The story gives an update on the NH recount. So far, after day one, there are some notable errors, but no information suggesting a patterned shift in votes.

Short and informative. Did miss the opportunity to hear from the Diebold company and their take on the missing votes from the automation equipment. The big picture was drawn in with the bill to fund the use of automation that provides paper tallies to confirm the voting machines tallies.

This is the first story I've seen on the recount. One of my pet peeves with mainstream media is how quickly it drops a story--way before anybody gets a chance to find out how it turned out--unless it's about some no-talent "celebrity." Then they play it until I'm ready to move to a desert island just to get away from it. So I was grateful for the story and thought it raised several interesting issues. I'm going to call my county registrar of voters and find out if she audits scanned ballots--which we use.

The story lets you know that the recount is possible and proceeding. It is much too early in the process for the numbers to mean much. It is interesting that such large number of votes can go uncounted, and still be treated as a minor matter because their counting doesn't change the final outcome.

The key phrase: "missing computer memory cards" makes this article well worth knowing about. The whole point of voter hacking is contained in the memory cards....will the hunt begin for the vanished cards?

Pretty limited info. But it is early in the recount effort. Contrasting South Carolina's electronic voting system which has no means of verifying the vote with New Hampshire's verifiable paper audit trail as ironic suggest that the reporter doesn't understand the bigger picture or doesn't know the meaning of the word, ironic. What is amusing about possible fraudulent election results?

Given the authors association with Fitrakis and Wasserman, this story is very lacking in context and makes statements that are questionable, such as "and possibly explain Hillary Clinton's surprise victory in the New Hampshire primary.". THAT is strictly a msm storyline, not the basis for the recounts from both the democrat Kucinich but also the republican Howard. And preambling the story "So far the errors highlight problems with electronic voting, but don't overturn Clinton's surprise victory." is also a msm headline. The story also doesn't mention the issues associated with the chain of custody of voting materials and how the Secretary of State of New Hampshire subcontracts out the logistics of elections to a private ... More »

This story may never make the main-street press, and what a shame. Diebold should reimburse Kusinich for the recount and insure an audit in every election for the next 5 election seasons.