Author Topic: Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire  (Read 4156 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline franksolich

  • Scourge of the Primitives
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58679
  • Reputation: +3057/-173
Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire
« on: January 10, 2008, 10:56:04 PM »
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) - Democrat Dennis Kucinich, who won less than 2 percent of the vote in the New Hampshire primary, said Thursday he wants a recount to ensure that all ballots in his party's contest were counted. The Ohio congressman cited "serious and credible reports, allegations and rumors" about the integrity of Tuesday results.

Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan said Kucinich is entitled to a statewide recount. But, under New Hampshire law, Kucinich will have to pay for it. Scanlan said he had "every confidence" the results are accurate.

In a letter dated Thursday, Kucinich said he does not expect significant changes in his vote total, but wants assurance that "100 percent of the voters had 100 percent of their votes counted."

Kucinich alluded to online reports alleging disparities around the state between hand-counted ballots, which tended to favor Sen. Barack Obama, and machine-counted ones that tended to favor Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. He also noted the difference between pre-election polls, which indicated Obama would win, and Clinton's triumph by a 39 percent to 37 percent margin.

Candidates who lose by 3 percentage or less are entitled to a recount for a $2,000 fee. Candidates who lose by more must pay for the full cost. Kucinich's campaign said it was sending the $2,000 fee to start the recount.

read more at http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080111/D8U3EBKG0.html

----------

This is probably already on Skins's island, but I'm too tired to haul out the boat and row over there.

Anyway, the Democrats, liberals, and primitives should perhaps be careful about what they wish for, given that all things are a two-edged sword.

apres moi, le deluge

Offline Lauri

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3636
  • Reputation: +143/-18
Re: Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire
« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2008, 11:01:29 PM »
Maybe Bev can help count them ...?  :popcorn:

Offline franksolich

  • Scourge of the Primitives
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58679
  • Reputation: +3057/-173
Re: Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire
« Reply #2 on: January 10, 2008, 11:11:28 PM »
I'm thinking it's a two-edged sword because now what's to stop Republicans from demanding recounts?

In places such as Chicago, Detroit, Washington, St. Louis, Cleveland, Boston, Memphis, New Orleans, Seattle, Lost Angeles, Denver, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Camden, Newark, Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Kansas City, &c., &c., &c.--you know, all those big cities controlled by Democrat machines.

Republicans have a history of being reticent about recounting the votes--the example of Richard Nixon in 1960 being the best-known case, but there's been many other instances--but with the Democrats, liberals, and primitives always screaming for recounts, probably there's going to come that time when Republicans are going to demand recounts too.

It won't look good for the other side; it's a two-edged sword that cuts both ways.
apres moi, le deluge

Offline Wretched Excess

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15284
  • Reputation: +485/-84
  • Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happy Hour
Re: Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire
« Reply #3 on: January 10, 2008, 11:13:33 PM »
I'm thinking it's a two-edged sword because now what's to stop Republicans from demanding recounts?

In places such as Chicago, Detroit, Washington, St. Louis, Cleveland, Boston, Memphis, New Orleans, Seattle, Lost Angeles, Denver, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Camden, Newark, Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Kansas City, &c., &c., &c.--you know, all those big cities controlled by Democrat machines.

Republicans have a history of being reticent about recounting the votes--the example of Richard Nixon in 1960 being the best-known case, but there's been many other instances--but with the Democrats, liberals, and primitives always screaming for recounts, probably there's going to come that time when Republicans are going to demand recounts too.

It won't look good for the other side; it's a two-edged sword that cuts both ways.

demanding recounts is a game for losers.   :rotf:

Offline Lauri

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3636
  • Reputation: +143/-18
Re: Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire
« Reply #4 on: January 10, 2008, 11:21:31 PM »
I'm thinking it's a two-edged sword because now what's to stop Republicans from demanding recounts?

In places such as Chicago, Detroit, Washington, St. Louis, Cleveland, Boston, Memphis, New Orleans, Seattle, Lost Angeles, Denver, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Camden, Newark, Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Kansas City, &c., &c., &c.--you know, all those big cities controlled by Democrat machines.

