Heads up: Research project on New Mexico for the next couple of days

[WilliamPitt]

This is not any five-alarm thing, at least not for tonight. But David Cobb, the guy who basically pushed Kerry and the Democrats into getting involved with their Ohio case, is also putting up a fight in New Mexico. I'd like to see Kerry get involved in that state as well, perhaps with another "Me, too" motion or two in order to strengthen the 'success on the merits' case...and perhaps more.

I'd like to put together a dossier on New Mexico voting problems for certain interested parties, if you don't mind the stupid evasion. If you have anything on this, please post it here, and many thanks.

Here is the latest Cobb release on New Mexico. From now on, any DUer who bashes the Green party will get lashed with a wet noodle until they pee their pants and promise never to do it again. We owe Cobb and his people. Big time. Badnarik, too.

===

NEWS RELEASE

For immediate release: December 27, 2004

NEW MEXICO RECOUNT GOES BACK TO COURT

Attorneys for Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb will
file a Notice of Appeal on Tuesday from a District Court decision which
rejected Cobb's request to start the New Mexico recount without paying the
entire cost of it in advance. Last week the New Mexico Supreme Court
declined to hear the case. Since the Supreme Court did not rule on the
merits of the case, it can be heard by the New Mexico Court of Appeals.

The Notice will be filed on behalf of Cobb and Libertarian
presidential candidate Michael Badnarik who are both seeking a recount of
New Mexico's presidential vote. The candidates paid the state a deposit
of over $100,000, and say that New Mexico law does not require that the
entire amount of the recount be paid in advance.

"We believe the law is on our side and look forward to a full
recount of the presidential vote. There are still many unanswered
questions about provisional ballots, missing votes and the integrity of
voting machines which don't produce a paper trail. The people of New
Mexico deserve to know that their votes will be counted fairly and
accurately," said Cobb.

On Tuesday, Cobb and Badnarik's attorneys will also be notifying
the New Mexico Secretary of State, the Attorney General and the Clerks for
all of New Mexico's 33 counties, that the Notice of Appeal prevents them
from "opening and clearing" voting machines throughout the state.

"Although, generally, voting machines can be cleared 30 days
after the official certification of the vote, New Mexico law is clear that
this can't happen when a recount has been initiated. The candidates have
paid the deposit for the recount and we expect it to go forward, so any
adjustment to the machines would be clearly inappropriate until the
recount has been concluded," said Lowell Finley, one of the attorneys
representing the candidates.

For more information about the Cobb-LaMarche campaign and its
recount efforts in New Mexico and Ohio, see http://www.votecobb.org.

[delphine]

1. Gee, I hear someone who might be interested in the outcome of this

has a ton of money specifically for this type of thing.

Let me think a minute to see if I can remember his name ...

:mad:

Just when I'm feeling a bit better . . . Why should Cobb, et al, have to beg us for $$ when there is a fund set up for this purpose that is flush with money.

[WilliamPitt]

2. Aaaaaaand..

Dossier.

Yeah, it should have happened sooner, but a lot of this evidence hasn't been around for more than a week or two, in any sort of concrete form. The stuff takes time. If Cobb and Badnarik could have filed on November 3rd, the would have. They had to wait for the evidence, too.

[WilliamPitt]

3. Addition

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x202218

[Bill Bored]

4. Here's one thread

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=168x328>

[WilliamPitt]

5. Thanks

[Bill Bored]

7. Here's another. The 1st post is a dupe, but more in the discussion. n/t

[troubleinwinter]

6. Wow. Very good news that they are going for it.

[Terre]

8. Here's a site with a few stories

http://vote2004.eriposte.com/swingstates/newmexico.htm

[rhite5]

9. Native American vote, New Mexico demographics

From conversations with a Native American living on tribal land in the Northwestern part of New Mexico, I've learned the following:

She knew of no native american who would vote for Bush. Many, however, have traditionally not voted at all in the past, believing (with plenty of evidence) their vote would mean little. This year many became interested in Kucinich and the Peace platform, which they strongly relate to philosophically. Tribal families live at a poverty level and young adults join the military in hopes of escaping the poverty. They have been hit with heavy casualties in the Iraq War, physical and psychological. Whether this translated into family tribal votes for Kerry is uncertain, because he was not anti-war.

