“I want to make it clear what the goal is in this recount.  We’re not here trying to overturn the election.  We’re doing basic democracy activism.  We’re trying to protect our democracy.  This is more like an audit of the vote.  We’re seeking a recount in wards in New Hampshire where there have been mathematical anomalies, where people expected more votes for Kerry than Bush, and Bush got anywhere from 5 to 15% more votes than expected.  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.  If it turns out that there was no problem, it will show that these machines were reliable in this race, it will show that there’s a positive role for audits and it will make the Democrats question further why they keep losing support-and I think there’s good reason they’re losing support.  If it turns out there’s a problem, well then we have a major national story involving electronic voting and raising questions that really need to be evaluated, as more and more of the country goes to electronic vote count.”

I guess he’s the only candidate that really cared about democracy. Oh, and all you Democrats that bashed Nader for running should send him an email with an apology…

—–