Skip to comments.Judge Denies 3rd Party Recount Request
Posted on 11/27/2004 12:04:10 AM PST by West Coast Conservative
A federal judge denied a request by third-party presidential candidates who want to force a "recount" of Ohio ballots even before the official count is finished.
US District Judge James G. Carr in Toledo ruled that the candidates have a right under Ohio law to a recount. But Carr says they have not shown "that they will be harmed irreparably if the recount is not completed by the time Ohio's electors to the Electoral College must be certified."
The judge says two third-party candidates seeking the recount can't credibly claim that they garnered enough votes to have Ohio's presidential electors cast their electoral votes for them.
The lawsuit had asked Carr to issue a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction requiring the state to immediately recount the November second voting results.
puts Kerry into a touchy spot. Does he attempt to get a recount and look like a horse's behind for doing that after conceeding or does he attempt to weather the rath of his side for not attempting to get to the bottom of the "fraud"......
Should prove interesting....
Should prove interesting....
Yeah, it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. A good number of his die-hard, rank-and-file "supporters" will be furious with him if he doesn't come out swinging, and they swear they won't support him if he does try to run again. Yet, if he keeps that in mind and does make a request, he'd be doing so knowing there's no possible way which he can prevail, and ends up looking like a total a$$, a sore loserman, in which case will be distasteful to the party hierarchy and general public.
This is so simple. The liberterian and green parties have to show that Ohio "could" have gone to "their" candidate, which everyone knows is simply ABSURD!
I was just over reading at the yahoo newsgroups, and the liberals are completely unhinged. They actually believe all the tripe they're spouting, and have a tone of smug desperation that this is going to be bigger than Watergate, Kerry will take OH and Bush is going back home in January. Wonder how long their hope will last until--when the electors cast their vote? . . . When Congress counts the votes and accepts them? . . . When W is sworn in? Nah, even when all that happens, I'm sure, no, I know they think this whole "vote fraud scandal" will erupt and force Bush out of office he he he.
maybe the Democrats will continue to implode. I dont see Kerry challenging really.
Besides, the way Hillary is polling these days, he has a 50-50 chance at being the nominee again.....
HI there. When I was at DU yesterday, ok I admit it again, they were upset with Kerry because his campaign said they were joining the recount demand then recanted and said they are interested in the recount. Flip Flop!! As I posted on another thread, they are unhinged! haha
Their hope for a recount will last until the 'impeachment of Bush' story gains ground. Then they'll hang their hats on impeachment.
The Governor is Repub., the Legislature is Repub., the Court is 7-2 Repub., and the Chief Justice is Repub.
Kerry's gonna keep his 17 million bucks and run. I don't think the Dems will run him again for any reason. He lost because he's tainted....we still don't know about his initial less than honorable discharge. There's lots that hasn't been seen and the Dems know that.
They need to go back to the Truman Dem Party, but they'll never do.
I live only 7 miles from the Ohio line. I wish some of their politics would move North and invade us in Michigan. We're taken over by Detroit and all their fraud there. If it wasn't for the UAW brow beating the voters on election day, oh if only...There were lawsuits filed against them I know but don't know what happened with them.
I thought you were leaving Iraq a month or so ago...did your duty extended?
that was just for my mid (7/8th) tour break....I always had to come back for about 7 weeks or so at the other end of that....
its almost over....
Is this the same article that was posted on 11.23.04? Or is it new information? http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1287115/posts
This 'story' has been posted a gazillion times and all with the same information in it, No recount - period.
I even checked the link to the article, it's published today. Must be a slow news week.
(but in any case, do we really need multiple postings of old news?)
I think they are in cahoots with Kerry, and this way Kerry can claim to have had nothing to do with it.
They still think Kerry is going to get 90% of the provisional votes. No question about it, not even up for debate according to one DU poster. Of course they are ignoring that a large # of provisionals HAVE ALREADY BEEN counted and Bush is actually gaining a larger net margin. They also think Kerry is going to get 90% of the spoiled ballots.
Now regardless of your party affiliation or wishful thinking, why would anyone think that one candidate is getting 90% of whatever. Especially if that person didn't get 90% of whats already counted. I could see the dems trying to be hopeful in 2000 in FL when we were debating a 1000 votes or less. But with a 136,000 vote margin, everyone with any IQ over 50 knows, Bush has won, and will win any recount no matter what. How can some people be so far out of touch? I mean I wanted Bush to win, and would have been upset if he lost. But unless it was a heck of lot closer than 130k votes, why waste the time? Let the dems keep looking back at the 2004 election. The republicans will just keep on winning. Look how the balance of power has shifted in the country in the last 25 years. It really is an amazing shift in the overall history of our country.
It is what is great about our country, we can change Governments and not fire a shot! And the design only allows for gradual change, a little here and a little there.
In DC Kerry recieved 90+% of the vote. Keep in mind that in 2000 the Democrats were caught trying to take the good ballots into a room where there were maybe tens of thousands of uncounted/invalid ballots.