Poll: Will the recounts be worth the effort?

[Bassman007]

I doubt it, I think she's demanding the recounts for Hillary's sake, not her own

So Hillary is too stupid to ask? What a glorious waste of time, Trump destroyed the witch

 

[waltky]

Good question...

... `specially since it gonna cost $5 million.

 

[oreo]

A week before the election righties cried how the election was "rigged /stolen /fixed ".

Now that Trump won its "how dare you challenge the results !!!"

You are completely missing the point....probably on purpose.

The IRONY is the alt-left wanting TRUMP to PROMISE to accept the election results, but it's actually HILLARY who wants a recount.

That is very funny shit.

Recounts are common in tight races .

Then why is Stein not demanding recounts in tight races that Hillary won with less margin than Trump won the three states she's challenging?

We all know why...because it's a bullshit ploy.

If there is a recount of these states, Trump should definitely demand a recount in States Hillary won.

I doubt it, but what Trump could do is demand to see if all ballots were legal or not.

According to the OP, PA is almost impossible to get a recount from. So this is probably going nowhere and will only make the Democrats look even more foolish.

This isn't a recount, a recount would only produce the same result. This is an audit of the votes cast, specifically out of electronic machines, specifically in Democrat counties, where the paper ballots were coming in strong for Hillary Clinton but the electronic machines in the same county or precincts were showing a 7% loss. That's what got everyone's attention, specifically the cyber experts.

 

[JustAnotherNut]

I doubt it, I think she's demanding the recounts for Hillary's sake, not her own

So Hillary is too stupid to ask? What a glorious waste of time, Trump destroyed the witch

Well she hasn't asked has she? Neither has the DNC asked for or demanded a recount........only the people have been, until Stein stepped up to the plate with funds raised.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This isn't a recount, a recount would only produce the same result. This is an audit of the votes cast, specifically out of electronic machines, specifically in Democrat counties, where the paper ballots were coming in strong for Hillary Clinton but the electronic machines in the same county or precincts were showing a 7% loss. That's what got everyone's attention, specifically the cyber experts.

By paper ballots, you mean the same ballots that the machines count? And if so, who was keeping track of these paper ballots in the first place?

 

[BluesLegend]

Good question...

... `specially since it gonna cost $5 million.

$5 million that could have been donated to the poor or abused women or a worthwhile cause. Don't hold your breath waiting for the left to apologize.

 

[oreo]

This isn't a recount, a recount would only produce the same result. This is an audit of the votes cast, specifically out of electronic machines, specifically in Democrat counties, where the paper ballots were coming in strong for Hillary Clinton but the electronic machines in the same county or precincts were showing a 7% loss. That's what got everyone's attention, specifically the cyber experts.

By paper ballots, you mean the same ballots that the machines count? And if so, who was keeping track of these paper ballots in the first place?

Paper ballots are ones that go through an optical machine at the precinct or are mail-in ballots. Electronic machines are just like ATM machines, you punch buttons on the machines to cast your votes. This is where they're seeing the discrepancies. Ironically, it was Hillary Clinton that pushed for electronic machines back in 2000 after the debacle in Florida over the butterfly punch card ballots. There was a big discussion on how they could verify electronic machines accuracy and they came up with some kind of paper trail that will do that. So they will be looking at these paper trails that is somehow tied to these electronic machines to verify the vote count.
Recount granted in Wisconsin; same likely coming for Penn., Michigan

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Americans need to be assured of the integrity of a National Election, and if this does anything, it will restore confidence in our elections. Because right now there are just way too many unanswered questions.

You mean like every time a Democrat loses?

Your candidate, Trump was out there campaigning on a rigged election. We had wiki leaks only targeting DNC databases. There are several reports of "attempted hackings" into county voter registration databases. 17 intelligence agencies stated these hacks were coming from Russia. FBI director, James Comey broke long standing DOJ protocol by sending a letter to congress, 11 days prior to an election, AFTER being warned by the DOJ not to do it. 7 days later, and after millions of people voted, he gave birth to a nothing burger. Huma, Hillary Clinton's aid has stated repeatedly she has no idea how her emails showed up on her x-husbands laptop.