Republicans have a history of being reticent about recounting the votes--the example of Richard Nixon in 1960 being the best-known case, but there's been many other instances--but with the Democrats, liberals, and primitives always screaming for recounts, probably there's going to come that time when Republicans are going to demand recounts too.

It won't look good for the other side; it's a two-edged sword that cuts both ways.


it is a double edged sword.. but the Dems have been pretty smart stacking these courts up with leftie judges from the ACLU.

our governor's race, which was won the first two times by the GOPer, and then just once by the Dem.. was handed over to the State Supreme Court and they handed it back to the Dem..

this is what i tell my daughter and her friends; the Supreme Court is what we have to focus on the most and a Dem will stack that court up with ACLU lawyers and we are screwed far longer than one presidency.

Offline Wretched Excess

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15284
  • Reputation: +485/-84
  • Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happy Hour
Re: Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire
« Reply #5 on: January 10, 2008, 11:24:54 PM »
I'm thinking it's a two-edged sword because now what's to stop Republicans from demanding recounts?

In places such as Chicago, Detroit, Washington, St. Louis, Cleveland, Boston, Memphis, New Orleans, Seattle, Lost Angeles, Denver, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Camden, Newark, Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Kansas City, &c., &c., &c.--you know, all those big cities controlled by Democrat machines.

Republicans have a history of being reticent about recounting the votes--the example of Richard Nixon in 1960 being the best-known case, but there's been many other instances--but with the Democrats, liberals, and primitives always screaming for recounts, probably there's going to come that time when Republicans are going to demand recounts too.

It won't look good for the other side; it's a two-edged sword that cuts both ways.


it is a double edged sword.. but the Dems have been pretty smart stacking these courts up with leftie judges from the ACLU.

our governor's race, which was won the first two times by the GOPer, and then just once by the Dem.. was handed over to the State Supreme Court and they handed it back to the Dem..

this is what i tell my daughter and her friends; the Supreme Court is what we have to focus on the most and a Dem will stack that court up with ACLU lawyers and we are screwed far longer than one presidency.

WA was one place where recounts were no laughing matter.  but hell, when the margin is 40 or 50 votes out of hundreds of thousands, you are very close to the point where you may as well flip a coin.


Offline Lauri

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3636
  • Reputation: +143/-18
Re: Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire
« Reply #6 on: January 10, 2008, 11:30:16 PM »
I'm thinking it's a two-edged sword because now what's to stop Republicans from demanding recounts?

In places such as Chicago, Detroit, Washington, St. Louis, Cleveland, Boston, Memphis, New Orleans, Seattle, Lost Angeles, Denver, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Camden, Newark, Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Kansas City, &c., &c., &c.--you know, all those big cities controlled by Democrat machines.

Republicans have a history of being reticent about recounting the votes--the example of Richard Nixon in 1960 being the best-known case, but there's been many other instances--but with the Democrats, liberals, and primitives always screaming for recounts, probably there's going to come that time when Republicans are going to demand recounts too.

It won't look good for the other side; it's a two-edged sword that cuts both ways.


it is a double edged sword.. but the Dems have been pretty smart stacking these courts up with leftie judges from the ACLU.

our governor's race, which was won the first two times by the GOPer, and then just once by the Dem.. was handed over to the State Supreme Court and they handed it back to the Dem..

this is what i tell my daughter and her friends; the Supreme Court is what we have to focus on the most and a Dem will stack that court up with ACLU lawyers and we are screwed far longer than one presidency.

WA was one place where recounts were no laughing matter.  but hell, when the margin is 40 or 50 votes out of hundreds of thousands, you are very close to the point where you may as well flip a coin.




it was just so freaking surreal. the GOPer first won by a handy margin.. the second time the lead shrank.. then they "found" some votes ( which turned out to be a bunch of homeless people that used a federal bldg as their address) and the Dem won by  120something votes.

even the level headed Dems here were outraged... they were embarassed and it was SUCH a public broo ha ha, i thought surely the SSC would do the right thing.. i guess in the end they did indeed flip a coin.

Offline Wretched Excess

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15284
  • Reputation: +485/-84
  • Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happy Hour
Re: Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire
« Reply #7 on: January 10, 2008, 11:42:03 PM »
I'm thinking it's a two-edged sword because now what's to stop Republicans from demanding recounts?

