Nader Seeks Recount in New Hampshire
Nader will be holding a press conference at 1:00 PM Tomorrow
There is an online petition to congress to investigate the results of the 2004 Presidential Election:
and while you're at it, here's a site where you can vote to impeach Bush:
(Hey there is a bid to impeach Blair over "gross misconduct" in the US-led war in Iraq. Could a similar movement in the US be far behind?)
Gulf Daily News
Here is an update on the Ohio Presidential Election Numbers:
- Bush is ahead by 136,483 uncertified votes
- There are 155,000 uncounted provisional ballots
- There are 92,676 discarded ballots that were not counted
- There is an unknown number of overseas absentee ballots
- There were 92,000 more votes than voters recorded in Cuyahoga county
- There were 92,251 ballots counted in secrecy in Warren county, hidden behind the guise of the Homeland Security Act
- There are 3,989 votes that were invalidly cast for George W. Bush in a county with only 300 voters + many other cases being investigated
Here is a timeline of the voter certification and electoral process:
11/12/2004 - Absentee deadline; vote canvass begins;
12/1/2004 - certification expected; at this point a recount can be undertaken
12/7/2004 - Any disputes over choosing Electors must be resolved
12/13/2004 - the Electoral College meets to elect the president
Ralph Naders letter follows:
To The Secretary of State of New Hampshire:
The Nader-Camejo campaign requests a hand recount of the ballots in the presidential election in New Hampshire. Numerous voting rightsactivists have requested that we seek a recount of this vote.
We have received reports of irregularities in the vote reported on the AccuVote Diebold Machines in comparison to exit polls and trends in voting in New Hampshire. These irregularities favor President George W. Bush by 5% to 15% over what was expected. Problems in these electronic voting machines and optical scanners are being reported in machines in a variety of states.
We are requesting that the state undertake this recount or a statistically significant sample audit of these vote counts.
We would like to make sure every vote counts and is counted accurately.
Paperless Electronic Voting
A bedrock of democracy is making sure that every vote counts. The counting of votes needs to be transparent so people can trust that their vote is counted as they cast it. Paperless electronic voting on touch screen machines does not provide confidence to ensure votes are counted the way voters intend. The software on which votes are counted is protected as a corporate trade secret and the software is so complex that if malicious code was embedded no analysis could discover it. Further, because there is no voter verified paper record, it is not possible to audit the electronic vote for accuracy, nor is it possible to conduct an independent recount. This Primary Day six million voters will be voting on paperless electronic voting machines. This is a grotesquely designed, over-complicated expensive system fraught with the potential for mistakes and undetected fraud.
On July 23, 2003 the Johns Hopkins Information Security Institute reviewed the electronic voting system in Maryland and found that it had security far below even the most minimal security standards . . . . Johns Hopkins computer security experts concluded:
If we do not change the process of designing our voting systems, we will have no confidence that our election results will reflect the will of the electorate.
Computers are inherently subject to programming error, equipment malfunction, and malicious tampering. If we are to ensure fair and honest elections, and retain voter confidence in our democratic process, we need to ensure that there are no such questions. Therefore, it is crucial that any computerized voting system provide a voter-verifiable paper audit trail and that random audits of electronic votes be conducted on Election Day. Paperless electronic voting machines make it impossible to safeguard the integrity of our vote thereby threatening the very foundation of our democracy.
The seller of the machines, the Diebold Corporation, is a supplier of money to one of the major party candidates, George W. Bush. The CEO and top officers of Diebold are major contributors to the Bush campaign. This does not pass the smell test. Voters should report immediately any suspected malfunctions and deficiencies at voting precincts around the country to their Board of Elections. And voters should urge their legislators to require a voter verified paper ballot trail for random audits and independent recounts.