Now while you were cheering all of these leaks on, & probably promoting a rigged election, it has come back around to bite you in the ass. There is no confidence in the numbers coming out of several battleground states.

Trump won on a mere "accumulated" 100K votes in certain states. Hillary Clinton is now leading by more than 2 million popular votes. If Trump were in the same position, is there any doubt in your mind that he would have challenged the result--LOL

We need to make certain that no 400 pounder sitting on his bed was manipulating this election, or that Russia was involved. We need to make certain that Trump supporters did not get away with casting more than one vote. We need to make certain that county registrations match the ballots and that those county databases were not hacked into. We need to make certain that the votes were counted correctly. That's why they need to do an audit of these votes.

Is there any doubt in my mind that Republicans would have challenged the result? Yes there is, because it never happened in our lifetime. While there may have been some accusations and complaints about DumBama winning, Republicans never resorted to protests, riots, and even death threats to electors yet alone recounts.

Oh, and Huma had no idea how that stuff got on her husbands computer? Give me a break.

As for Comey, he gave Hil-liar a huge break by not forwarding his investigation results to a grand jury for their decision on how to handle the matter.

Now if Russia (or whoever) rigged these machines, don't you think it would have been by a much larger margin for trump than a few thousand?

Here's the deal: we've been through this and more the last three losses by a Democrat loser; all claiming foul play. The last two ended up being BS, and this one next in line. And what's going to happen the next election if Trump wins a second term?

This circus is why I think Trump should announce that if this recount goes through, he plans on hiring a private prosecutor to look into the FBI's probe of Clintons email, and further keep them on retainer in the event the FBI reveals more about the Clinton foundation.

I think two should play this game instead of just one.

 

[ChrisL]

Can you just imagine the terrible things that are going to happen if they say that Hillary actually won? Holy smokes. Lol.

 

[Jackson]

Latest news is Hillary is going to join Stein for a recount of 3 states. This is a mockery of our election laws.

 

[oreo]

Americans need to be assured of the integrity of a National Election, and if this does anything, it will restore confidence in our elections. Because right now there are just way too many unanswered questions.

You mean like every time a Democrat loses?

Your candidate, Trump was out there campaigning on a rigged election. We had wiki leaks only targeting DNC databases. There are several reports of "attempted hackings" into county voter registration databases. 17 intelligence agencies stated these hacks were coming from Russia. FBI director, James Comey broke long standing DOJ protocol by sending a letter to congress, 11 days prior to an election, AFTER being warned by the DOJ not to do it. 7 days later, and after millions of people voted, he gave birth to a nothing burger. Huma, Hillary Clinton's aid has stated repeatedly she has no idea how her emails showed up on her x-husbands laptop.

Now while you were cheering all of these leaks on, & probably promoting a rigged election, it has come back around to bite you in the ass. There is no confidence in the numbers coming out of several battleground states.

Trump won on a mere "accumulated" 100K votes in certain states. Hillary Clinton is now leading by more than 2 million popular votes. If Trump were in the same position, is there any doubt in your mind that he would have challenged the result--LOL

We need to make certain that no 400 pounder sitting on his bed was manipulating this election, or that Russia was involved. We need to make certain that Trump supporters did not get away with casting more than one vote. We need to make certain that county registrations match the ballots and that those county databases were not hacked into. We need to make certain that the votes were counted correctly. That's why they need to do an audit of these votes.

Is there any doubt in my mind that Republicans would have challenged the result? Yes there is, because it never happened in our lifetime. While there may have been some accusations and complaints about DumBama winning, Republicans never resorted to protests, riots, and even death threats to electors yet alone recounts.

Oh, and Huma had no idea how that stuff got on her husbands computer? Give me a break.

As for Comey, he gave Hil-liar a huge break by not forwarding his investigation results to a grand jury for their decision on how to handle the matter.

Now if Russia (or whoever) rigged these machines, don't you think it would have been by a much larger margin for trump than a few thousand?

Here's the deal: we've been through this and more the last three losses by a Democrat loser; all claiming foul play. The last two ended up being BS, and this one next in line. And what's going to happen the next election if Trump wins a second term?