At any rate, the tribal areas of New Mexico need to be looked at. The population is sizable. If they voted, the votes would not have gone to Bush.

The other sizable demographic in New Mexico is hispanic, living in smaller towns near the southern border. If they voted, their support would have gone to Kerry.

[Helga Scow Stern]

10. Here are some threads:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2864455

On youth vote in NM:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=197930

NM statistics--has anyone analyzed?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=194057

Pattern of vote machine fraud documented in Ohio, New Mexico,Florida
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=179169

NM Worst at Counting Votes:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=187265

Urgent request for reports of NM voting irregularities:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=184876

[L. Coyote]

11. This Phantom Votes article draft from Warren Stewart today....

Distributed with permission:

Impossible Phantom Votes in New Mexico
by Warren Stewart

"That can't be what they really call them!" I exclaimed in amusement. But Lowell Finley, legal counsel for the Green/Libertarian recount effort in New Mexico, assured me that 'phantom vote' was indeed the common legal term for the puzzling phenomenon I had uncovered in looking at the state's canvass report. A phantom vote occurs when the number of votes recorded exceeds the number of ballots cast. Mathematically, phantom votes are merely the inverse of undervotes. Undervotes, which show up when there are less votes than ballots cast, can be accounted for more or less persuasively in one way or another but I have yet to come up with any acceptable explanation for phantoms. Much less, 2,087 of them statewide in New Mexico, just about one third of the margin of victory that determined the selection of that state's presidential electors.

In a recent Albuquerque Journal article New Mexico Secretary of State and Canvassing Board member Rebecca Vigil-Giron is quoted as saying that phantom votes are not possible. She stressed that independent auditors had looked at the state's final canvass report and assured us that "they didn't find any irregularities like that." However, an examination of the canvass reports available at her website (http://www.sos.state.nm.us/Election/cntyindx04.html) shows that those auditors apparently missed quite a few. For example, Dona Ana County's Precinct 106, where107 absentee ballots somehow reported 325 presidential votes. Or Bernalillo Precinct 558 where in early voting the 178 ballots cast resulted in 319 presidential votes – 141 phantoms. In fact, phantom votes were reported in 15 of the 33 counties.

Phantoms are not new to New Mexico. In the 1996 canvass report we find 998 phantom votes in Chaves County - an astonishing rate of 5.57%. In 2000 in Dona Ana County, N.M. 5,509 absentee ballots somehow resulted in 6,456 votes. When Denise Lamb at the Secretary of State's office was asked to explain the 947 phantom votes, she blamed "administrative lapses." But wait a minute - no one would accept that sort of "lapse" on a monthly bank statement or a sales receipt from the 7-11. Why would anyone accept it in this, "the most important election of our lives" in which "every vote will count and every vote will be counted"?

The presence of such impossible votes is bad enough, but then there's the insidious effect they have on undervote reporting. When calculating undervotes at the statewide level, each phantom vote that might appear at the precinct level cancels out an undervote and both of them disappear in the accumulated totals. The pesky nature of phantoms can be observed even more clearly by separating the precinct totals into early vote, election day and absentees voting types. For example, in Santa Fe County Precinct 43 there were10 phantom votes in early voting, and 25 undervotes on election day while absentee ballots produced two more undervotes. However, in the precinct totals these 27 undervotes and 10 phantom votes resolve into 17 undervotes, and the report shows no indication whatsoever of the phantom votes.

A recent article (http://www.courierpress.com/ecp/news/article/0,1626,ECP_734_
3425406,00.html) pointed out that New Mexico had the dubious honor of leading the nation in undervoting with a statewide rate of 2.45%. Of course, that figure was determined by simply taking the difference between the statewide totals of ballots cast and presidential votes. The 2,087 phantom votes 'disappeared' and hid an equal number of undervotes at the same time. Surely New Mexico would have left the other states in the dust if they had calculated the phantoms right. But then how many phantoms do you suppose there are lurking in the canvass reports of the other 49 states?

