What's new
By:

What if this happened?

Gameface

Gameface

1135809
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
I know that it won't. I'm not getting my hopes up or anything. Just wondering, if a recount did flip the election how the hell would that work. I imagine obviously the Republican party would want another recount and that ultimately it would go to court.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/25/politics/green-party-recount-wisconsin/index.html?adkey=bn

Washington (CNN)Green Party officials filed Friday for a recount in Wisconsin, following reports of voting discrepancies, and were seeking a deeper investigation into the election results, which handed the state to Donald Trump two weeks ago.

Wisconsin Green Party co-chairman George Martin said that they were seeking a "reconciliation of paper records" -- a request that would go one step further than a simple recount, spurring, he said, an investigation into the integrity of the state's voting system.

"This is a process, a first step to examine whether our electoral democracy is working," Martin said.

The announcement came as Green Party candidate Jill Stein's Thanksgiving fundraising blitz passed $5 million. The money is well beyond the $2 million mark the Green Party initially set, and Wisconsin party officials said that any additional money not used for the recount would be used to train Green Party candidates for local office. The goal as of Friday was to raise $7 million.
Click to expand...
 
A money grab. First "give us 2 million and we'll initiate a recount in 3 states". Then "oh, that 2m was for one state. We'd like 7m now. Anything extra will go to our pockets". I guess if they can raise 100m, that'd make their candidates a bit more viable.
 
I get that part of this is the Green party getting their name out there and raising some money, but I'm wondering what would happen if there were irregularities uncovered and the results of the election were called into question?
 
Lets say they re-count and find that somehow 27k votes were counted wrong and now it favors Clinton. That is 10 electoral votes only... why even bother?
 
MVP said:
Lets say they re-count and find that somehow 27k votes were counted wrong and now it favors Clinton. That is 10 electoral votes only... why even bother?
Click to expand...

I imagine they'd expand the investigation into other states.
 
MVP said:
Lets say they re-count and find that somehow 27k votes were counted wrong and now it favors Clinton. That is 10 electoral votes only... why even bother?
Click to expand...

IF Hillary wins all 3 recounts then she'd have enough EC votes to win the election.
 
It could go the other way and give Trump an even bigger victory so that he has the popular and EC vote.

I am hearing about delegates of the EC receiving death threats if they cast their vote for trump and not change it to Clinton.
 
Scat said:
It could go the other way and give Trump an even bigger victory so that he has the popular and EC vote.

I am hearing about delegates of the EC receiving death threats if they cast their vote for trump and not change it to Clinton.
Click to expand...

Standard bullying tactic from the left tbh.
 
Siro said:
IF Hillary wins all 3 recounts then she'd have enough EC votes to win the election.
Click to expand...

I understand. Are other 2 states officially being filed for recount as well? I heard they are thinking about it but did not know if anything was filed or not?
I remember few recounts in Europe( for Parliament elections) back in the day but usually when margins of win were in few hundred votes. Kind of silly to expect that 27.000 votes were messed up. They have better chances in Michigan where it is 11.000 difference but in Wisconsin they should not waste time and money.
 
MVP said:
I understand. Are other 2 states officially being filed for recount as well? I heard they are thinking about it but did not know if anything was filed or not?
I remember few recounts in Europe( for Parliament elections) back in the day but usually when margins of win were in few hundred votes. Kind of silly to expect that 27.000 votes were messed up. They have better chances in Michigan where it is 11.000 difference but in Wisconsin they should not waste time and money.
Click to expand...

https://www.theverge.com/2016/11/25...-filed-wisconsin-donald-trump-hillary-clinton
 
Look, I voted for Clinton but something stinks. How the **** did Jill Stein raise that much money so quickly? That's probably more money than she raised for her entire presidential campaign.

As for the electors I've read at least 6 are not voting for Trump - one is even suing for the right to not vote for him. Which is going to set a disturbing precedent.

We're on slippery ground here.
 
candrew said:
Look, I voted for Clinton but something stinks. How the **** did Jill Stein raise that much money so quickly? That's probably more money than she raised for her entire presidential campaign.

As for the electors I've read at least 6 are not voting for Trump - one is even suing for the right to not vote for him. Which is going to set a disturbing precedent.

We're on slippery ground here.
Click to expand...

I don't think the recount or investigation is slippery ground. That seems pretty routine to me. Faithless electors are a problem though.
 
MVP said:
OK I get Michigan, but Pennsylvania? 66.0000 vote difference , nobody would approve recount there. Such a waste of money:(. Why not recount Kentucky, 66k or 660k what the hell, maybe it is rigged!
Click to expand...

I think the whole thing is nonsense.
 
candrew said:
How the **** did Jill Stein raise that much money so quickly?
Click to expand...

Who knows?

George-Soros.jpg
 
Hmm, faithless electors might be the best chance in my lifetime to get rid of the electoral college once and for all... Conflicted
 
colton said:
Aren't you old enough to remember Florida in 2000? That's exactly what happened.
Click to expand...

I remember it. It was different. Clinton has already conceded. Plus, that wasn't really an issue of voting irregularities it was about how difficult it was to count their ballot due to dimples and hanging chads. There was an issue with how confusing the "butterfly" layout of the ballot was. What they're looking into here is something possibly a little more malicious.
 
Gameface said:
I remember it. It was different. Clinton has already conceded. Plus, that wasn't really an issue of voting irregularities it was about how difficult it was to count their ballot due to dimples and hanging chads. There was an issue with how confusing the "butterfly" layout of the ballot was. What they're looking into here is something possibly a little more malicious.
Click to expand...

Yeah from my memory,this is a pretty significant difference. Florida was pretty unclear on who won back then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top