Kos called us fraudsters. He and all you other assholes who are making fun of those of us who want a recount in NH constantly insult us. You tell us that if we want to pay for it, fine, we can have a recount. WELL WE'RE PAYING FOR IT!
So shut. The fuck. Up.
Most of us aren't fraudsters. MOST of us haven't even mentioned fraud or conspiracy. Dennis Kucinich did not mention fraud or conspiracy! I've donated $100 directly to Dennis Kucinich, but I earmarked it for this recount cost. Now, there is a way to contribute directly to the recount.
HERE
I get paid on Tuesday and I'll then donate another $100 via ActBlue. I'm not a Dennis Kucinich for President supporter but I fully support him in this recount effort.
There are many reasons to be in favor of a hand recount in New Hampshire and only a very few of them have to do with fraud or conspiracy. Personally, I'm interested in the hand recount procedure itself, how it is performed and who is involved. Here's a question I want answered and I want it answered now, in NH, rather than waiting for a problem in the general election:
Should the company(s) who manufacture(s) the optical scan computerized counting machines have anything to do with the hand recount?
In New Hampshire, are they trying to be involved with it? We're fixing to find out. That alone is worth my contribution, BECAUSE I SAY IT IS! It's my money and you can take your superior opinion about what I do with my money and shove it right up your ass.
I've actually seen comments that we don't need a hand recount in NH because they don't use touchscreens and they do have paper ballots! What good are paper ballots if you never count them? YOU MAINSTREAM ELITIST MISINFORMED ASSHOLES! I've also seen comments that say we don't need hand recounts because an automatic sampled hand-audit of randomly selected machines' ballots would do the same thing. Guess what? They didn't do those audits in New Hampshire. They have no procedure for doing them. Maybe they will, NEXT TIME, because some of us have made it an issue BY PAYING FOR THIS RECOUNT.
I'm interested in getting all of this settled now. Why? Because in many states, these same misconceptions, misconceptions regarding paper ballots that YOU are perpetuating (you thickheaded, mob-joining assholes) have made paper ballots exactly as useless as the touchscreens they replaced. For example, my state. Wyoming.
In Wyoming, we had a task force made up of all our county clerks. They decided that Wyoming would go with all paper ballots and all those paper ballots would be counted by optical scan machines manufactured by ES&S. Problem solved. No more discussion allowed -- shut up -- we're fine now -- stop making trouble -- you're a crackpot. One problem: no handcounts. None. ALL recounts in Wyoming are done by feeding the ballots back through the same machines that counted them in the first place. But what if I want to PAY for a handcount? Can't do it. I can pay to have the ballots run back through the machines, but I cannot pay to have them handcounted. Why? According to my own county clerk, she checks the accuracy of the ES&S machines before the election and certifies them accurate... so there's absolutely NO NEED for a handcount. There's no procedure for a handcount. Wyoming doesn't know how to DO a handcount.
If you want a handcount in Wyoming you have one option and one option only: take the county and the state to court. But you'll not only be taking the county and the state to court, you'll be taking ES&S to court too. ES&S will be a friend of the court on the side of the state AGAINST handcounts. Wyoming isn't the only state like this and I would appreciate rational commenters to check their own states' rules regarding recounts. I'm in favor of the New Hampshire Primary Recount because there's a chance even Wyoming county clerks will be able to see why they handcounted.
Some of you might find this diary insulting. How does that feel? Tell me all about it. Assholes.