It seems that such questions are of little concern to Secretary of State Vigil-Giron who recently commented that "We don't spend a lot of time on undervote issues, I'm just speculating that some voters are just not concerned with the presidential race." Whether or not you find it easy to believe that more than 1 voter in every 20 decided not to vote for president this November, it hardly helps to know that, in the same election, over 2,000 votes somehow managed to be counted without a ballot being cast.

Report prepared by Ellen Theisen and Warren Stewart in support of the Green/Libertarian New Mexico recount effort along with a comprehensive database on the 2004 New Mexico election.

This chart does not include the phantom votes. However, it does illustrate the problem.

[Helga Scow Stern]

12. Threads on phantom votes

by Warren:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=194057

by carolab:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=195082

[emlev]

22. And an apparent loophole in "Count Every Vote"

Nobody specified how many times any single vote would be counted!

Geez, how specific do we have to be?

[dzika]

13. Information on Cobb's side with Today's date...

December 28, 2008

New Mexico Update

The New Mexico Supreme Court declined to hear our petition for a writ of mandamus, upholding a State Canvassing Board decision that Cobb and Libertarian Michael Badnarik pay the full cost of the New Mexico recount in advance (estimated by the Board at $1.4 million). That decision was contrary to New Mexico law, because there is no legal requirement that campaigns pay the full cost in advance, nor any way to accurately estimate the cost of the recount before it is completed. press release commentary: Mock the Vote more updates

On December 16, the Cobb-LaMarche legal team filed a Verified Petition for Mandamus; Verified Petition for Superintending Control or Prohibition; and Request for Immediate Hearing with the New Mexico Supreme Court. The Petition and http://votecobb.com/lib/downloads/references/2004-12-16_nm_supplement.pdf">Supplement detail the reasons why the New Mexico recount should proceed. A hearing is expected today (Monday).

"There's tremendous grassroots support for the recount and for verifying the accuracy of our voting system. We have 800 volunteers who are ready to jump in and monitor the recount process," said Rick Lass, the New Mexico recount coordinator for the Cobb-LaMarche campaign. more

http://votecobb.com/recount/daily_update/

[Helga Scow Stern]

14. Please check your PM's. n/t

[zimba]

15. No help, but did find this interesting article from

the 2000 election. In New Mexico the repubs were demanding that the votes in two counties be impounded because of possible conflicts with getting a honest count. The specific that was given was,

"In Valencia county for example, the county clerk, who oversees the ballot counting, was running against the state representative for his seat, a state GOP official said."

Funny how in 2004 in Ohio, being both in charge of the state election and the re-election campaign arent considered grounds for concern. What a bunch of clowns.

Plus the article has a great picture of Bush doing his Alfred E Neuman impersination.

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/10/election.president/

[WilliamPitt]

16. .

[keepthemhonest]

17. Kerry

should join in that lawsuit as well and also give them some money toward it. Supposedly he gave some money to the Washington recount(I think) why not new Mexico.

Did you want us to write Kerry? It seems like he should already know to do these things.

[indigoblue]

18. Here is another post

Bingo! "Prima Facie" for New Mexico Part 2 - MORE EVIDENCES!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=96041

[rdmccur]

19. This may be a dup

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/102304D.shtml

[babylonsister]

20. Kickin'

[rdmccur]

21. I voted (early) in NM

and also had a problem, not with the presidential vote (as far as I know anyway) but with the US congress seat with Wilson (R) vs Romero (D). I touched the screen for Romero, but Wilson's name came up checked. I finally was able to correct this. Later I signed an affadavit with the Democratic Party in NM about this incident. Someone should contact the attorneys for the Democratic Party that were working in NM during the election regarding these kind of reported incidents.

[berniew1]

33. Send this documentation of machine fraud & suppression to your Congressmen

and Senators
Documentation of systematic touchscreen vote machine fraud, other systematic fraud(phantom votes/vote stuffing), and suppression of minority voters(Indians and poor hispanics) in New Mexico
http://wwww.flcv.com/fraudpat.html

[emlev]

23. Warren Stewart says you can download "complete data file" here

http://www.votersunite.org/info/newmexicophantomvotes.asp

[emlev]

24. self-delete (info available elsewhere)

[Vidar]

25. Go, go Cobb! Thanks Will.

[bunny planet]

26. Isn't there only a five thousand vote diff in NMexico, in which case

Kerry has a much better chance of getting close or overturning that state doesn't he. Then if that happened wouldn't it have made it easier to look into other states?

