Kucinich calls for New Hampshire recount

CONCORD, New Hampshire (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.

Scanlon said his office had received several phone calls since Tuesday, mostly from outside the state, questioning the results. New Hampshire's voting machines are not linked in any way, which Scanlon says reduce the likelihood of tampering with results on a statewide level. Also, the results can be checked against paper ballots.

"I think people from out of state don't completely understand how our process works and they compare it to the system that might exist in Florida or Ohio, where they have had serious problems," he said. "Perhaps the best thing that could happen for us is to have a recount to show the people that … the votes that were cast on election day were accurately reflected in the results. And I have every confidence that will be the case."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/11/kucinich-calls-for-new-hampshire-recount/#more-4386

What is the purpose of this recount?Is Mr. Kucinich a sore looser?That is right ;if he wants a recount let him pay for it.What does he want to prove by asking for a recount.Politicians are the same all over the world;they are a bunch of addicts of power;welfare recipients of a different category.If there were frauds Senator Obama is the one who should ask for a recount.

The democrats better be careful with their idiosyncracies;First it was Bill Clinton who calls Senator Obama a child ,now you have this recount.Mr Clinton should be applauding the courage of this young man who could attract the independants to the democratic party instead of putting him down.If the people want change I agree with senator Kerry ;Senator Obama is more likely the one who will work for change than Hilary Clinton.One should not forget that Senator Clinton vote for an illegal and immoral war;now President Clinton is saying that he was against the war since the beginning.Where was he to show his disapproval.Mr. Albert Gore and presdent Carter have said publicly that they are against the war ,but nobody heard Bill Clinton's disapproval of the war.As Bill Bennett said on CNN the other day ,we are seeing the true character of Mr. Clinton.

Not a sore looser San Malis, if he is entitled to request a recount. We shouldn't interprete it otherwise, that is his rights. I also have some suspission on that vote.

Will Mr Kucinich win by recounting the ballots?What is the difference between his total votes and Mrs Clinton's votes?I would think differently if the difference were small.Had Senator Obama asked for a recount that would be a different story,because he came close to equal Mrs Clinton's total votes.if Mr.Kucinich wants to pay for it that is fine,but the state of New Hampshire should not waste the taxpayers'money to please a sore looser .

Understand the case San Malis, Kucinich is on the Obama side, this would help Obama regain Hillary's suspicious. San Malis, you are democrat don't let Hillary's demonazation of Obama cast on you.

If Hillary thinks that her dirty politics will help her winning the General Elections, M'ap di wayan.

Now she wants to attract Obama in the racial field, which Obama doesn't want to play because the racial debate will not serve Obama.

This is a dirty tactic to make Obama loose the white support that he enjoys now. It's unfortunate to see at the 21st century that is the kind of politics the NY Sen, wants to bring to washington.

Listen,I am not against Obama;I said before, and I repeat if I had the authority to elect the President of the United States I woud install mr. Obma in the White house.However, so far I do not see any dirty politics in what Mrs. Clinton said about Senator Obama.

Let's analyse without any prejudices her statement about President Lindon Johnson's contribution to the succes of the civil right movement started by Rev. Martin Luther King and all the other black leaders.Is there anybody with some intelligence who could doubt Lindon Johnson's merit in this endeavour?Would the movement be as succeful if Governor Wallace , Richard Nixon or Georges bush was the President of the United States?Mrs. Clinton did not defame Dr. Martin Luther King.she tells it like it is.

In regard to the electability of a black person to the presidency of the United States ;I hope she and I are wrong, but folks ,sincerly I don't think any reasonable person can blame somebody who thinks this way.Could you imagine the reactions of white folks in this country when they heard the President of BET,a black man saying that had he met Mr. Obama in his neighborhood during his youth (Mr Bobama's)he would ask him what is he doing there.The president of BET was refering to Mr Obama's drug problems.Could you imagine the effect on the electorate when Senator Thompson or Rudolph Giulliani will ask Senator Obama if he were a drug dealer.I do not give any credence to the President of BET allegations ,but in politic perceptions can make a big difference in a race.

Malice,

Who do you want us to listen?

1. The man who spent his time to educate young people at the University?
   
2. Or the founder of a TV channel that promotes delinquencies
   among black community?
   

It is irrelevant.I said I do not give credence to what the President of BET said. That does not mean his statement will not have any effect on the electorate.

We should not forget also that mrs. Clinton during her youth worked for a law firm that defended the members of the Black Panther party.In my opinion this is enough to qualify her as a defender against oppresion.I am not listening to any demagoguery of politicians as Senator Edwards 'statement that if anybody thinks that change will come from Washington politicians;they are dreaming.What is Senator Edward if not a Washington politician.Hasn't he spent some time in Washington also?