Recounts prove there's at least some discrepancy. We have quotations from Democrats and campaign officials saying before the Georgia recount that there would only be a few hundred vote differences. Instead the discrepancy was thousands. Al Gore only gained back 1200 votes in Florida, the 3rd most populated state, and that was only because of disagreements over hanging chads.
Also a lot of judges want to see campaigns trying to settle election problems outside of the legislative branch. If you don't even attempt recounts, a judge may think you're not seriously invested.
Furthermore thanks to the Georgia recount, we now have affidavits from Democrat observers claiming that they witnessed seriously questionable ballots.
Recounts are definitely the first step.
Recounts prove there's at least some discrepancy. We have quotations from Democrats and campaign officials saying before the Georgia recount that there would only be a few hundred vote differences. Instead the discrepancy was thousands. Al Gore only gained back 1200 votes in Florida, the 3rd most populated state, and that was only because of disagreements over hanging chads.
Also a lot of judges want to see campaigns trying to settle election problems outside of the legislative branch. If you don't even attempt recounts, a judge may think you're not seriously invested.
Furthermore thanks to the Georgia recount, we now have affidavits from Democrat observers claiming that they witnessed seriously questionable ballots.
Good point. I guess today's journalists have not even a rudimentary understanding of American history to put these discrepancies into proper context.