This circus is why I think Trump should announce that if this recount goes through, he plans on hiring a private prosecutor to look into the FBI's probe of Clintons email, and further keep them on retainer in the event the FBI reveals more about the Clinton foundation.

I think two should play this game instead of just one.

Dumbass, I didn't say Republicans--I SAID DONALD TRUMP. You can bet your sweet ass, if Hillary Clinton won with a mere 100K accumulated votes coming out of 3 states, he would challenged it immediately, the accusations of voter fraud would have been flying all over the place, and he wouldn't have waited for cyber experts to review the vote to make those accusations. You know it, and I know it.

 

[bripat9643]

This isn't a recount, a recount would only produce the same result. This is an audit of the votes cast, specifically out of electronic machines, specifically in Democrat counties, where the paper ballots were coming in strong for Hillary Clinton but the electronic machines in the same county or precincts were showing a 7% loss. That's what got everyone's attention, specifically the cyber experts.

By paper ballots, you mean the same ballots that the machines count? And if so, who was keeping track of these paper ballots in the first place?

Paper ballots are ones that go through an optical machine at the precinct or are mail-in ballots. Electronic machines are just like ATM machines, you punch buttons on the machines to cast your votes. This is where they're seeing the discrepancies. Ironically, it was Hillary Clinton that pushed for electronic machines back in 2000 after the debacle in Florida over the butterfly punch card ballots. There was a big discussion on how they could verify electronic machines accuracy and they came up with some kind of paper trail that will do that. So they will be looking at these paper trails that is somehow tied to these electronic machines to verify the vote count.
Recount granted in Wisconsin; same likely coming for Penn., Michigan

Apparently each town in Wisconsin can choose its own voting machines. Some towns use paper ballots. Some use electronic machines. There are literal dozens of different types of voting machines. That just makes your theory of election tampering look so much more stupid and ridiculous.

 

[flacaltenn]

get 100 votes and she only got 98, so if she gets two more she gets a free trip to Disney or something?

Does Jill Stein expect to win?

Yawn

It's really simple. The Clinton camp has since signed on to this recount. It's a peace treaty between the DNC and the Greens. Because if Clinton had gotten 1/16th of the Stein vote in Michigan -- she would have won. The left doesn't want internal fighting right now. Because if the mourning partisans figured out that Stein cost Clinton Mich and possibly 2 other states, they would go berserk and the Greens would be a BIGGER target than Trump.

It's a coalition to make it look like everyone is cooperating and on the same page. No Stein votes are gonna suddenly become Hillary. Not since "chad" went extinct at any rate. It's all about making Stein and the Greens look useful and friendly --- rather than maybe the reason Hillary lost the election..

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This isn't a recount, a recount would only produce the same result. This is an audit of the votes cast, specifically out of electronic machines, specifically in Democrat counties, where the paper ballots were coming in strong for Hillary Clinton but the electronic machines in the same county or precincts were showing a 7% loss. That's what got everyone's attention, specifically the cyber experts.

By paper ballots, you mean the same ballots that the machines count? And if so, who was keeping track of these paper ballots in the first place?

Paper ballots are ones that go through an optical machine at the precinct or are mail-in ballots. Electronic machines are just like ATM machines, you punch buttons on the machines to cast your votes. This is where they're seeing the discrepancies. Ironically, it was Hillary Clinton that pushed for electronic machines back in 2000 after the debacle in Florida over the butterfly punch card ballots. There was a big discussion on how they could verify electronic machines accuracy and they came up with some kind of paper trail that will do that. So they will be looking at these paper trails that is somehow tied to these electronic machines to verify the vote count.
Recount granted in Wisconsin; same likely coming for Penn., Michigan

You didn't answer my question. Who was keeping track of paper ballots and comparing them to the voting machines? Or the better question, why?

As for your link, read the OP. It clearly states that it's next to impossible to get a recount in PA. You have to have evidence, it goes to court, and then it has to be decided that they will break the rules and allow a recount. But you have to come up with compelling evidence first before a court will even hear the complaint.

