Election Recount
- Thread starter cltrat
- Start date
Bob Dylan Flyboy
Member
- Nov 14, 2016
- 49
- 3
How stupid can you be? The recount has the potential to affect current outcome of the election. So it affects everyone.
Bob Dylan Flyboy
Member
- Nov 14, 2016
- 49
- 3
Hillary Clinton Schemed Since Day After Election to Steal Presidency From Donald Trump
Clinton campaign lawyer Marc E. Elias gave the scheme away in an article published Saturday morning at Medium announcing Clinton would join the recount effort in Wisconsin by Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein and that Clinton would join Stein should she also file for recounts in Michigan and Pennsylvania.
Elias wrote that starting the day after the election the Clinton campaign worked to find ways to reverse Trump’s election.
Those efforts continue through the present, Elias wrote, and now include joining the recount efforts by Stein.
Elias’ statement about Clinton’s behind the scenes scheming excerpted from Medium:
…we have quietly taken a number of steps in the last two weeks to rule in or out any possibility of outside interference in the vote tally in these critical battleground states.
First, since the day after the election we have had lawyers and data scientists and analysts combing over the results to spot anomalies that would suggest a hacked result. These have included analysts both from within the campaign and outside, with backgrounds in politics, technology and academia.
Second, we have had numerous meetings and calls with various outside experts to hear their concerns and to discuss and review their data and findings. As a part of this, we have also shared out data and findings with them. Most of those discussions have remained private, while at least one has unfortunately been the subject of leaks.
Third, we have attempted to systematically catalogue and investigate every theory that has been presented to us within our ability to do so.
Fourth, we have examined the laws and practices as they pertain to recounts, contests and audits.
Fifth, and most importantly, we have monitored and staffed the post-election canvasses — where voting machine tapes are compared to poll-books, provisional ballots are resolved, and all of the math is double checked from election night. During that process, we have seen Secretary Clinton’s vote total grow, so that, today, her national popular vote lead now exceeds more than 2 million votes.
In the coming days, we will continue to perform our due diligence and actively follow all further activities that are to occur prior to the certification of any election results…”
Elias admits the campaign could find no evidence to support a challenge to Trump’s victory, but that is not stopping them from joining Stein in trying to overthrow Trump’s presidency before it begins.
“Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides.”
Clinton campaign lawyer Marc E. Elias gave the scheme away in an article published Saturday morning at Medium announcing Clinton would join the recount effort in Wisconsin by Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein and that Clinton would join Stein should she also file for recounts in Michigan and Pennsylvania.
Elias wrote that starting the day after the election the Clinton campaign worked to find ways to reverse Trump’s election.
Those efforts continue through the present, Elias wrote, and now include joining the recount efforts by Stein.
Elias’ statement about Clinton’s behind the scenes scheming excerpted from Medium:
…we have quietly taken a number of steps in the last two weeks to rule in or out any possibility of outside interference in the vote tally in these critical battleground states.
First, since the day after the election we have had lawyers and data scientists and analysts combing over the results to spot anomalies that would suggest a hacked result. These have included analysts both from within the campaign and outside, with backgrounds in politics, technology and academia.
Second, we have had numerous meetings and calls with various outside experts to hear their concerns and to discuss and review their data and findings. As a part of this, we have also shared out data and findings with them. Most of those discussions have remained private, while at least one has unfortunately been the subject of leaks.
Third, we have attempted to systematically catalogue and investigate every theory that has been presented to us within our ability to do so.
Fourth, we have examined the laws and practices as they pertain to recounts, contests and audits.
Fifth, and most importantly, we have monitored and staffed the post-election canvasses — where voting machine tapes are compared to poll-books, provisional ballots are resolved, and all of the math is double checked from election night. During that process, we have seen Secretary Clinton’s vote total grow, so that, today, her national popular vote lead now exceeds more than 2 million votes.
In the coming days, we will continue to perform our due diligence and actively follow all further activities that are to occur prior to the certification of any election results…”
Elias admits the campaign could find no evidence to support a challenge to Trump’s victory, but that is not stopping them from joining Stein in trying to overthrow Trump’s presidency before it begins.
“Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides.”
Bob Dylan Flyboy
Member
- Nov 14, 2016
- 49
- 3
The Democrats’ real strategy in launching recounts
The recount in Wisconsin, and the coming ones in Michigan and Pennsylvania will not change the outcomes in any of the states. No recount ever changes thousands of votes. I do not think that is the purpose.
The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters. If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232. No one hits 270.
Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump, and Senate selects Pence. This would be first time Pthis happened since 1824, but in that case, John Quincy Adams won in the House, though he had fewer electoral college votes than Andrew Jackson.
If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it? The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.
The recount in Wisconsin, and the coming ones in Michigan and Pennsylvania will not change the outcomes in any of the states. No recount ever changes thousands of votes. I do not think that is the purpose.
