It's official: Jill Stein announces plans to file for a recount in PA, MI & WI
- Thread starter Spectrum
- Start date
Still not sure if it's gonna change anything but I think this is seriously worth keeping an eye on at this point.
Bruh corrections to the voting in WI has made 18% of Trumps lead disappear and their still counting...
Yup this is going to be very interesting
Haven't got to read through the thread yet its probably been already stated but Im sure the Russians hacked the fuck out of this election but the US government absolutely can never admit that to the public....they will come clean in about 50 years.
You got a point there but Trump pissed so many people off if that's what happened they'll find a way to disqualify his ass best believe.
Fellas, I've investigated this shit thoroughly. I had to. I got to the point where I was dreaming about the shit. I did not want to let myself get that into this, because I knew the odds of this shit getting overturned was very slim.
There will be some vote discrepancies, but they will be relatively minor. If Trump's WI win goes from 10k to 5k, so what? That don't change shit. What she'd have to surmount in MI would be virtually impossible.
Besides, even Jill Stein saying she ain't doing this because she thinks it'll change anything, but will give some people comfort that their voting process is legit. Who gives a shit about that if TRUMP is still the president?
I can live out of the country for four years, no problem. I don't want to be able to not visit my mother for that long, but it is what it is. No way this dude will get more than 4 years after the bullshit he'll pull. This motherfucker will make Bush look like Obama.
Oh, and based on what I'm reading, if there was a fix for Trump, then the US government was in on it.
There will be some vote discrepancies, but they will be relatively minor. If Trump's WI win goes from 10k to 5k, so what? That don't change shit. What she'd have to surmount in MI would be virtually impossible.
Besides, even Jill Stein saying she ain't doing this because she thinks it'll change anything, but will give some people comfort that their voting process is legit. Who gives a shit about that if TRUMP is still the president?
I can live out of the country for four years, no problem. I don't want to be able to not visit my mother for that long, but it is what it is. No way this dude will get more than 4 years after the bullshit he'll pull. This motherfucker will make Bush look like Obama.
Oh, and based on what I'm reading, if there was a fix for Trump, then the US government was in on it.
Seven Main Reasons Democrats Shouldn’t Donate to Jill Stein’s Recount Fund
1. The amount she's asking for keeps increasing. The amount of money needed for the recount has been suspiciously creeping upward since the fundraising drive was launched. At first, the goal was $2.5 million. Now it’s $7 million with no real explanation as to why the additional money is needed.
2. The increasing attorney fees. Another point of contention is the way the supposed attorney fees for the recount effort keep on increasing. Politico explains:
In an initial cached version of the fundraising page, they do not mention attorney fees in the fundraising pitch. A cached version of the page from early Thursday morning then estimates that attorney fees will “likely to be another $1 million," while her page had set a goal of $4.5 million mid-day Thursday.
As of noon on Thursday, the fundraising page now estimates that attorney fees “are likely to be another $2-3 million, then there are the costs of the statewide recount observers in all three states,” raising the total cost to “$6-7 million.”
3. No guarantees. Those critical of the effort are quick to point out that in the fundraising drive, Stein outright admits that she cannot guarantee recounts will actually happen. Stein also doesn’t say what any money that isn’t used for the recount will actually go to, beyond a general pledge that “the surplus will also go toward election integrity efforts and to promote voting system reform.”
4. No smoking gun. “Let me be very clear: We do not have evidence of fraud,” Stein said in an interview. “We do not have smoking guns. What we do have is an election that was surrounded by hacking.” The push for a recount really went into overdrive with a New York magazine report that claimed cybersecurity experts were calling for Clinton’s campaign to contest the results. But since then several experts spoke up to say the evidence was far from clear-cut. “Were this year’s deviations from pre-election polls the results of a cyberattack? Probably not,” wrote J. Alex Halderman, one of the experts cited in the initial report. “I believe the most likely explanation is that the polls were systematically wrong.” Even as some security and election experts call for paper ballots to be checked it’s important to note “there’s no evidence that the electronic machines were hacked or the election was compromised,” as NPR’s Camila Domonoske explained.
5. A recount wouldn’t necessarily disprove hacking anyway. Despite his skepticism, Halderman said nobody will know whether a cyberattack changed the result of the race unless there is a recount. But that’s not necessarily true. In Pennsylvania, for example, most machines don’t have paper ballots and if the past is any guide the recount could simply mean re-scanning the machine results, notes the Washington Post.