In places such as Chicago, Detroit, Washington, St. Louis, Cleveland, Boston, Memphis, New Orleans, Seattle, Lost Angeles, Denver, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Camden, Newark, Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Kansas City, &c., &c., &c.--you know, all those big cities controlled by Democrat machines.

Republicans have a history of being reticent about recounting the votes--the example of Richard Nixon in 1960 being the best-known case, but there's been many other instances--but with the Democrats, liberals, and primitives always screaming for recounts, probably there's going to come that time when Republicans are going to demand recounts too.

It won't look good for the other side; it's a two-edged sword that cuts both ways.


it is a double edged sword.. but the Dems have been pretty smart stacking these courts up with leftie judges from the ACLU.

our governor's race, which was won the first two times by the GOPer, and then just once by the Dem.. was handed over to the State Supreme Court and they handed it back to the Dem..

this is what i tell my daughter and her friends; the Supreme Court is what we have to focus on the most and a Dem will stack that court up with ACLU lawyers and we are screwed far longer than one presidency.

WA was one place where recounts were no laughing matter.  but hell, when the margin is 40 or 50 votes out of hundreds of thousands, you are very close to the point where you may as well flip a coin.




it was just so freaking surreal. the GOPer first won by a handy margin.. the second time the lead shrank.. then they "found" some votes ( which turned out to be a bunch of homeless people that used a federal bldg as their address) and the Dem won by  120something votes.

even the level headed Dems here were outraged... they were embarassed and it was SUCH a public broo ha ha, i thought surely the SSC would do the right thing.. i guess in the end they did indeed flip a coin.

thanks for refreshing my memory.  the dems kept finding ballots and demanding that they be counted.  that was outrageous.

Offline Lauri

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3636
  • Reputation: +143/-18
Re: Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire
« Reply #8 on: January 10, 2008, 11:55:28 PM »
I'm thinking it's a two-edged sword because now what's to stop Republicans from demanding recounts?

In places such as Chicago, Detroit, Washington, St. Louis, Cleveland, Boston, Memphis, New Orleans, Seattle, Lost Angeles, Denver, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Camden, Newark, Miami, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Kansas City, &c., &c., &c.--you know, all those big cities controlled by Democrat machines.

Republicans have a history of being reticent about recounting the votes--the example of Richard Nixon in 1960 being the best-known case, but there's been many other instances--but with the Democrats, liberals, and primitives always screaming for recounts, probably there's going to come that time when Republicans are going to demand recounts too.

It won't look good for the other side; it's a two-edged sword that cuts both ways.


it is a double edged sword.. but the Dems have been pretty smart stacking these courts up with leftie judges from the ACLU.

our governor's race, which was won the first two times by the GOPer, and then just once by the Dem.. was handed over to the State Supreme Court and they handed it back to the Dem..

this is what i tell my daughter and her friends; the Supreme Court is what we have to focus on the most and a Dem will stack that court up with ACLU lawyers and we are screwed far longer than one presidency.

WA was one place where recounts were no laughing matter.  but hell, when the margin is 40 or 50 votes out of hundreds of thousands, you are very close to the point where you may as well flip a coin.




it was just so freaking surreal. the GOPer first won by a handy margin.. the second time the lead shrank.. then they "found" some votes ( which turned out to be a bunch of homeless people that used a federal bldg as their address) and the Dem won by  120something votes.

even the level headed Dems here were outraged... they were embarassed and it was SUCH a public broo ha ha, i thought surely the SSC would do the right thing.. i guess in the end they did indeed flip a coin.

thanks for refreshing my memory.  the dems kept finding ballots and demanding that they be counted.  that was outrageous.

it was so embarassing.. i think we expect this stuff in Chicago... not in flannel wearing hippie-ville..

Offline SSG Snuggle Bunny

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23048
  • Reputation: +2232/-269
  • Voted Rookie-of-the-Year, 3 years running
Re: Kucinich paying for recount of votes in New Hampshire
« Reply #9 on: January 11, 2008, 06:14:01 AM »
Kiucinich (patting pockets like Columbo): I know I had one here somewhere.
According to the Bible, "know" means "yes."