[Ronbrynaert]

27. 50 States Mislead Their Voters: New Mexico

http://whyareweback.blogspot.com/2004/11/recount-in-new-mexico.html

In 2000, Vice President Al Gore won New Mexico by just 366 votes; it took nearly a month for New Mexico to finish counting the votes. In 2004, the wait wasn't quite as long; last week the state's official tally showed Bush beating Senator John Kerry by 5,988 votes. The delays are largely due to the large number of provisional ballots cast, and the manner in which they were counted (or not).

The unofficial (until they are audited) general election results listed on the Secretary of State's website (Sos.NM) show that 776,010 people voted in the election. Bush received 376,958 votes; Kerry got 370,930; and the third party candidates - Cobb, Peroutka, Badnarik and Nader - received a total of 8416 votes). What happened to the other 19,706 votes?

In 1996, 556,074 voters turned out for the presidential election (Clinton/Gore was declared the winner). In 2000, that number improved to 598,605. In 2004, the number skyrocketed to 756,304. Over four years that computes to an increase of just over 26%. Over eight years the increase is an astounding 36%.

On November 6, Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron announced that there were 1,051,536 registered voters in the state (New Mexico's total population stands at 1,515,069), but that didn't include many newly registered voters whose registration forms weren't processed yet. "Among all New Mexico registered voters — including the old and new registrants — 51 percent are Democrats. Thirty-two percent are Republicans, and 14 percent chose no party." (ABQJournal.com).

As Greg Palast wrote in his November 4th article (Kerry Won), Republican elections officials were in control of areas that heavily populated by Hispanics and Native Americans: "Chaves County, in the "Little Texas" area of New Mexico, has a 44 percent Hispanic population, plus African Americans and Native Americans, yet George Bush "won" there 68 percent to 31 percent. I spoke with Chaves' Republican county clerk before the election, and he told me that this huge spoilage rate among Hispanics simply indicated that such people simply can't make up their minds on the choice of candidate for president."

Some conservative bloggers have criticized Mr. Palast for ignoring the fact that Bush also won by a wide margin in 2000. But, of course, that election should contain an asterisk, as well. So far, I haven't been able to find any Chaves County results for any prior elections in order to compare, but I'm still searching (I've read elsewhere that Bush won by a little bit over 5,000 votes over Dukakis in 1988, but I can't confirm that figure). Also, to be fair, Mr. Palast neglected to mention that Roswell in Chaves County is the heart of New Mexico oil country and that "royalties on oil production in Chaves County generate about $500 million in annual revenue for the State of New Mexico." (Roswell-online.com).

George Bush received 11,376 votes to Al Gore's 6,337 in the 2000 election (18,143 including the third party candidates). (Roswell-usa.com). In 2004 Chaves County, New Mexico recorded 14773 votes for Bush (68.1%)and 6726 votes for Kerry (31.0%) (including the third party candidates). (SOS.NM). This amounts to a vote increase of 19.6% for 2004. This is below the state rate of 26%, but the margin of victory of Bush over Gore compared to Bush over Kerry rose four percentage points, which is considerably more than it did for the entire state (.8%).

Four months ago, Chaves County Clerk David Kunko, a Republican, decided that he didn't agree with the Secretary of State's interpretation of a 2003 state law that requires some first-time voters to show identification at the polls: "If (a voter registration) form is not submitted in person by the applicant and the applicant is registering for the first time in New Mexico, the applicant must submit with the form a copy of a current and valid photo identification, utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck or other government document that shows the name and address of the applicant; and if the applicant does not submit the required identification, he will be required to do so when he votes in person or absentee." (ABQtrib.com).

While Mr. Kunko interpreted "in person" as meaning directly to the county clerk's office, Secretary of State Vigil-Giron argued that it meant anyone not registering by mail, including those who register in front of a person at a DMV, welfare office or mall. Initially, a Democratic judge in Bernalillo County ruled against Mr. Kunko's broad interpretation, but a couple of Republican judges in Chaves and Otero County took his side. Finally, the New Mexico Supreme Court concurred with the Secretary of State's opinion in a 4-1 decision - just five days before the start of absentee ballot voting - ruling that the legislature "intended to require identification only for first-time registrants who register by mail." (WashingtonTimes).