6. Stein doesn’t actually want to help Clinton. Stein clearly states that the effort is “not intended to help Hillary Clinton,” adding that “recounts are part of an election integrity movement to attempt to shine a light on just how untrustworthy the U.S. election system is.” After all, during the campaign, Stein made clear she didn’t prefer Clinton over Trump and has now said that the way Clinton has stayed out of the recount fray only shows the Democratic Party is corrupt. Some Democrats are also saying that it’s really rich for someone like Stein to worry about how a few thousand votes could affect the outcome of an election. “I really wish Jill Stein had not waited until after the election to be so concerned about a few thousand votes tipping the election to Trump,” wrote Dan Pfeiffer.
7. There are better places for your money. Many are urging those who just want to put their money where their mouth is to send cash for progressive organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood, which have already seen a surge in donations after Trump’s election. Others say that those who want to help Democrats really should be donating toward Louisiana’s Democratic Senate candidate, Foster Campbell, who is competing in a Dec. 10 runoff. “The amount of Democratic energy and money being wasted on recounts instead of trying to win the Louisiana Senate Race is mind boggling,” wrote Pfeiffer on Twitter.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...ldn_t_contribute_to_jill_stein_s_recount.html
1. The amount she's asking for keeps increasing. The amount of money needed for the recount has been suspiciously creeping upward since the fundraising drive was launched. At first, the goal was $2.5 million. Now it’s $7 million with no real explanation as to why the additional money is needed.
2. The increasing attorney fees. Another point of contention is the way the supposed attorney fees for the recount effort keep on increasing. Politico explains:
In an initial cached version of the fundraising page, they do not mention attorney fees in the fundraising pitch. A cached version of the page from early Thursday morning then estimates that attorney fees will “likely to be another $1 million," while her page had set a goal of $4.5 million mid-day Thursday.
As of noon on Thursday, the fundraising page now estimates that attorney fees “are likely to be another $2-3 million, then there are the costs of the statewide recount observers in all three states,” raising the total cost to “$6-7 million.”
3. No guarantees. Those critical of the effort are quick to point out that in the fundraising drive, Stein outright admits that she cannot guarantee recounts will actually happen. Stein also doesn’t say what any money that isn’t used for the recount will actually go to, beyond a general pledge that “the surplus will also go toward election integrity efforts and to promote voting system reform.”
4. No smoking gun. “Let me be very clear: We do not have evidence of fraud,” Stein said in an interview. “We do not have smoking guns. What we do have is an election that was surrounded by hacking.” The push for a recount really went into overdrive with a New York magazine report that claimed cybersecurity experts were calling for Clinton’s campaign to contest the results. But since then several experts spoke up to say the evidence was far from clear-cut. “Were this year’s deviations from pre-election polls the results of a cyberattack? Probably not,” wrote J. Alex Halderman, one of the experts cited in the initial report. “I believe the most likely explanation is that the polls were systematically wrong.” Even as some security and election experts call for paper ballots to be checked it’s important to note “there’s no evidence that the electronic machines were hacked or the election was compromised,” as NPR’s Camila Domonoske explained.
5. A recount wouldn’t necessarily disprove hacking anyway. Despite his skepticism, Halderman said nobody will know whether a cyberattack changed the result of the race unless there is a recount. But that’s not necessarily true. In Pennsylvania, for example, most machines don’t have paper ballots and if the past is any guide the recount could simply mean re-scanning the machine results, notes the Washington Post.
6. Stein doesn’t actually want to help Clinton. Stein clearly states that the effort is “not intended to help Hillary Clinton,” adding that “recounts are part of an election integrity movement to attempt to shine a light on just how untrustworthy the U.S. election system is.” After all, during the campaign, Stein made clear she didn’t prefer Clinton over Trump and has now said that the way Clinton has stayed out of the recount fray only shows the Democratic Party is corrupt. Some Democrats are also saying that it’s really rich for someone like Stein to worry about how a few thousand votes could affect the outcome of an election. “I really wish Jill Stein had not waited until after the election to be so concerned about a few thousand votes tipping the election to Trump,” wrote Dan Pfeiffer.
7. There are better places for your money. Many are urging those who just want to put their money where their mouth is to send cash for progressive organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood, which have already seen a surge in donations after Trump’s election. Others say that those who want to help Democrats really should be donating toward Louisiana’s Democratic Senate candidate, Foster Campbell, who is competing in a Dec. 10 runoff. “The amount of Democratic energy and money being wasted on recounts instead of trying to win the Louisiana Senate Race is mind boggling,” wrote Pfeiffer on Twitter.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...ldn_t_contribute_to_jill_stein_s_recount.html
Yeah, at the above post. .
