It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Source | OpEdNews | Recount - Is Dennis Kucinich walking into a trap?
"We have no control over the ballot chain of custody and we have learned the pain from the 2004 Nader recount, in which only 11 districts were counted, chosen by a highly questionable person, and then nothing showed up. Now all we hear is how the Nader recount validated the machines."
As Tobi says, "A candidate asking for a recount may well be a tool used to 'prove' everything was okay and then that candidate will be further discredited."
I'll go further than that. The only way a recount makes any sense at all in New Hampshire is AFTER an assessment is made of the chain of custody issues. If the chain of custody isn't intact the recount won't be worth a cup of warm spit.
Originally posted by Lokey13
Athough I love the thought of "fair" politics, what exactly is having a recount going to prove? Paul won't gain anything from it ...
Originally posted by ludaChris
I don't blame Dr. Paul for declining after that question about a lot of his believers and support base are "9/11 Truthers." I personally don't believe the 9/11 conspiracies but it's really neither here nor there in the debate, and he made that known with his response. It was a clear swipe at his character and his supporters. I took exception to the question and I'm not one of those supporters referenced. I've been trying to sway my family over to Paul, but to no avail, they have bitten into the information provided to them from the mainstream media hook, line, and sinker.
Originally posted by esdad71
This is an extreme waste of money to look into something that does not really mean anything ot begin with. The loss of manpower and money spent could go towards better education in this country or heatlcare or to secure our borders.
This is like having a review of a race finish in the Special Olympics..
Originally posted by pavlovsdog
Originally posted by kindred
What I find worrying is that as far as the British press is concerned, he doesn't exist. I've seen no mention of his name whatsoever in the British tabloids, which is bizarre considering how popular he supposedly is on the internet.
Even stranger still - he's not in the press here Stateside either. It's very odd that a candidate can raise so much money on the internet and yet receive almost no major news coverage.
Originally posted by forestlady
Yes, I like Kucinich, too. In fact, I really love him, I thinkhe has integrity, intelligence and courage. He's the best of all the candidates, IMO, but has the least amount of coverage, unfortunately. Our country could be restored to greatness if he were prez, but well, it's a longshot. Still, I'm not giving up on him.
Originally posted by Lokey13
There is no problem at all with fair politics, I'm just saying that in this case I don't think there will be a big difference after the recount. It's just gonna be a waste of money to give Obama another 1%. I won't even humor a proposal of Ron Paul over taking McCain after the recount, thats not only laughable but it's impossible. To recount votes and to have a 35% swing I don't think so.