NH Recount Would Be FREE if Obama Requested it: Kucinich Has to PAY.

[garybeck]

"New Hampshire law, RSA 660:7, provides that "any person for whom a vote was cast for any nomination of any party at a state or presidential primary may apply for a recount." RSA 660:2, IV provides that if the difference between the vote cast for the applying candidate and a candidate declared elected shall be greater than 3 percent of the total votes cast in the towns which comprise the office to be recounted, the candidate shall pay the fees provided in RSA 660:2, III and shall agree in writing with the secretary of state to pay any additional costs of the recount." RSA 660:6 provides that if the person requesting the recount is declared the winner after the recount or loses by a margin of less than one percent of the total votes cast, the fees for the recount will be refunded by the State."

Obama is within 3 points now. By my interpretation, a recount would be free if he requested it.

This shows, IMHO, that Obama is not going to fight or persue any evidence of election fraud. There are red flags all over the place and he's "moving on." If he wins the nomination we could have all kinds of discrepancies and irregularities on election day and Obama would just smile and wave at the end of his concession speech, like 4 years ago.

We need a fighter.

[sabbat hunter]

1. what red flags? n/t

[jaksavage]

7. red flags

40 thousnad hand counted ballots results
Obama leads hillary by 4 %

80 thousand diebold counted ballots results
hillary leads obama by 4 %

but the kicker is the lead or loses are mirror images of each other to the 100th of a %.

Diebold is counting...still.

[sabbat hunter]

9. links?

[ORDagnabbit]

11. start at www.bradblog.com

www.bradblog.com

[sabbat hunter]

37. ah yes a blog

always where I go for my news/reliable sources.

[ORDagnabbit]

38. well maybe you oughta go read brad and you'd realize how silly your statement is.

[rucky]

39. Brad has a solid track record.

Newspapers hardly do investigative reporting anymore, and TV does it poorly.

[ORDagnabbit]

40. fyi....heres some things said about brad

"Brad richly deserves the first internet investigative journalism Pulitzer Prize
for his tenacious pursuit of the truth on electronic voting." -NYTimes' About.com


"The state's most persistent blogger-watchdog on the dangers of voting technology."
- The Los Angeles Times

"This is a site you should visit every single day."
- Mike Malloy, Air America Radio

"Brad Friedman is the Paul Revere of the Election Integrity fight."
-- David Bender, Politically Correct, Air America Radio

[garybeck]

12. It's all over the place. here's one link:

http://electionarchive.org/ucvData/NH/ReleaseReNHPrimary2008.pdf

[kirby]

2. Not how I read it...

It would only be free if the recount determines the machines were wrong by more than 3 percent.

[rateyes]

3. It wouldn't be free...

Somebody would have to pay that bill. Better a candidate asking for the recount, or the taxpayers?

[tritsofme]

4. Maybe he's not a tin-foil hat nutter and knows that there is no evidence of manipulation.

Maybe that's why?

[garybeck]

5. maybe you need to look at the facts?

[tritsofme]

8. I'm sure the Obama camp has all the facts in front of them.

And having decided not to do any sort of challenge means only one thing to me, there is no real evidence of any voter fraud.

Hasn't a nice little dungeon been provided for these discussions so they don't stink up the main board?

[garybeck]

13. I see, you blindly trust that he and his advisors will do the right thing

and that they understand election technology and how easy it is to rig elections with Diebold equipment.

Again, if you look at the facts and don't blindly trust, you will find the truth.

If you did about 5 minutes of research, you would find that with an un-audited system like what they have in NH, there is NO reason to trust ANY election results, whether they resemble the polls or not. Those are the facts, as given by many independent studies on the machines. The Brennan Report, which was conducted by the world's leading experts on computer security confirmed that without audits, the election results can't be trusted, period.

open your eyes. it's not about tinfoil hats. it's about truth and justice.

[tritsofme]

14. Do I think senior officials in the Obama camp know more about these things than you?

and the voter fraud conspiracy theorists on the internet?

Yes.

[garybeck]

15. If you did about 5 minutes of research

If you did about 5 minutes of research, you would find that with an un-audited system like what they have in NH, there is NO reason to trust ANY election results, whether they resemble the polls or not. Those are the facts, as given by many independent studies on the machines. The Brennan Report, which was conducted by the world's leading experts on computer security confirmed that without audits, the election results can't be trusted, period.

i guess the head of security for Microsoft and Lawrence Livermore Labs don't understand it, when they say that if there are no audits, the results can't be trusted? REad the report.

open your eyes. it's not about tinfoil hats. it's about truth and justice.