On September 23rd of 2003, a special election took place in New Mexico that involved a proposed constitutional amendment to boost the annual distribution from the Permanent School Fund to five percent to help fund education reform in public schools. The next day, the initial election results showed that it was defeated by only 23 votes. But there were problems with the count: In Chaves County, officials added the results of more than 400 votes from a voting machine used to read absentee ballots Wednesday morning after discovering they had left out those results from a vote tally Tuesday. Chaves County Clerk Dave Kunko described the mistake as a "human error." (ABQjournal). The amendment ended up passing by 195 votes; Chaves County recorded 1925 votes for it and 4084 against. (Sos.state.nm.us).


Out of 12,000 provisional and in-lieu-of paper ballots cast in Bernalillo County, nearly half were rejected; most because the prospective voter wasn't registered to vote anywhere in the county, but hundreds of provisional ballots were rejected due to minor discrepancies: "A Democratic attorney and an election volunteer for the party said workers disqualified hundreds of provisional ballots cast in Bernalillo County because of names that had a missing middle initial or some other minor discrepancy. They urged commissioners to reconsider the rejection of those ballots, if they could. The commissioners, however, said they didn't have authority to question the qualification of provisional ballots. They voted 3-0 in favor of certifying the Nov. 2 election results, which were sent to the Secretary of State's Office." (ABQJournal.com).

Bernalillo Country Clerk Mary Herrera claimed that in one batch of provisional ballots all of the disqualified ballots were Democrat and those that qualified were Republican. "The main reason for disqualifying them, she said, was because an affidavit testifying to the voter's identity, which is supposed to be signed by a presiding judge, was not in the outer of two envelopes that are supposed to be turned in to election workers. That rule was prescribed by New Mexico Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron." (ABQtrib.com).

Two months before the election, Republican U.S. Attorney David Iglesias formed a task force — involving the criminal division of the U.S. Justice Department, the FBI, the New Mexico Department of Public Safety and the secretary of state's office — to investigate and prosecute suspected cases of election fraud (ABQpubco.com). "The New Mexico probe was launched in part at the request of Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White, who chairs the county's Bush-Cheney campaign." (Washington Post). "When they brought me on, it was plain and simple: They said, `We need to win Bernalillo County,'" said Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White, who is helping coordinate Bush's campaign here. (ABQtrib.com). In April 2004, Sheriff White was added to the National Bush-Cheney '04 First Responders Leadership Team. "The Bush-Cheney '04 National First Responders Leadership Team will help build a nationwide network of grassroots support for the President and help communicate his commitment to homeland security and his record of achievement for America's first responders." (Forrelease.com).

Sheriff White also attended the 2004 Republican National Convention as a GOP delegate. While in New York City, the delegates took in a Broadway show and a tour of the Fox News studios (FreeNewMexican.com). Sheriff White also received the honor of being one of the 10 delegates selected to officially inform President Bush of his selection as the official Republican nominee for President. (FreeNewMexican.com).

In July of 2004, Indian Health Service hospitals and clinics in New Mexico were barred from registering new voters. Ronald C. Wood, executive officer of the federal program's regional Navajo office, advised his hospital and clinic directors in an e-mail: "There have been recent questions about whether we can do nonpartisan voter registration drives in our IHS facilities during non- duty hours. The guidance from HQs staff is that we should not allow voter registration in our facilities or on federal property." The Washington Post's Jo Becker reported that "everal of those involved in the registration effort questioned what they saw as a double standard, given that the federal government encourages registration on military bases, where voters traditionally have favored Republicans." (IndyMediaTV).

In Sandoval County, Santo Domingo Pueblo Governor Sisto Quintana shut the polls a half-hour after they opened on Election Day, in order to observe All Souls Day, before re-opening them at 5 p.m. "The pueblo was closed for the feast and no outsiders were allowed on the pueblo," Quintana said. "I don't have to explain any more. Maybe next time, they should pick another site so it doesn't interfere." Three election observers from the U.S. Department of Justice were also asked to leave. (ABQjournal.com).

