Wisconsin orders a recount.
She requested the count a few hours before the deadline, and also requested a recount by hand. I suspect the hope is that the recount can't be completed in time for the Wisconsin electors to cast their votes, then they can call in the lawyers to argue the Wisconsin votes shouldn't count in the electoral tally.
Nothing will come of this. Trump is going to do a great job.
All supporters of the Green Party should be highly upset with this Stein lady for selling them out for a few bucks from the cabal.
Quote: GreasyjohnI've done some research on the electoral college in order to understand it better. I appreciate the basic idea of the institution. If we elected a president based on just popular vote the candidates would only concentrate on areas with large populations. With the electoral college, once a candidate believes they are ahead in a certain state they can then pay attention to smaller states, since once a candidate receives the majority of votes in a state, additional votes would not secure them additional electors. It gets more complicated when you have the possibility of electors not voting according to their pledge--so-called faithless electors.
Without it, a vote in NY would be just as important as a vote in Wyoming. As it stands now, just about every person who votes Republican in New England, N.Y., and on the West Coast might as well not vote, as their vote is meaningless. Same as a Democrat in the south.
A popular vote only election would have the Democrats and Republicans campaigning in all fifty states because every vote everywhere is equally important. A Republican might lose California by two million, but the votes they got might be the ones needed to put them over. As might a vote in Fargo or DC.
It seems like you're favoring doing away with The electoral college. And if that happens then candidates would only campaign in areas with large populations. They wouldn't even be concerned or campaign in states like Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, North Dakota, etc. Canditates would only be concerned with interests of large population areas as opposed to all areas of the United States.Quote: billryanWithout it, a vote in NY would be just as important as a vote in Wyoming. As it stands now, just about every person who votes Republican in New England, N.Y., and on the West Coast might as well not vote, as their vote is meaningless. Same as a Democrat in the south.
A popular vote only election would have the Democrats and Republicans campaigning in all fifty states because every vote everywhere is equally important. A Republican might lose California by two million, but the votes they got might be the ones needed to put them over. As might a vote in Fargo or DC.
It's the same reasoning that each state has two U. S. Senators, irregardless of the states population.
However, I don't have a solution. Maybe changing the weighting so there's a smaller disparity between the bottom and top population figures? There was a spread when the EC was designed that was not nearly so wide, but still existed; maybe a periodic rebalancing to that by percentage would most closely reflect the original purpose of the EC.
Quote: beachbumbabsmaybe a periodic rebalancing to that by percentage would most closely reflect the original purpose of the EC.
There already is a periodic rebalancing, it's called the census.
Quote: DeMangoThere already is a periodic rebalancing, it's called the census.
Thanks for the mansplaining. The census isn't working to fix this.
That is how a Wyoming vote ends up counting 3x as much as a Texas vote.
Quote: beachbumbabsThanks for the mansplaining. The census isn't working to fix this.
How is it not "fixing" things? My guess is because of the US Senate, which was made to ensure that small states get some say and are not ignored, as they would be in a popular vote system.
That darned Constitution!
Quote: billryanEvidently, the third party candidate is footing the bill for it.
She put up a GoFundMe and raised like 4 million in a few days from crying snowflakes. I'm sure she'll somehow pocket some of it for her efforts.
ZCore13
I really don't care one way or the other about keeping it or getting rid of it. I just think your argument is completely backwards.
How much time did either candidate spend in any of four states you mentioned under this system?
Quote: rxwineDoes she need a reason to have a recount?
There's precedent: "dangling chad."
Off to the Supreme Court!
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/802200073375510529Quote: Nate Silver@NateSilver538 Nate Silver Retweeted Mediaite
Not saying this Jill Stein thing is a scam, but if it were a scam, it would probably look a lot like this.
Nate Silver added,
Mediaite @Mediaite
Jill Stein Now Can’t ‘Guarantee’ Money Will Go to Recount, Changes $$$ Goal http://bit.ly/2fz5MYg
https://twitter.com/kibblesmith/status/801593136535498752?ref_src=twsrc%5EtfwQuote: Daniel Kibblesmith@kibblesmith
What if Jill Stein spends my money on weird cereal
https://twitter.com/jilltwiss/status/801602999093182470?ref_src=twsrc%5EtfwQuote: Jill Twiss@jilltwiss
Honestly if Jill Stein steals all this money to fund her new folk-rap album, I will be real mad but kind of respect her
Only a person who believes they actually lost would be upset at a recount. If he won legit then the recount will confirm that.