[tritsofme]

16. Obama has the most to lose here.

Which is basically the point of your OP.

If this was such a big deal, why hasn't the Obama campaign done the five minutes of research that could offer definitive proof of a major primary election being stolen from them?

[garybeck]

18. just take your head out of the sand

and you'll see the truth. Read the Brennan Report. Read the list of who prepared the report. They know much more than you, I, or anyone at the Obama camp about computer security. Here's the link.

http://brennancenter.org/dynamic/subpages/download_file_36340.pdf

Since you appear to be too closed minded to actually do any research yourself, here are the core findings of the report:

All three voting systems have significant security and re l i ability vulnerab i l i t i e s,
wh i ch pose a real danger to the integrity of national, state, and local elections.

■ The most troubling vulnerabilities of each system can be substantially remedied
if proper countermeasures are implemented at the state and local level.

■ Few jurisdictions have implemented any of the key countermeasures that
could make the least difficult attacks against voting systems much more difficult
to execute successfully

and here is a list of who compiled the report.

Georgette Asherman, independent statistical consultant,
founder of Direct Effects
Professor Matt Bishop, University of California at Davis
Lillie Coney, Electronic Privacy Information Center
Professor David Dill, Stanford University
Jeremy Epstein, PhD, Cyber Defense Agency LLC
Harri Hursti, independent consultant, former CEO of F-Secure PLC
Dr. David Jefferson, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and
Chair of the California Secretary of State’s Voting Systems
Technology Assessment and Advisory Board
Professor Douglas W. Jones, University of Iowa
John Kelsey, PhD, NIST
Rene Peralta, PhD, NIST
Professor Ronald Rivest, MIT
Howard A. Schmidt, Former Chief Security Officer, Microsoft and eBay
Dr. Bruce Schneier, Counterpane Internet Security
Joshua Tauber, PhD, formerly of the Computer Science and
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at MIT
Professor David Wagner, University of California at Berkeley
Professor Dan Wallach, Rice University
Matthew Zimmerman, Electronic Frontier Foundation

I suppose the Obama camp knows more than these guys.

[cloudythescribbler]

19. There are TWO questions being conflated here:

(1) Is there reason to believe that there was election fraud THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN SUFFICIENT TO TIP THE ELECTION?

(2) Is it in the overall interests of the Obama campaign to pursue this issue, including dealing with all those who dismiss ALL concern about the SIGNIFICANT divergence between the RAW exit poll data (as the vote tallies come in, the exit poll data are routinely reweighted to match the reported results!).

The Obama campaign MAY NOT have answered (1) in the negative, but they HAVE answered question (2) in the negative, and under the circumstance (and I think there is AMPLE evidence to warrant a healthy skepticism, unlike the DU moderators who exiled the issue UNTIL Kucinich gave some of the DU-rejected arguments credence in his request for a recount) Obama probably made the right TACTICAL decision. Obama is running to WIN if possible, not to make a point about electoral integrity. However, he makes many points (including cautiously waiting before rejecting the race-baiting and disenfranchising litigation -- which party does that remind you of? -- in very carefully tailored comments).

Even with the caution of the Obama campaign, bashing to the contrary by SWARMS of Obama-bashing trolls on DU abounds.

[tritsofme]

21. Why does the Obama camp believe that every single primary won't be rigged against them?

If a major one already has?

If he thinks it was actually rigged, there seems to be no reason that it would stop in NH.

If that's the case he has no reason to continue his campaign if the votes are rigged against him and he refuses to do anything about it.

[garybeck]

23. just face the facts..

the truth is that any election using the Diebold opscan system without audits just can't be trusted. it's not just fraud - even just a glitch or bug could exist and there is nothing in place to catch it. that is the fact, you can't deny it unless you have your head in the sand.

[motocicleta]

45. I am not an Obama supporter, so don't get me wrong

But the message has been well sent: you fuck with the program, things do not go well for you (see Wellstone, et al). You play along, even if you are intended to lose, you will be assured a cush position with the real power elites (see Bill Clinton kissing GHWBush's ring the last several years).

Besides, the real power may decide you should be the winner before the election. Hey - maybe we just wanted Hillary to make this thing a race, huh? TV ratings are no good when it's a blowout, babe, we need a nice tight race! That way, everybody wins, especially the folks selling the ads.

If you don't think that's motive enough to play along, I don't really care what ignorant opinion you have of well verified voting problems.