Posted by: rab / 11/30/2004 05:45:29 AM

[Machiavelli05]

28. Why are IA VA and NV being ignored?

Plus states that went Blue, but barely... like PA, WI and MN?

[DemOperative]

29. IA especially

We have people on the ground there that went to bed with polling data showing Kerry ahead by a large margin; they woke up in the morning to a Buah narrow victory still being counted out. "WTF" was essentially the message they left on my machine.

[m.standridge]

40. Well, Cobb was unable to pay for a NV recount

which would be over $1 million.
Where's that ketchup money?
I went to the Iowa DU Site and tried to see if anyone there was looking at anything. There was a very old post from Ida Briggs, but the newer posts in response to mine about any possible discrepancies there (I didn't think it was that weird--they had machine breakdowns that greatly slowed down the vote count, if you recall), were quite condescending in tone and suggested that "there are odds and ends in every election."

In NV's DU site, there's virtually nothing about any activity beyond what Cobb was trying to do. One NV judge ruled against one of the requests that a group of disenfranchised voters be allowed to vote, on the grounds it wouldn't turn around the state. How the hell would he know?

Everyone seems to be taking this lying down in IA and NV. Maybe they just feel they have nothing to work with.

I've tried to get some action in AR, the only southern state besides FL where Kerry led Bush at times in pre-election polls, where the thing tightened up tremendously on election day, after Clinton had been campaigning in AR for about 72 hours, and where SurveyUSA poll graphics showed Kerry rising rapidly from 46.4% and Bush dropping some from 50.6%. On election day, our local CBS TV affiliate said polls where showing a dead heat, 48%-48%.

Our (Dem.) SOS was late certifying and getting it all tabulated due to errors of up to 57,000 votes in just two counties. I went to the Site on Dec. 3, they were still uploading updated numbers.
We had a power failure in LR on election day, shutting down two large polling places and possibly putting key computers offline. I've tried to get input from anyone here about suspicions of computer tampering by private firms who farmed out the election computers, but the media is silent. Did they have a techie out who "fixed" the computers after the power failure? That's an interesting angle on Colorado, too, where they had a power failure and computer shut-down, too.

These states have the potential to turn the election around in the Electoral College, too. Iowa plus Nevada plus Arkansas would give Kerry 270 Electoral votes, even w/o Ohio or Florida.
New Mexico plus Nevada plus Colorado would give Kerry 252 + 19 = 271 Electoral votes.

[Lostnote03]

30. Thanks Will....It Is Sad However,

......Those that are curious now, and most assuredly in a more influential position to effect a political Teutonic shift have to be reassured that they are actually seeing what is before them.....I refuse to believe that they are as unaware as your topic indicates.....Of course it would not be the first time that I have been wrong....Best Wishes and Have A Great New Year

[berniew1]

31. Here's documentation of widespread vote machine fraud & suppression in N.M

This web page has links that have documentation of touchscreen vote machine fraud, widespread systematic suppression of minorities(Indians and poor hispanics), and other vote machine fraud(phantom votes) in New Mexico.
http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html

[bleever]

32. I was just about to PM you to make sure you got in on this.

:thumbsup:

And Happy New Year!

:toast:

[Amaryllis]

34. kick

[Amaryllis]

35. See here on NM volunteer's notes; concern w. undervotes.

http://www.votewatch.us/Members/ewinter/electionexperience.2004-11-10.7081082625/view?searchterm=None
from election.solarbus.org in NM section

[Mister Ed]

36. I just sent them my weekly donation to help keep this moving forward

It's not much, but I send what I can each week to Green Recount Effort and to others who are fighting on the front lines. That's one of the best ways for the rest of us to "Support Our Troops!"

[Amaryllis]

37. Lots of NM stuff on these links

http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html
Keep scrolling down; there are a number of NM links

[Amaryllis]

38. Will, question for you: Anyone talking about contesting FL or NM electors?

Other than activists, I mean? Conyers has focused on OH but he did have some FL people there the first day of the forum. Any chance of getting other states contested, as far as you know?

[Amaryllis]

39. Another NM recount thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x224796

New Mexico recount information