Why is trump and his supporters so afraid is what everyone should wonder
There also does not seem to be a way to give the millions of dollars raised for the possible recounts if they don't happen...so more money goes to the Greenies...and, well, likely Hillary, too.
Me? I say recount away if your goal is a legitimate recount and not just an attempted manipulation of the Electoral College. Your timing is suspect--if there was a potential issue, you knew it way before the deadline for the recount, not 90 minutes before that deadline. It was still within the correct time frame, so please recount away.
Recounting for the purpose of manipulating the Electoral College votes...and threats to the Electors...well, seems kind of un-American to me.
Recounting because you actually think there was cheating or votes were counted incorrectly? That is fine. Oh...but everyone keeps telling us that there is no voter fraud out there...
Have a great day!!
Quote: darkozTrump publicly proclaimed he reserves the right to ask for a recount if he loses. He won and now is upset hillary has the same right lol
Quote: darkoz
Why is trump and his supporters so afraid is what everyone should wonder
I'm pretty sure nobody is afraid. It's just more laughable material to add to:
Trump is not my President
Safe spaces with play dough and bubbles
Illegal immigrants have Constitutional rights
Trump is just like Hitler
Now, dont get me wrong, there are wackos on the other side too. Birthers, Obama is part of ISIS, Obama hates the U.S., etc. I just think there are many more wackos on the Liberal side.
ZCore13
Quote: RonCOh...but everyone keeps telling us that there is no voter fraud out there...
Have a great day!!
Yes, I remember when Republicans launched substantive investigations on voter fraud before passing new legislation. Oh. wait. Guess not.
They usually just tried to pass new legislation. At least a recount IS an actual method of confirming a vote count, and not Republican boogeyman crapola.
Quote: ams288Let the recount happen. It is clearly making Trumpsters (including Donald himself) nervous, so I am all for it!
It may make some "Trumpsters" nervous, but it is making even more emotionally unhinged "Hillarists" excited about something only to be let down again in the end.
Quote: ams288Let the recount happen. It is clearly making Trumpsters (including Donald himself) nervous, so I am all for it!
Well, didn't the Orange Orangutan himself say that the election would be rigged? By that logic, we definitely need to examine his "victory" very, very closely. We also need to determine if Gospodin Putin had anything to do with the election tallies. (We also need to flay Comey alive, but that won't happen, darn it.)
It's a longshot that Clinton could recapture one, let alone all three of the states in question, and she will probably ultimately lose Michigan as well. But there's no reason not to have recounts there. Republican fraud, voter suppression, and Trump's encouragement of computer hacking aimed at Democrats make such examinations mandatory.
What I'm really looking forward to is mass elector defection. Would you really want to tell your grandchildren that you were one of the persons who were directly responsible for electing the worst human being to ever hold the Presidency? I would definitely defect if I were an elector and my state went Trump-nutty. I realize, of course, that the House would still Trumpify the country even if he didn't get to 270, but we do need to delegitimize him wherever possible.
Quote: RonCIt may make some "Trumpsters" nervous, but it is making even more emotionally unhinged "Hillarists" excited about something only to be let down again in the end.
Right now I can't decide if Trump is rolling back some of his promises because of his actual beliefs, or it's just a ploy to placate some of his detractors until the elector's vote on December 19th. After all, he's technically not in, yet.
If something volatile enough happened, it could sway the electors.
Quote: RonCIt may make some "Trumpsters" nervous, but it is making even more emotionally unhinged "Hillarists" excited about something only to be let down again in the end.
A "both sides" post from RonC.
Who coulda ever seen that coming?!
Quote: SOOPOOI can just see the round table discussion at the Green Party headquarters. We just raised 7 million dollars! That 140 houses we can build for homeless people..... or let's waste it on a recount?
I was thinking more along the lines of how much weed they could buy.
Quote: RonCIt may make some "Trumpsters" nervous, but it is making even more emotionally unhinged "Hillarists" excited about something only to be let down again in the end.
I really hate to point out yet another of your loose relationships with the facts, but the Clinton camp actually declined to pursue a recount initiative despite pressure from the rank and file. You also need to know that Hillary herself has discouraged the idea of contesting the election--unlike Trump would have, she conceded the election and acknowledged that the results should be treated as legitimate unless proved otherwise (which does not exclude the possibility of recounts). The difference between Hillary and Trump is that Hillary has principles and actually cares about the country.
