Author Topic: Jill Stein and Vote Recounts (Read 16000 times)

Hawkmoon · « **Reply #50 on:** December 04, 2016, 12:07:04 PM »

Quote from: Angel Eyes on December 03, 2016, 07:49:56 PM

Stein & co have dropped their demand for a statewide recount in PA:

Looks like she hasn't given up in PA, just looking for a change of venue -- to federal court.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-green-party-drops-election-recount-bid-pennsylvania-020036851.html

What an idiot:

Quote

On Twitter, she added: "How odd is it that we must jump through bureaucratic hoops and raise millions of dollars so we can trust our election results? #Recount2016.

"#Recount2016 is so expensive because of elected leaders who have refused to invest in a 21st-century voting system," she said.

How ironic that much of the problem seems to be "21st century" voting systems. Until just a few years ago, my state used the same old-fashioned, mechanical voting machines that I recall being shown when I was in grammar school. There was never a problem -- or an allegation -- that those machines ever switched votes from one side to the other. Same with good, old-fashioned paper ballots. The only way those can switch votes is if all the vote counters agree to cheat. Once you bring computers into the mix, all bets are off.

As for voter fraud, why isn't she pushing for universal voter ID requirements? I'm sure I have posted before that I'm almost 73 years old and I can't remember ever NOT having to show ID when voting. I don't mind. In fact, I not only expect it, I welcome it. I want ME to cast my vote, not Guillermo or Pablo.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #51 on:** December 04, 2016, 12:38:44 PM »

I'd no idea the Greens were so opposed to bureaucracy.

Scout26 · « **Reply #52 on:** December 04, 2016, 02:30:48 PM »

Quote from: Hawkmoon on December 04, 2016, 12:07:04 PM

What an idiot:

Quote
What an idiot:

Quote
On Twitter, she added: "How odd is it that we must jump through bureaucratic hoops and raise millions of dollars so we can trust our election results? #Recount2016.

"#Recount2016 is so expensive because of elected leaders who have refused to invest in a 21st-century voting system," she said.

You seriously expect logic and reason from her (and the rest of the "Greens")? The rest of your post is spot on....

Ben · « **Reply #53 on:** December 04, 2016, 09:03:49 PM »

Trump now ahead by double digits.

http://twitchy.com/jacobb-38/2016/12/04/latest-wisconsin-recount-numbers-have-trump-extending-his-lead-by-39-votes/

Hawkmoon · « **Reply #54 on:** December 04, 2016, 11:48:10 PM »

Quote from: Ben on December 04, 2016, 09:03:49 PM

Trump now ahead by double digits.

http://twitchy.com/jacobb-38/2016/12/04/latest-wisconsin-recount-numbers-have-trump-extending-his-lead-by-39-votes/

Scout26 · « **Reply #55 on:** December 05, 2016, 05:12:46 AM »

This part worries me:

Quote

City of Milwaukee still isn't complete; have not added in the absentees to the precincts yet. No Madison reports yet at all.

— Ed Morrissey (@EdMorrissey) December 4, 2016

Since those two areas are liberal bastions, what are the chances of finding several boxes of ballots that were "never counted"?

Ron · « **Reply #56 on:** December 05, 2016, 06:15:53 AM »

If they "find" enough votes to change the results it will just strengthen the narrative that Democrats rig elections. Even if they don't find enough votes it looks like that is what they are trying to do.

Trump has defanged the impact of a recount by framing the issue right out of the gate.

"Crooked Hillary and the crooked Democrats just happened to find enough votes, they are rigging the system."

Ben · « **Reply #57 on:** December 05, 2016, 09:31:16 AM »

I agree with Ron. If they find so many ballots, or so many "ballot mistakes" in Milwaukee that it flips the vote (we're talking what, 20,000?) that would be a pretty clear indication of monkey business by the Democrats and/or whoever is actually behind this nonsense. IIRC, the most votes ever "reversed" were like 1000 during Bush/Gore. Average is like a couple hundred.

Interesting side note, a Federal Judge has ordered a Michigan recount. Michigan had initially refused, stating that there was no way for Stein to be "aggrieved", but the Federal judge rejected that.

A couple of points: 1) Fed judge telling states what to do on recounts is kind of interesting. 2) Apparently Stein (and/or whoever is behind this) is arguing that in Michigan, their beef is that there may be many ballots that were left blank in the "president" section. Even if true, so what? Do they somehow expect "blank" to equal "they meant to vote for Clinton"?

Scout26 · « **Reply #58 on:** December 05, 2016, 10:29:10 AM »

Quote from: Ben on December 05, 2016, 09:31:16 AM

A couple of points: 1) Fed judge telling states what to do on recounts is kind of interesting. 2) Apparently Stein (and/or whoever is behind this) is arguing that in Michigan, their beef is that there may be many ballots that were left blank in the "president" section. Even if true, so what? Do they somehow expect "blank" to equal "they meant to vote for Clinton"?

