1 .... 2 .... 3. Three. Done.
H
Posted on 01/10/2008 6:02:36 PM PST by LdSentinal
Citing unspecified “serious and credible reports, allegations, and rumors” regarding the presidential primary in New Hampshire, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) is asking for a recount of the vote.
Kucinich, who placed at the back of the Democratic field with less than 1.4 percent of the votes, said in a letter to New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner that there were “possible vote-count irregularities” that have been “fueled by the stunning disparities between various ‘independent’ pre-election polls and the actual election results.”
The lawmaker said he does not expect his own vote count to be significantly affected by such a recount but he added that it is “imperative that these questions be addressed in the interest of public confidence in the integrity of the election process and the election machinery.”
In his request for a recount, Kucinich alleges that there have been “unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots.”
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) won the Democratic primary in a stunning upset of Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), who had surged to the top of the polls following his win in the Iowa caucuses.
In Iowa, Kucinich had urged his supporters to back Obama.
“This is not about my candidacy or any other individual candidacy,” Kucinich said. “It is about the integrity of the election process”
Is the Secretary of State in New Hampshire, Democrat or Republican?
He is a Democrat, and very well respected by both parties
In that case, yes, an investigative team could check the names and then go to the addresses given and see who lived there. It would take an awful lot of work. I don’t see the MSM doing it, not against hillary. And I’m not sure whether Kucinich could afford to do it.
The pygmy pagan is posing for the cameras again.....ala Jesse Jackson.
They should allow it and the Supreme Court of NH make the citizens of NH vote again.
(Old Military Tactic) :^)
Not really. You have to be a New Hampshire resident. That means you are living in New Hampshire and intend it to be your legal domicile. This is very similar to the requirement in other states. Like other states, you could have recently moved to the state. And presumably you could move to New Hampshire, vote, and then decide to move somewhere else in time for that state's primary.
Declaring an intent to move to New Hampshire would disqualify the declarant from registration since it would establish that they were not a resident.
It is more of a task for activists and local residents. In the smaller towns, and we have a lot of them, the people working at the polls have a pretty good idea who is a legitimate resident. For example, the Town Clerk is normally at the polls, and they handle the property tax bills, register cars and boats, license dogs, issue marriage licenses and birth certificates, etc. Needless to say they have met most of the residents in town.
Yes. I vote in a small town in Vermont. I know the Town Clerk well, and there are a bunch of neighbors whom I know at the tables checking IDs as well. They still go through the motions of checking your driver’s license even though they know you.
But I’d think it was different in a few of the larger towns and cities.
Hmm. That’s not what the guy told Rush.
Voter Registration form defines domicile and penalty for violation
If you can't prove residency by documents (normally a NH license showing your address) then you can swear out a domicile affidavit. Fibbing on your affidavit is a bad idea, with penalties up to a year in jail and a $5000 fine. The jail is unlikely, but the fine isn't.
RSA 654:12 Voter Qualifications
RSA 654:12 describes the procedure followed for all registrations where a photo ID is not presented.
Then acording to you the guy on Rush was lying.
What the guy on Rush said is inconsistent with New Hampshire state law.
Probably the guy on Rush either didn’t understand the law, or in trying to explain the law in one sentence he didn’t explain it correctly. Residency law in any state is more complicated than it appears, with a lot of special cases that are hard to sum up quickly.
There isn’t one simple test to determine where someone resides. Even the example given on the NH voter registration form of where you most often sleep doesn’t apply to everyone. Consider a long distance truck driver who owns a house in New Hampshire, and whose wife and kids live there. He’s a resident too, even though he may spend most of his nights sleeping in the back of his cab at some truck stop.
Another example would be the voters from our town who are serving overseas. You can register to vote, and vote in the New Hampshire town you are from and intend to return to after your tour of duty is over. We have received several ballots from FOBs in Iraq in our elections, and we certainly hope those voters are back in town to vote in person in the future.
The caller to Rush may also have been alluding to a case in a prior election where a campaign worker managed to get past the residency screening, but then “moved” to another state a few months later. The law was subsequently tightened up, including a provision for severe penalties for anyone who votes twice in the same election. (The case of someone who votes in one primary, moves to another state, and then votes in their later primary is much harder to solve given the applicable federal law. But some people do this legitimately, if they happen to move between the dates of the primary elections in two states, and the overall effect nationwide is slight.)
Is this the Friday Silliness thread?
I dont think Kucinich is looking at, nor is the controversy about who lived where, thats more of an intramural immigration issue, and I believe every state should build a wall and citizens should carry papers to prove their citizenship and place of residence. That should put an end to illegal immigration once and for all.
What they appear to be whining about is a discrepancy between the districts that hand count and those that use optical scanners run entirely by the great Satan, Diebold.
If they really cared about vote counting, they would do a recount on the Republican votes as well, making sure that moonbat McCain beat Huckabee and Paul fair and square. For me, those numbers are suspicious, and I dont trust anyone who was involved with the Keating S&L scandal to run this country. Do you?
More importantly, who do we want to run against in the general, a black man or a white woman? Interesting questions for our time...
who do we want to run against in the general, a black man or a white woman? Interesting questions for our time...
Maybe both if they can patch over their differences in the name of political expediency.
1 .... 2 .... 3. Three. Done.
H
I was thinking after the NH primaries that something did not smell right. Not so much because the media polling was wrong but because it was *so* wrong..
I wonder if some ballot stuffing did not take place..
Another thing that has been bothering me, but not so much that I’ll chase the numbers. If there was shenanigans, did McCain receive the benefit as a promise in exchange for a kiss?
I very much doubt that, McCain is most certainly not the pick of the litter but I dont think (a) he needed any help or (b) would have signed a deal with Clinton...
Besides his numbers were dead on with the polling..
What’s a Kucinich. He is a Ferengi jerk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.