>>>Did you see that he asked for a recount in New Hampshire after getting 2% of the vote? (ISIANMTU). I guess he thought he really got 3% of the vote.
>>
>>No, he wanted to make sure that the allegations of vote counting fraud that had been made were inaccurate -- especially since they involved Diebold machines. If Obama had asked for the recount, he would have looked like a sore loser, but Kucinich could do it without having to worry about accusations of self-interest.
>>
>>If I remember correctly, the recount showed that there was no wide-spread fraud, and that we could therefore trust the results of the election. Just think of the accusations that would have been thrown around had it been electronic-only, with no means to recount.
>
>I see. Thanks for the explanation. The news story I saw didn't mention that, just spun it as "guy with 2% of the vote asks for recount."

Here's a quote from an AP story earlier this month:

In a letter dated Thursday, Kucinich said he does not expect significant changes in his vote total, but wants assurance that "100 percent of the voters had 100 percent of their votes counted."

Kucinich alluded to online reports alleging disparities around the state between hand-counted ballots, which tended to favor Sen. Barack Obama, and machine-counted ones that tended to favor Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. He also noted the difference between pre-election polls, which indicated Obama would win, and Clinton's triumph by a 39 percent to 37 percent margin.

>
>Holy moley, you're in Bangor now? How long have you been there? I lived there for 10 years as a kid.

I moved back here at Thanksgiving '06 -- Seattle just wasn't working out for us. I previously lived in the Bangor area (Orono/Old Town/Bangor) from '92 to '97.

And I'm glad you're still here to argue. I haven't been on the UT lately, so I just found out. I've been fighting depression lately myself, but not quite to the degree you have. :-(