAIN), OBAMA NEVER REALLY HAD A DOUBLE DIGIT LEAD!

My opinion, the recount moves forward, whether it proves that the count was right or wrong has nothing to do with this particular SCAM.

This scam has all to do with convincing the people that HR 811 Paper ballots with audits is the way to go.

HOLT HR 811 IT IS NOT THE WAY TO GO!!!

This is a set up to get Holts HR 811 bill passed, nothing more nothing less.


Propaganda machine:

1)Everything in the recount turns out all right...thank goodness we had paper ballots to audit the machine count.

OR...

2)Obama actually won there was machine error...thank goodness we had paper ballots to audit the machines count

THEN...

3)Holt HR 811 IS GREAT because it gives us a paper ballot to audit.

And then...

4)The activist were right we do need paper ballots so that we can do a double check of the SECRET VOTE COUNT MACHINES.

If that wasn't enough...

5)That great site Moveon made it all possible by gathering 3.5 million signatures to have a paper ballots for all votes cast.

In the end WE LOSE, THE SECRET VOTE COUNTING MACHINES REMAIN IN PLACE.

HAND COUNT THE PAPER BALLOTS IN THE FIRST PLACE

My two cents, and I've been wrong before.......... :)

K&R...

Look at Iowa, look at the debates. Hillary is no Evita Peron.

HAND COUNT THE PAPER BALLOTS IN THE FIRST PLACE !!

Without casting aspersions on anyone, it is well to remember that the CIA has a long and successful history of infiltrating opposition groups and influencing elections.

and I wonder who put her up to it.