NH Recount update....

[berner59]

I thought this would have led to bigger & better news...it's disappointing...

>Recounts independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader requested in 11 voting precincts continued to show few changes from original results yesterday.

Ballot counters finished work in 10 of the 11 precincts and were due to finish the last, Salem, before noon today.

"It looks like a pretty accurate count here in New Hampshire," said Michael Richardson, Nader's representative.


http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041130/REPOSITORY/411300351/1001

[TimeToGo]

1. Shocked

Not ---- that is why NH was a stupid place to start.

[AP]

2. NH had wide variation between exit polls and actual votes.

So it made sense in that respect.

[berner59]

3. exit polls....

Had Kerry up by a lot...so that was the reason for the recount. Now this proves that the exit polls WERE really wrong?? Something still fishy...I hope.

[TimeToGo]

4. Well, yea

But, I really couldn't imagine there was much fraud in NH.

[Old and In the Way]

5. If there was fraud committed.................

wouldn't they have worked to make the evidence fit the results? Too much time and unknown post-security of the ballots to believe otherwise.

Much better to canvass the voters and validate/refute the results, independent of the ballots.

[Yupster]

6. That's why conspiracies can never be disproven

Any evidence against the conspiracy just shows that the conspiracy was even bigger than we first suspected.

[Old and In the Way]

7. Well, I say that because.

Kerry had a huge exit poll advantage and it ended up in a squeaker. The results went down to the wire....after Iowa, I think. And there aren't that many voters in NH. But there's a significant Republican machine there and they do have a Republican governor.

I don't trust Nader (we know his campaign was financed by the Republicans), so I wondered why he moved so quick on NH.....they may well have wanted to flip the state on challenge.