This one is interesting. First read the New Hampshire Poll thread.
Dennis the Menace today offered to pay for a recount in N.H. Here is a list of possible reasons why he would do this.
1 - He is a truly worried citizen. He thinks that Hillary stole the election and wants to investigate and make people aware.
2 - He's a really pathetic, squirrelly commie, sore loser.
3 - He is doing the opening conditioning for Soros. The commies need experienced henchpersons for trying to steal the election just as they did in 2000... or "Prepare your thugs. Give them practice. Inoculate the masses."
4 - As a poor worn-out commie, he is following the age old dictum that anything a commie can do to "screw the system" and cast doubts on the VALIDITY of the system is a net win for the party. (I think that this is the most likely)
Any further comments or debates? Please try to include WHY you think he is willing to pay for a recount. Thanks
Originally posted by StarValleyWyHe wants to pay because he lost. If this is allowed, then the rich are allowed political power because of their money. This is of course true but there's no reason to encourage it.
This one is interesting. First read the New Hampshire Poll thread.
Dennis the Menace today offered to pay for a recount in N.H. Here is a list of possible reasons why he would do this.
1 - He is a truly worried citizen. He thinks that Hillary stole the election and wants to investigate and make people aware.
2 - He's a really pathetic, squirrel ...[text shortened]... or debates? Please try to include WHY you think he is willing to pay for a recount. Thanks
A recount can be called for if a candidate agrees to pay for it. In most states a recount is mandatory in close elections. Agree or disagree it is his right and his money. I think the point he is trying to make is about an excercise in democracy. It is important to check and see if the counting methods are accurate, and if there has been any shananigan's . It won't change the outcome (maybe a few votes here or there). If he is wrong, then democracy is intact, if he is right, then democracy can be made whole again. I see no downside for him.
the duecer and StarValley's first choice- Kucinich is a citizen concerned about the accuracy of voting machines. New Hampshire doesn't require random audits of voting machines to count paper receipts- they just trust whatever the machine spits out. given the discrepancy in exit polls vs. outcome- the results should be contested. I think it's nice of Dennis to take it upon himself to front the $2000 fee for a recount, considering he doesn't have alot.
edit: not that there is one smack of difference between O and H
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritterthat's quite a bit of ire for a candidate who doesn't stand a chance contesting a race I'd gather you'd rather hillary lose anyway? i mean, "noose"? jeeeez
I wish he'd conduct the recount with a noose around his neck -- if there was any wrongdoing then he'd be allowed to remove the noose, however...
Originally posted by duecerI hope there are no chads involved. 🙂
A recount can be called for if a candidate agrees to pay for it. In most states a recount is mandatory in close elections. Agree or disagree it is his right and his money. I think the point he is trying to make is about an excercise in democracy. It is important to check and see if the counting methods are accurate, and if there has been any shananigan's . It ...[text shortened]... is intact, if he is right, then democracy can be made whole again. I see no downside for him.
Kelly
Originally posted by StarValleyWyThe man got 1.4% of the vote and wants a recount? How stupid is he? But if he wants to spend his money , I say lets recount it 50 times..
This one is interesting. First read the New Hampshire Poll thread.
Dennis the Menace today offered to pay for a recount in N.H. Here is a list of possible reasons why he would do this.
1 - He is a truly worried citizen. He thinks that Hillary stole the election and wants to investigate and make people aware.
2 - He's a really pathetic, squirrel ...[text shortened]... or debates? Please try to include WHY you think he is willing to pay for a recount. Thanks
Originally posted by Darth SpongeIn case you skipped reading my post, I agree that what he is doing is a good thing, Kucinich knows he will not win a single state, but he gets to make important point like these by running
the duecer and StarValley's first choice- Kucinich is a citizen concerned about the accuracy of voting machines. New Hampshire doesn't require random audits of voting machines to count paper receipts- they just trust whatever the machine spits out. given the discrepancy in exit polls vs. outcome- the results should be contested. I think it's nice of ...[text shortened]... ing he doesn't have alot.
edit: not that there is one smack of difference between O and H
Let's talk about the real issue here. The issue is that the Diebold machines are widely mistrusted. Why were the exit polls wrong in the 2000 presidential election and in New Hampshire in 2008 ? Were the pollsters wrong, or were the machines rigged ? Unless these questions are properly looked into, the whole democratic process will remain under a cloud. This is why Kucinich's intervention is important, and has been applauded by a number of people who disagree with him politically.
As for the Kucinich campaign itself, what the guy is doing is giving a voice to thousands of Americans who are pro-union, anti-war, and take a leftist stance on a number of social issues. I just had a look at his website http://www.dennis4president.com, and it mentions that he has won three major national polls of grassroots Democrats (sponsored or organised by the Progressive Democrats of America, Democracy for America , and The Nation magazine). So although he is obviously not going to be elected President, he does represent quite a large constituency of people who are looking for real change.