Jill Stein had me looking at her side-eye when that money total went the fuck up. She got caught with that bullshit. Then for her to LATER come back and say 'We can't guarantee there will be recounts' but ONLY AFTER she got that first 2.5m. I guess politricians are politricians. . . .
. . . . but it looks like that money tally is slowing the fuck up. They'll probably reach 7m, 'cause they have until next Wednesday. . .
. . . BUT. . . it ain't pouring in at the pace it was. I'll bet my last she gon' find some sort of way to keep some of that money. Watch. She don't even fuck with Hillary or Trump like that.
Jill Stein had me looking at her side-eye when that money total went the fuck up. She got caught with that bullshit. Then for her to LATER come back and say 'We can't guarantee there will be recounts' but ONLY AFTER she got that first 2.5m. I guess politricians are politricians. . . .
. . . . but it looks like that money tally is slowing the fuck up. They'll probably reach 7m, 'cause they have until next Wednesday. . .
. . . BUT. . . it ain't pouring in at the pace it was. I'll bet my last she gon' find some sort of way to keep some of that money. Watch. She don't even fuck with Hillary or Trump like that.
Well the gov better fix this shit and fast
I'm saying... dude will make Bush2 look like a goddamn virtuouso of Statesmanship and excellence
This sh!t.........is wild... this story......this election.........this YEAR, just inexplicably WILD!
this sounds like the media is working for the feds again. They're trying to stop this recount from happening
maybe... but
no you haven't....
not true - if hacking occurred Wisconsin is where the finger prints / bread crumb trail begins because of the type voter machines they used
so far the current count (not the recount yet) is showing counties with errors overwhelmingly benefiting 1 candidate...
if the current trend continues in Wi, before the recount starts, Trump votes will decrease to within the margin of error that would have triggered an automatic recount anyway -
this is bullshit and lies - Stein already knows that she won't get enough votes to change her % for FEC funding -
and the line about integrity is also bullshit - IMO an unnamed party is trying to destabilize this country
well -she filed the request in Wisconsin - so there will be a recount there - that state alone isn't enough to shake Trump but if the numbers keep trending the way they are - It could flip to Hill and there is going to be a shit storm about WHY
Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Says It Will Participate In Wisconsin Recount
The campaign also said it would participate in recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan if they went forward.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign on Saturday said that it would participate in a recount initiated by Green Party nominee Jill Stein in Wisconsin and said it would take similar action if a recount was initiated in Michigan and Pennsylvania.
The campaign has taken a number of steps since election day to review election results and has not found “any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology,” Marc Elias, the campaign’s general counsel, wrote in a statement on Medium. The campaign had not planned to call for a recount, Elias wrote, but now that one is underway, it felt an obligation to participate. The extent of the campaign’s participation was not immediately clear.
“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,” Elias wrote. “If Jill Stein follows through as she has promised and pursues recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan, we will take the same approach in those states as well.”
Stein filed for a recount in Wisconsin on Friday after quickly raising more than $5 million to challenge election results there and in Michigan and Pennsylvania ― all key states that Clinton lost in the presidential election. Stein’s call for a recount came after data scientists publicly raised questions about discrepancies in election results.
Elias wrote that the Clinton campaign had been consulting with a number of experts to understand irregularities in election result data and had attempted to “systematically catalogue and investigate every theory that has been presented to us within our ability to do so.” The campaign has also staffed post-election canvasses ― the processes by which election returns are officially certified, which includes double checking tallies from election night.
Elias wrote that the campaign was participating in a recount knowing that it was unlikely to change election results. As of Thursday, Clinton was roughly 30,000votes behind Trump in Michigan and Wisconsin, though the gap was closing.
“We do so fully aware that the number of votes separating Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the closest of these states — Michigan — well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount,” he wrote. “But regardless of the potential to change the outcome in any of the states, we feel it is important, on principle, to ensure our campaign is legally represented in any court proceedings and represented on the ground in order to monitor the recount process itself.”
Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-recount_us_5839ad95e4b09b605600a69b
The campaign also said it would participate in recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan if they went forward.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign on Saturday said that it would participate in a recount initiated by Green Party nominee Jill Stein in Wisconsin and said it would take similar action if a recount was initiated in Michigan and Pennsylvania.