The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters. If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232. No one hits 270.
Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump, and Senate selects Pence. This would be first time Pthis happened since 1824, but in that case, John Quincy Adams won in the House, though he had fewer electoral college votes than Andrew Jackson.
If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it? The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.
Bob Dylan Flyboy
Member
- Nov 14, 2016
- 49
- 3
It is ironic that idiot Stein is demanding electoral integrity while praising Fidel Castro, the dictator of a one party state for 50 years.
Kev3188
Veteran
OP
- Aug 29, 2007
- 5,484
- 3,067
- Thread Starter
- #22
I,ve answered your question you just don't like the answer.I can' really say I blame you considering how much of a hypocrite that you others here,the liberal media and most of all the Clinton campaign are on this.
For week after the last debate all we here both in the media and here was Trump won't commit to accepted election results..
Here's what HRC said right here in Charlotte on the subject
you still want to ride that high horse you're on?
lapdog much?
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
During Debate 3, weren't the Liberals all over the place labeling Trump and his supporters as bad Americans for not just giving a rubber stamp to the election night results?....
Taking money from willful idiots who believe the recounts will restore faith in the electoral process doesn't really bother me, but it doesn't take a Harvard MBA to realize the actual cost of doing the recounts won't be recovered by anything Stein or Clinton put up.
It will wind up being covered by taxpayers, who should be livid that their state laws don't prevent someone without even a remote chance of winning from filing a nuisance claim and causing the state to incur what will likely be millions in added expenses.
At least PA had the foresight to require a judge determine standing before commencing a recount, and logic will carry the day there. Trump won that state by more than 1% (the threshold that most states use as a cut-off for allowing a recount).
Taking money from willful idiots who believe the recounts will restore faith in the electoral process doesn't really bother me, but it doesn't take a Harvard MBA to realize the actual cost of doing the recounts won't be recovered by anything Stein or Clinton put up.
It will wind up being covered by taxpayers, who should be livid that their state laws don't prevent someone without even a remote chance of winning from filing a nuisance claim and causing the state to incur what will likely be millions in added expenses.
At least PA had the foresight to require a judge determine standing before commencing a recount, and logic will carry the day there. Trump won that state by more than 1% (the threshold that most states use as a cut-off for allowing a recount).
Bob Dylan Flyboy
Member
- Nov 14, 2016
- 49
- 3
It's pretty transparent what they are trying to do here. They're not looking for fraud. They're seeking to delay the counting of the votes so that Trump won't have 270 on December 13.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Kev3188
Veteran
You're right; I don't like the answer because you arent responding to the question I asked.
You started this thread, but really have yet to explain why/how it affects you. Did you just fee like venting? Is that it?
Kev3188
Veteran
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Trump still claims the election was rigged.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-donald-trump-recount-20161127-story.html
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-donald-trump-recount-20161127-story.html
Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Apr 30, 2012
- 4,825
- 4,428
He seems as irritated as the Donald is tonight.
What bothers CLTrat about recounting ballots that have been cast? The results have been now called into question by Donald Trump outside of the three states called by the Green Party.
Do you (CLTrat) support the claims of Trump that there was millions of illegal voters? We should get to the bottom of this before he has to get to work, huh?
The world is laughing out loud tonight at the man-child that 26% of the USA has voted to make POTUS.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
Like it or not, Quags, it's not Trump's claim. A 2014 study done by George Mason and Old Dominion estimated 2.8M illegal voters, between dead people, ballots cast in multiple precincts by a single person, and illegally registered non-citizen voters.
If you want to buy access: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000973
Pew did a study in 2012 which is free, and came up with similar results -- around 2.7M people who appeared to be registered in 2 or more states, and another 1.8M who were deceased yet still registered. By their research, 1 out of 8 voter registrations were invalid (13% for those who can't convert fractions).
http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/le...ets/2012/pewupgradingvoterregistrationpdf.pdf
Either way, coming from Chicago where the dead regularly vote, the fact there are illegal votes shouldn't surprise anyone, nor should the raw percentages.
Recounting the ballots cast won't fix this. Purging the voter rolls would certainly go a long way, but Democrats are opposed to that every time it happens or comes up.
If you want to buy access: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000973
Pew did a study in 2012 which is free, and came up with similar results -- around 2.7M people who appeared to be registered in 2 or more states, and another 1.8M who were deceased yet still registered. By their research, 1 out of 8 voter registrations were invalid (13% for those who can't convert fractions).
http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/le...ets/2012/pewupgradingvoterregistrationpdf.pdf
Either way, coming from Chicago where the dead regularly vote, the fact there are illegal votes shouldn't surprise anyone, nor should the raw percentages.
Recounting the ballots cast won't fix this. Purging the voter rolls would certainly go a long way, but Democrats are opposed to that every time it happens or comes up.
Last edited:
Similar threads
