 |
|
Add to My Group
|
January 10, 2008 at 07:20:02
How John Edwards Can (Still) Win the New Hampshire Primary by Emily Levy Page 1 of 1 page(s) 
|
|
|
I want to state up front that a John Edwards victory is not my goal. What I strive for is a true democracy in this country with fair, transparent, and accurate elections. Because the New Hampshire primary--with approximately 60% of its precincts counted by the same Diebold optical scanners that were shown to be hackable in Florida--was not transparent, we cannot know if it was fair or accurate. As my colleague Brad Friedman reported on New Hampshire's election night, we have reason to question the fairness and accuracy of the NH primary: polls taken just prior to the election looked to be extremely accurate everywhere but for the Clinton and Obama percentages in the Democratic presidential primary If Democrats intend for one of their own to be sworn in as President on January 20, 2009, one thing is certain: they need a candidate who will pursue swift and thorough investigation of election irregularities. Barack Obama pulled a 'John Kerry' Tuesday night, conceding first place to Hillary Clinton before the balloons began their descent from the ceiling. Democrats need their candidates to demand a swift and thorough investigation of the New Hampshire primary election. And John Edwards is in the best position to begin the call. Clinton won't do it (I predict, but I'm happy to be proven wrong) because she's the announced winner. Obama won't do it (same parenthetical comment) for fear of being called a "sore loser." While I believe that Kucinich truly understands the issues and supports the goals of the election integrity movement, given his recent support of Obama in Iowa, I think a Kucinich call for an investigation would be seen by many as a pro-Obama move, not a pro-democracy move. Richardson, having gotten his state of New Mexico to switch from DRE (often called touch-screen) technology to optical scanners that count paper ballots, is unlikely to want to point out the problems with that technology. Late word is that Richardson will withdraw from the race on Thursday. And Gravel simply doesn't have a loud enough voice. As Kerry's running mate in the 2004 election, Edwards knows the importance of following up on questionable election results. Edwards is believed to have urged Kerry not to concede in 2004. Now he doesn't need Kerry's or anyone else's permission to go after full accountability. He need not even question his announced third place finish in New Hampshire. By demanding an investigation of the New Hampshire Democratic primary results, Edwards can show the leadership Democratic voters want to see on an issue that must secretly eat away at every one of the candidates: What would I do if I get the nomination and the election is stolen from me? 
As soon as one Democratic candidate demands an investigation, it will become essential for the others to join in. No Democratic presidential candidate can afford the appearance of indifference to questions about the veracity of election results. If Edwards stands alone, he will win the trust of voters throughout the nation. If his colleagues join him, it'll be a win for the pursuit of integrity of U.S. elections. Without a nominee willing to take bold action for democracy, the Democrats stand little chance of seeing one of their own in the White House next year.
While demanding an investigation into Tuesday's irregularities may not garner him a larger share of New Hampshire's delegates, this courageous action could bring John Edwards and the nation significantly greater dividends.
Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Democratic Candidates: Demand Election Accountability In NH!
Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers
http://www.velvetrevolution.us/electionstrikeforce
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
| 6 comments |
|
A Pro-Obama Move?
Kucinich's endorsement was for Iowa only. He would probably endorse Ron Paul before he settled for Obama, Edwards, or Clinton. The MSM would like people to believe he wants all Kucinich supporters to vote Obama. But his supporters haven't given up. A win in Michigan is a definite possibility. by Kevin Gosztola (302 articles, 146 quicklinks, 81 diaries, 1082 comments [77 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:31:15 AM  (0+)
|
|
Reply: A win in Michigan
could give Kucinich a leg up, but Obama and perhaps Edwards are not on the ballot there due to the party's sanctions for moving up their primary election date. Clinton may also be a no show, I'm not sure. The next phrase in this problematic equation is whether or not the Democratic party will seat the Michigan delegation at the convention. They have said they would not, but it is not a party that has distinguished itself with shows of resolve of late. by John Sanchez Jr. (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 25 diaries, 1791 comments [148 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 5:16:12 PM (0+)
|
|
Speak up, John!
I agree it would be brilliant strategy for Edwards to ask some tough questions: by Dale Axelrod (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:50:17 AM (0+)
|
|
Kevin #1, I was talking about *perception*
fueled by media spin. I agree with you that Kucinich pursuing investigation of the NH primary wouldn't be a pro-Obama move. My point was that it would like be *seen* that way so close on the heels of his Iowa-only Obama statement. I'm in agreement with you. by Emily Levy (7 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 16 comments) on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 1:38:22 PM (0+)
|
|
Oprah can effect change
I'm starting to feel sorry for Barack Obama, even though I panned him just the other day (and plugged Dennis Kucinich). That was before the NH primary. If I had to write a headline for right now, it would say-- "Obama Sucker Punched In NH; No Film At 11." I still suspect that he's a willing tool of the status quo, but if "the fix is in" for Hillary, then he is being scripted out of the White House. And further, I feel that all the votes should be counted, accurately. This article above notes correctly that Hillary is unlikely to complain, and likely even Obama himself. (He dodges questions of impeachment. He's trying -- too hard, I'd say -- to be mainstream, establishment friendly, and compatible with the status quo. So, he's the type to roll with establishment bs. 'Why have a fight with evil, when you can turn a blind eye and dodge the fight?') But, I strongly believe that the man is due his full count of votes. (Cardinal principle #7--in my politics of practical idealism--says "Political democracy requires actual choice, with actual votes, actually counted.") So, I begin to feel sorry for him due to New Hampshire's recent election fraud. In fact, if this gets out, then there is a ton of sympathy that will come his way and he is more likely to win the White House if America has a backlash against the rigged system of the evil puppet masters. Contesting the results would be the honorable thing to do for John Edwards, but I don't have that much confidence in him. Similar to Obama, Edwards talks a good game. But I have a long memory for those Senators (including Edwards) who voted for PNTR, the free trade deal with Communist China. What's he doing now, campaigning to reverse his own work? It seems to me more likely that Oprah Winfrey will be the voice who weighs in about the "sucker punch" in New Hampshire. Let's face it, she has a moral compass, while politicians are deathly fearful to rock the boat. (And the mainstream news media is comprised of cowards who can't reach the obvious conclusion--if they value integrity--that they should be resigning from the MSM.) Okay, so there's my two cents. I would like to expect great things, but I can't expect it of Washington politicians. Oprah is far more likely to be a change agent and to catalyze a recount. by John Kusumi (53 articles, 0 quicklinks, 32 diaries, 107 comments [8 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Jan 10, 2008 at 9:38:25 PM (0+)
|
|
Edwards won't do it ...
... they'd cancel his membership in the Bilderberg Group by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Friday, Jan 11, 2008 at 12:45:24 AM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