The campaign has taken a number of steps since election day to review election results and has not found “any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology,” Marc Elias, the campaign’s general counsel, wrote in a statement on Medium. The campaign had not planned to call for a recount, Elias wrote, but now that one is underway, it felt an obligation to participate. The extent of the campaign’s participation was not immediately clear.
“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,” Elias wrote. “If Jill Stein follows through as she has promised and pursues recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan, we will take the same approach in those states as well.”
Stein filed for a recount in Wisconsin on Friday after quickly raising more than $5 million to challenge election results there and in Michigan and Pennsylvania ― all key states that Clinton lost in the presidential election. Stein’s call for a recount came after data scientists publicly raised questions about discrepancies in election results.
Elias wrote that the Clinton campaign had been consulting with a number of experts to understand irregularities in election result data and had attempted to “systematically catalogue and investigate every theory that has been presented to us within our ability to do so.” The campaign has also staffed post-election canvasses ― the processes by which election returns are officially certified, which includes double checking tallies from election night.
Elias wrote that the campaign was participating in a recount knowing that it was unlikely to change election results. As of Thursday, Clinton was roughly 30,000votes behind Trump in Michigan and Wisconsin, though the gap was closing.
“We do so fully aware that the number of votes separating Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the closest of these states — Michigan — well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount,” he wrote. “But regardless of the potential to change the outcome in any of the states, we feel it is important, on principle, to ensure our campaign is legally represented in any court proceedings and represented on the ground in order to monitor the recount process itself.”
Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-recount_us_5839ad95e4b09b605600a69b
the state declared he won by 10700, but just yesterday he lost 1k more votes there...Didnt she only lose Michigan by 10k
you already know...
Fuckery is afoot.
They don't want their cash cow to stop
Like the head of CBS said: "Trump is bad for America, but good for us!"
I knew Hillary and her Team would be lurking in the shadows.. Her team is already on standby if those votes flip and she gets the 270
I'm here for it.. Fuck em
Didnt she only lose Michigan by 10k
That's Wisconsin.
YOU'RE TELLING ME I DIDN'T RESEARCH THE SHIT, but can you tell me what the response from Wisconsin was about the inconsistencies? Can you tell me how many counties still have votes left to check thoroughly?
Don't go run and do your research now.
You're coming at me like I'm a fucking Trump supporter and shit. I'm stating facts as they are reported. You motherfuckers are too fucking hardheaded. I never said there wasn't fuckery. I said if it is, the Feds are likely in on it because it was reported US official said there was no evidence of hacking, etc. . . which is what was being alleged.
Donald Trump is going to lose some votes in some states, but she needs ALL THREE states, and the margin in some states is very substantial. Even with loss votes, she needs to WIN, not simply reduce his numbers.
No one has yet to say that that was even likely.
dude - I posted tweets that linked to the state official response vs the statistical trend...you may have followed the story / reporting but now follow the math
Clinton won't win this count but the errors documented now indicate a problem coming in the recount
Money above everything else. They love him being in there because you have 4 more years of this fuckery and people are going to tune in to watch it.. they made crazy money over the last year and a half and traditional media was struggling
you may have followed the story / reporting but now follow the math
Clinton won't win this count but the errors documented now indicate a problem coming in the recount
So they left the math out? The major element that determines who WINS is what they left out, right? You don't even know what I read, but you're going to assume I don't know what the math is.
Like I said, you dudes are too fucking hardheaded.
I get not wanting Trump to win. That makes perfect sense. But if you think shit is going to flip that much for Hillary in THREE states, then you have lost your mind. Even Hillary's people admitted they know even recounts don't close the kind of gaps they need closed, and thats for WI.
Better be figuring out what the fuck you gon' do over the next four years, instead of wishing upon a star.
---
I would actually bet money that Trump will be impeached. No way in HELL this dude keeps his nose clean for four years.
You haven't read this thread especially any of my posts - I never addressed MI or PA - I already stated WI isn't enough for Hill but it will cause a lot of trouble if it flips - because of the issues surrounding the machines in use there and statistical impossibility that random error favored one candidate at the rate currently trending in their count...
most posters havn't seriously posted in this thread that this will flip the election or gone in on it outside of possible cac reactions-
RIF -You probably read the reports as well as you did this thread - if you had read the stats you would have discussed the numbers not your POV
Similar threads