Nobody, Trumpsters or Hillary supporters, expects these recounts to sway the election results, so your statement that Hillary supporters are getting excited about anything is merely extracted from your rectum rather than a statement of fact. Some Trumpers might be worried if they are aware of the massive election fraud that Republicans successfully pulled off to get the OO elected. But as the people who oversee the election process in the states that Trump won are themselves Republicans--who believe in fraud--they have nothing to worry about.
Quote: SOOPOOI can just see the round table discussion at the Green Party headquarters. We just raised 7 million dollars! That 140 houses we can build for homeless people..... or let's waste it on a recount?
Getting Trump out of the way would mean that billions of dollars would not be diverted from social welfare programs to subsidizing Trump golf courses, so yeah, even though it's a long shot, it's worth the money. If Trump is elected, hundreds of thousands of people will die as a direct result. That's worth trying to prevent. (Of course, most of those will be the lazy poor and the lesser breeds, so you may view that as a desirable outcome.)
Quote: JoeshlabotnikGetting Trump out of the way would mean that billions of dollars would not be diverted from social welfare programs to subsidizing Trump golf courses, so yeah, even though it's a long shot, it's worth the money. If Trump is elected, hundreds of thousands of people will die as a direct result. That's worth trying to prevent. (Of course, most of those will be the lazy poor and the lesser breeds, so you may view that as a desirable outcome.)
Wow. Your last two posts are classic liberal baloney and exactly why Trump won the election. There is no connection to reality and the average U.S. Citizen by the left.
ZCore13
Quote: ams288A "both sides" post from RonC.
Who coulda ever seen that coming?!
Yet another silly post that totally ignores a lot of real conversation out there. You do that often; it is as if you only want people to believe in one side or the other. Actually, in reality, both have some good things about them...though I think one side is better with the issues than the other.
There are a lot more folks that are vocal about not accepting Trump's election active on social media. They are excited about the possibility of recounting in up to three states, with hope that the results could change. There are fewer of supporters of the President-elect chiming in, but they are there, too.
Quote: Zcore13Wow. Your last two posts are classic liberal baloney and exactly why Trump won the election. There is no connection to reality and the average U.S. Citizen by the left.
And there is no connection between the right and reality. As far as the average US citizen goes, they either don't care about or don't comprehend what the average citizen goes through. The rhetoric of the campaign was that the Republicans understand the plight of the little guy. It was brilliantly sold bullshit.
Trump won the election for two reasons: 1) he's a populist fraud and huckster, and very good at it; 2) we have enough stupid and gullible people in this country to elect such a person. The visceral appeal of hatred, sexism, and racism had a lot to do with it, but it was mostly Trump's ability to make suckers out of 47% of the electorate that did the trick. You may consider yourself proud to be among that 47%.
Call that "classic liberal baloney" (I prefer Oscar Meyer) if you wish, but it's the truth.
Quote: JoeshlabotnikAnd there is no connection between the right and reality. As far as the average US citizen goes, they either don't care about or don't comprehend what the average citizen goes through. The rhetoric of the campaign was that the Republicans understand the plight of the little guy. It was brilliantly sold bullshit.
Trump won the election for two reasons: 1) he's a populist fraud and huckster, and very good at it; 2) we have enough stupid and gullible people in this country to elect such a person. The visceral appeal of hatred, sexism, and racism had a lot to do with it, but it was mostly Trump's ability to make suckers out of 47% of the electorate that did the trick. You may consider yourself proud to be among that 47%.
Call that "classic liberal baloney" (I prefer Oscar Meyer) if you wish, but it's the truth.
Lol
ZCore13
Quote: JoeshlabotnikI really hate to point out yet another of your loose relationships with the facts, but the Clinton camp actually declined to pursue a recount initiative despite pressure from the rank and file. You also need to know that Hillary herself has discouraged the idea of contesting the election--unlike Trump would have, she conceded the election and acknowledged that the results should be treated as legitimate unless proved otherwise (which does not exclude the possibility of recounts). The difference between Hillary and Trump is that Hillary has principles and actually cares about the country.
Nobody, Trumpsters or Hillary supporters, expects these recounts to sway the election results, so your statement that Hillary supporters are getting excited about anything is merely extracted from your rectum rather than a statement of fact. Some Trumpers might be worried if they are aware of the massive election fraud that Republicans successfully pulled off to get the OO elected. But as the people who oversee the election process in the states that Trump won are themselves Republicans--who believe in fraud--they have nothing to worry about.