 

[ChrisL]

I think there might be a civil war or a revolution if they (whoever THEY are ) announced that Hillary was the president and not Trump. Oh boy, would there ever be trouble. I just can't see people taking that very well at all.

 

[oreo]

This isn't a recount, a recount would only produce the same result. This is an audit of the votes cast, specifically out of electronic machines, specifically in Democrat counties, where the paper ballots were coming in strong for Hillary Clinton but the electronic machines in the same county or precincts were showing a 7% loss. That's what got everyone's attention, specifically the cyber experts.

By paper ballots, you mean the same ballots that the machines count? And if so, who was keeping track of these paper ballots in the first place?

Paper ballots are ones that go through an optical machine at the precinct or are mail-in ballots. Electronic machines are just like ATM machines, you punch buttons on the machines to cast your votes. This is where they're seeing the discrepancies. Ironically, it was Hillary Clinton that pushed for electronic machines back in 2000 after the debacle in Florida over the butterfly punch card ballots. There was a big discussion on how they could verify electronic machines accuracy and they came up with some kind of paper trail that will do that. So they will be looking at these paper trails that is somehow tied to these electronic machines to verify the vote count.
Recount granted in Wisconsin; same likely coming for Penn., Michigan

Apparently each town in Wisconsin can choose its own voting machines. Some towns use paper ballots. Some use electronic machines. There are literal dozens of different types of voting machines. That just makes your theory of election tampering look so much more stupid and ridiculous.

I believe that's the way it is everywhere. In my county, only optical counters are used, requiring the voter to fill out a paper ballot that is then run through the counter. But there are large counties that use both systems, depending on which precinct in the county they're voting at.

 

[blackhawk]

Just curious if Trump had won the popular vote and Hillary the electoral vote and Trump and his supporters were calling for recounts what would the lefts reaction be? Just kidding I'm not at all curious we all know what the reaction would be.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Dumbass, I didn't say Republicans--I SAID DONALD TRUMP. You can bet your sweet ass, if Hillary Clinton won with a mere 100K accumulated votes coming out of 3 states, he would challenged it immediately, the accusations of voter fraud would have been flying all over the place, and he wouldn't have waited for cyber experts to review the vote to make those accusations. You know it, and I know it.

The one great thing about you leftists is how you can see into the future with your crystal ball. You have no idea WTF Trump would have done. But I assure you this: if they steal this election from him, there will be hell to pay down the road.

 

[oreo]

This isn't a recount, a recount would only produce the same result. This is an audit of the votes cast, specifically out of electronic machines, specifically in Democrat counties, where the paper ballots were coming in strong for Hillary Clinton but the electronic machines in the same county or precincts were showing a 7% loss. That's what got everyone's attention, specifically the cyber experts.

By paper ballots, you mean the same ballots that the machines count? And if so, who was keeping track of these paper ballots in the first place?

Paper ballots are ones that go through an optical machine at the precinct or are mail-in ballots. Electronic machines are just like ATM machines, you punch buttons on the machines to cast your votes. This is where they're seeing the discrepancies. Ironically, it was Hillary Clinton that pushed for electronic machines back in 2000 after the debacle in Florida over the butterfly punch card ballots. There was a big discussion on how they could verify electronic machines accuracy and they came up with some kind of paper trail that will do that. So they will be looking at these paper trails that is somehow tied to these electronic machines to verify the vote count.
Recount granted in Wisconsin; same likely coming for Penn., Michigan

You didn't answer my question. Who was keeping track of paper ballots and comparing them to the voting machines? Or the better question, why?

As for your link, read the OP. It clearly states that it's next to impossible to get a recount in PA. You have to have evidence, it goes to court, and then it has to be decided that they will break the rules and allow a recount. But you have to come up with compelling evidence first before a court will even hear the complaint.

Well if they find evidence in Wisconsin, then Pennsylvania and every other state is not going to have a problem with doing an audit in their own states. If they refused--the shit would hit the fan in a very big way, all across this country.

If they find anything going on in Wisconsin, the U.S. Supreme court will be approached and will force any state that refused--into doing an audit.

 

[easyt65]

Recount?


Are we talking about having another one for FLORIDA, or have you Snowflakes finally let that one go?