[Hippo_Tron]

34. So why was there no big concern about fraud before the New Hampshire Primary?

[garybeck]

48. Who said there wasn't any concern? There is much concern about the

voting machines.

Go to VotersUnite.Org, the best place to start.

I can send you a free DVD if you are interested in learning more about it.

[movonne]

22. Remember Gore, remember Kerry...there is something that really

smells in the New Hampshire election....

[lumberjack_jeff]

20. It isn't about this election. It's about electionS.

Like you, Obama doesn't get it.

It should be a matter of common practice to audit the results (via hand recount) of a machine-counted election.

[garybeck]

25. Yes I do get it

I've been trying to get audits in our state for 4 years. Every election needs to be audited, just like the Brennan Report states. I do get it.

[lumberjack_jeff]

26. Oh, okay then. Welcome to Oz, fellow "tin foil hat nutter".

:hi:

edited to add:
I had intended to reply to tritsofme, did I aim wrong?

[EFerrari]

28. You'd have to be a "nutter" to trust the count, not the other way around.

Geezus.

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. Why should Obama request it?

It's a loser from top to bottom. You want to chase imaginary villains? Foot the bill.

[EFerrari]

31. If we can't know who won, why bother to hold elections

unless you are fond of enriching the corporations that own our media, that is. There's always that.

[alcibiades_mystery]

35. We know who won.

That would be Hillary Clinton.

We don't need recounts and more recounts of every fucking election.

[EFerrari]

41. Really? Show me the votes if you can without cussing.

You don't know who won. You know what you've been told.

That's all any of us know. And, that's as sad for Senator Clinton's effort as it is for her opponents'.

[ORDagnabbit]

10. its one super rich guy versus another super rich guy in a game run by really

rich guys....

why would any corporatist want to rock the boat?

[MethuenProgressive]

17. Why do a recount? The polls matched the results.

They all predicted Obama would get mid-30s, and he got 36%. The polls were spot on.

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. Why would Obama want a recount when the exit polls matched the results?

He doesn't want to look like a kook or a sore loser.

[garybeck]

27. because they didn't

even Chris Matthews said on TV that the results did not match the PRE and EXIT polls.

[EFerrari]

29. And we all know that in a leader appearance, not integrity, is everything!

[EFerrari]

30. Democracy sure is expensive, isn't it? n/t

[zanne]

32. That was quite a stretch, garybeck....

Your arms must be really long.

[sandnsea]

33. Edwards is a multi-millionaire, let him pay n/t

[avaistheone1]

44. Aww, Let Obama is has got all that lobbyist dough.

[dnbmathguy]

36. It wouldn't be free for me

I say this as an Obama supporter in NH. Hillary won.

If Kucinich wants to pay for the recount, perfect. I admire him for making a principled stand. But the evidence doesn't support fraud.

[Laurab]

42. Kucinich has nothing to lose - Obama has a lot to lose.

1st primary and he asks for a recount because he didn't win? How would that go over with the average voter? The uneducated voter? What happens if they don't find anything in NH? I actually do believe the votes were helped along by the machines, but what if the evidence is gone? Isn't it true that the ballots weren't locked up? I don't want to see "Obama is a sore loser" as the next headline.

I'm sure Obama is happy that Kucinich is doing it. I'm happy Kucinich is doing it. I'd sort of like Obama to stay in the running for the Presidency.

I'm actually surprised John Edwards isn't speaking out - he talked so much about counting all the votes in the last election, and I haven't seen anything about him speaking out. If he has spoken out about NH - where he remained at 17% the entire night, I would like to see it. He's the one who pledged to fight, and I have yet to see him make any kind of statement. If he has, I would really appreciate someone telling me about it. I thought it was so odd that his numbers didn't change even once.

Obama is doing the right thing - and so is Kucinich. People have pledged to donate to Kucinich if he asks, and I'll be one of them.

[Fire Walk With Me]

43. That none of the other Dem candidates support Dennis in this tells me all I need to know about them.

And who they ultimately serve.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[IdaBriggs]

46. Its too late for any one else to do it -- it had to be done within 3 days. nt

[bejammin075]

47. That's not true! Recount is moving FORWARD on 1/16

http://grannywarrior.chipin.com/mypages/view/id/f4f0c43cf84bf880

Check that link. The Albert Howard and Dennis Kucinich campaigns have paid the $2,000 fee to initiate the process. The SoS has come up with a figure of $56,000 to be paid by tomorrow, er, Tuesday. Most of the money has already been raised, and I'm sure somebody will make up the rest.

The recount will start on January 16th!