Well, of course. Don't you remember the Florida recounts, where they were counting "dimpled" chads as evidence of a vote for Gore? Among other shenanigans?

TechMan · « **Reply #59 on:** December 05, 2016, 02:35:27 PM »

Quote from: scout26 on December 05, 2016, 10:29:10 AM

Well, of course. Don't you remember the Florida recounts, where they were counting "dimpled" chads as evidence of a vote for Gore? Among other shenanigans?

You mean him:

Angel Eyes · « **Reply #60 on:** December 06, 2016, 04:10:51 PM »

Trump now with a net gain of 110 votes in Wisconsin:

http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/12/05/trump-widening-lead-wisconsin-recount-rolls

Ben · « **Reply #61 on:** December 06, 2016, 05:13:17 PM »

Interesting also that now Stein, via federal judges, is forcing states to use taxpayer money for recounts. Guess she's already invested the first five million in mutual funds and Swiss bank accounts.

Angel Eyes · « **Reply #62 on:** December 06, 2016, 06:47:20 PM »

Quote from: Ben on December 06, 2016, 05:13:17 PM

Guess she's already invested the first five million in mutual funds and Swiss bank accounts.

. . . or the Clinton Foundation.

Hawkmoon · « **Reply #63 on:** December 06, 2016, 09:14:07 PM »

Quote from: Ben on December 05, 2016, 09:31:16 AM

2) Apparently Stein (and/or whoever is behind this) is arguing that in Michigan, their beef is that there may be many ballots that were left blank in the "president" section. Even if true, so what? Do they somehow expect "blank" to equal "they meant to vote for Clinton"?

Henceforth, all ballots for the office of President shall include an option for "Abstain."

How long will it be before we elect another Abe to the White House?

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #64 on:** December 06, 2016, 09:54:19 PM »

Quote from: Hawkmoon on December 06, 2016, 09:14:07 PM

How long will it be before we elect another Abe to the White House?

Another Abe Lincoln? The guy that made Democrats so mad, they talked secession? Well...

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-cal-secession-20161127-story.html

Scout26 · « **Reply #65 on:** December 07, 2016, 06:29:42 AM »

MI Court of Appeals tells Stein to get bent.

http://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2016/12/06/open-and-shut-michigan-court-of-appeals-stops-recount-says-jill-stein-is-not-an-aggrieved-candidate/

However, for Jill Stein, reading is not so fundamental....

Quote

The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a federal district judge's order, saying #RecountMI should continue. Democracy prevails.

— Dr. Jill Stein (@DrJillStein) December 7, 2016

Quote

@SchuetteOnDuty I really wanted to see Clinton lose twice.

— ☆_AJillity308_☆ (@ajillity308) December 7, 2016

zxcvbob · « **Reply #66 on:** December 08, 2016, 01:16:12 AM »

Quote from: scout26 on December 07, 2016, 06:29:42 AM

MI Court of Appeals tells Stein to get bent.

http://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2016/12/06/open-and-shut-michigan-court-of-appeals-stops-recount-says-jill-stein-is-not-an-aggrieved-candidate/

However, for Jill Stein, reading is not so fundamental....

And the same federal judge who ordered the recount on Monday (instead of Wednesday) has agreed. Stein did not have standing to demand the recount in the first place. http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/309358-federal-judge-kills-recount-effort-in-michigan

I did not expect that. Maybe the law really does mean something. Occasionally.

Hawkmoon · « **Reply #67 on:** December 12, 2016, 11:37:56 AM »

And another federal judge has tossed her recount bid in Pennsylvania:

https://www.apnews.com/322db08ce6eb49fb910d5a84de3cccb8/US-judge-rejects-Green-Party's-Pennsylvania-recount-case

What a dweeb. I would say she should have stuck to doctoring, except that I don't think I would care to be treated by anyone quite this delusional. She might start prescribing some of the quack medicine Dr. Oz gets all excited about.

Scout26 · « **Reply #68 on:** December 12, 2016, 11:51:16 AM »

Quote from: Hawkmoon on December 12, 2016, 11:37:56 AM

And another federal judge has tossed her recount bid in Pennsylvania:

https://www.apnews.com/322db08ce6eb49fb910d5a84de3cccb8/US-judge-rejects-Green-Party's-Pennsylvania-recount-case

What a dweeb. I would say she should have stuck to doctoring, except that I don't think I would care to be treated by anyone quite this delusional. She might start prescribing some of the quack medicine Dr. Oz gets all excited about.

Yep, I'd bet her doctoring degree is in Aroma Therapy and Herbal Medicine from Hippy-Dippy University..