Hmm. John Kerry just wrote me a note — it was so personal it was practically in longhand (and, by the way, “longhand” is a good example of a word with a “gh” in it that is not pronounced as it is in “rough” and “bough”) — pledging to continue fighting, yada yada. Then there was this sentence:

Regardless of the outcome of this election, once all the votes are counted — and they will be counted — we will continue to challenge this administration.

What’s that intended to signal and/or who is it intended to appease?

Meanwhile, here’s an audio message from Kevin Zeese, Nader’s campaign spokesperson:

We’re seeking a recount in wards in New Hampshire where there have been mathematical anomalies…When we look at those numbers it turns out that most of those anomalies occurred in wards where the vote was counted on the Diebold AccuVote Machine, in fact 78% of those unusual votes were on those machines. This is the first audit in a Presidential Election of an electronic voting count system so it’s an historic moment. Either way it turns out it will be good for our democracy.

Of course, to judge the significance of that 78% figure we’d need to know what percentage to the precincts used the Diebold machines, but I’m sure they’ll get that all straightened out…

Categories: Uncategorized dw