As usual, you consider yourself so brilliant as to assume that I am writing about the "Clinton camp"--those actually on her paid and unpaid staff--and not the people out there who are posting their thoughts on the possibility of a recount overturning the results of the election. There are, in spite of the opinion you disguise as fact (one of your very favorite things to do), people out there who are holding hope upon hope that three states can be recounted and overturned and that Hillary will be President. There are also people on the other side that are saying that there should not be recounts.
Though CNN did report that the campaign was at least interested in being involved...
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/26/politics/clinton-campaign-recount/
What you failed to read or bother addressing is my position that they should get recounts wherever they can, as long as their honest intention is to get the results right and not disrupt the electoral college process. Electors are apparently being threatened, which is deplorable. A fair election, with recounts, is not deplorable.
How about some real facts about the "massive election fraud" that you say got Trump elected? Again, another worthless statement with no proof added. Your posts are consistent in their loose relationship with any sort of factual information.
Quote: RonCYour posts are consistent in their loose relationship with any sort of factual information.
(yeah I know this is directed at joe, but)
Says the guy who claims to have voted for one of the most fact challenged US presidents in history.
Quote: rxwine(yeah I know this is directed at joe, but)
Says the guy who claims to have voted for one of the most fact challenged US presidents in history.
I said plenty of things against Trump along the way here. He's nowhere near the top of the list of people I would have liked to elected President. I would have been a lot happier if Hillary had been running in 2008 and put out of our misery by McCain then, but neither her supporters or McCain's got their way on that one; we got the current barely-qualified President instead. People love him, but they have rejected his legacy by not following his Presidency with another Democrat.
Hillary would never get my vote. I would never want the people she would have put on the Supreme Court allowed on that bench. It all came down to one issue, not total love and support for Trump. That, of course, has nothing to do with the current conversation.
I voted for every Republican below Trump on my ballot.
Can't Putin step in and help him out again somehow?!
Quote: ams288Donald has tweeted about this recount 9 times in the last 24 hours.... this got under his thin orange skin. Or he's nervous. Or he's off his meds. Or all three...
Can't Putin step in and help him out again somehow?!
I am just wondering why Hillary will not denounce the people trying to force a recount. Shouldn't she really do that?
Quote: RonC
How about some real facts about the "massive election fraud" that you say got Trump elected?
I assumed that you were writing about the "Clinton camp" because you said that "Hillary supporters are..." Forgive me if I've been unable to decipher your strange way of stating your positions. Clearly, you mean the opposite of what you say. Except when you don't. Or something.
The nationwide Republican efforts to disenfranchise minority voters are well documented. Look it up yourself. In a couple of places, those actions were found to be illegal and a few voters were hastily added back onto the rolls, but at the eleventh hour, and most of the time, it wasn't fixed at all. No one will ever know how many minority and poor voters were prevented and/or discouraged from voting as a result of Republican criminality. But it would certainly have been a resounding Clinton victory had it not been for all the voter suppression--it's been estimated that as many as half a million people who wanted to vote were prevented from doing so by the Republicans. You have to hand it to them--their programs to keep the undeserving poor and the lesser breeds from voting was wildly successful. That's the election fraud I was referring to--nationwide, systematic efforts to disenfranchise (likely) Democratic voters. Feel free to dismiss that and tell us it didn't happen. It's real, though, and almost certainly provided the OO with the push he needed.
Of course, there still might have been some bizarre quirk of the Republican-boosted Electoral College that would have had Trump winning even if he got fewer votes than Hillary. Oh wait, that actually happened!
Quote: AZDuffmanI am just wondering why Hillary will not denounce the people trying to force a recount. Shouldn't she really do that?
No.
Quote: ams288Donald has tweeted about this recount 9 times in the last 24 hours.... this got under his thin orange skin. Or he's nervous. Or he's off his meds. Or all three...
Can't Putin step in and help him out again somehow?!
Recounts are a normal part of just about any election process. That Trump is blathering about it shows once again that he has no understanding of how our government works and is utterly unfit to lead. Our resident Trumpers, however, still think he's God's gift to America. RonC and AzDuffman (etc.)'s slavish loyalty to that man would be funny if it weren't so sad.
Do Trumpers even think about the danger inherent in having a man who is so easily provoked wielding so much power? I've said before that Trump is a jerk. I don't view that in and of itself as a disqualification. What IS a disqualification is that he is temperamentally unfit and has no experience. He should just shut up and let the whole thing play out--it'll probably end in his favor anyway. But just shutting up is not something that appears to be in his skill set.
