RECOUNT in 3 SWING STATES - HERE WE GO!

[screen glare]

Happy Thanksgiving, Trump and Putin!

Hillary ahead by more than 2 million in popular vote total.

Within 24 hours Jill Stein has raised $millions in donations via crowdsource to start recounts in swing states Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

Manipulated or hacked voting machine totals suspected according to election experts.

Don't be sore winners fascist fans. Toast recounts round your Thanksgiving table with Trump wine in your goblets, a copy of the constitution in your pockets, and a prayer of gratitude for every gold star family's sacrifice. Especially sons and daughters who died exterminating fascism in World War II.

[Bryce]

Happy Thanksgiving, Trump and Putin!

Hillary ahead by more than 2 million in popular vote total.

Within 24 hours Jill Stein has raised $millions in donations via crowdsource to start recounts in swing states Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

Manipulated or hacked voting machine totals suspected according to election experts.

Don't be sore winners fascist fans. Toast recounts round your Thanksgiving table with Trump wine in your goblets, a copy of the constitution in your pockets, and a prayer of gratitude for every gold star family's sacrifice. Especially sons and daughters who died exterminating fascism in World War II.

Wait a minute. For years now, I've been hearing people of your ilk tell me there is no voter fraud. We don't need to require an ID to vote. Now, you're telling us there is voter fraud. Which is it? No voter fraud only when your side wins?

Second, I love how far left always wants to change the rules after they loose. Both sides went into the election knowing what the rules were. What happened to your "blue wall" that was going to ensure a HilLIERy victory? You LOVED the electoral college and the "blue wall" it created when it looked like it was a lock for HilLIERy. Now, the election is over, you lost and you want to change the rules. Typical.

[Calvert DeForest]

Michigan election officials have stated time and time again that our polling system is pretty much fraud-proof. Voting machines are secured, and nothing is connected to the internet.

Look, I'm no Trump fan (not that I'm any Hillary fan either), but according to our nation's election system, he won by a definite majority. I accept it, and I'm willing to give him a chance. The way I see it, recounts in this case are a waste of time and money, and the results will likely be no different.

If the voters are unhappy with the job President Trump does, they'll have a chance to say so in the mid-term's. If they still don't like the job he does after four years, they'll have the chance to put someone else in the job. That's the way it works.

[Deleted User 8570]

Happy Thanksgiving, Trump and Putin!

Hillary ahead by more than 2 million in popular vote total.

Within 24 hours Jill Stein has raised $millions in donations via crowdsource to start recounts in swing states Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

Manipulated or hacked voting machine totals suspected according to election experts.

Don't be sore winners fascist fans. Toast recounts round your Thanksgiving table with Trump wine in your goblets, a copy of the constitution in your pockets, and a prayer of gratitude for every gold star family's sacrifice. Especially sons and daughters who died exterminating fascism in World War II.

Wait a minute. For years now, I've been hearing people of your ilk tell me there is no voter fraud. We don't need to require an ID to vote. Now, you're telling us there is voter fraud. Which is it? No voter fraud only when your side wins?

Second, I love how far left always wants to change the rules after they loose. Both sides went into the election knowing what the rules were. What happened to your "blue wall" that was going to ensure a HilLIERy victory? You LOVED the electoral college and the "blue wall" it created when it looked like it was a lock for HilLIERy. Now, the election is over, you lost and you want to change the rules. Typical.

The computer scientists who suggested it call it very unlikely and only proposed it to eliminate the very remote possibility. The question isn't in person voter fraud at all, it's whether the machines were manipulated in some way. Very different than the voter fraud we hear so much about. Not gonna change anything probably but certainly a responsible course of action given that the analysis found some rather unlikely results. I'm not gonna jump up and down like Glare but it does seem an interesting question.

[bmw]

If the suspicion is that the voting machines were hacked, why start with a recount? Why not just have some random voting machines from the 3 states in question looked at by independent computer forensics experts for evidence that the software was hacked? Seems to me all you would have to do is a direct comparison between the software as extracted from the machines and the master and make sure they match.

[Deleted User 8570]

If the suspicion is that the voting machines were hacked, why start with a recount? Why not just have some random voting machines from the 3 states in question looked at by independent computer forensics experts for evidence that the software was hacked? Seems to me all you would have to do is a direct comparison between the software as extracted from the machines and the master and make sure they match.

It's safer to recount the whole thing by hand... a random sampling might miss any irregularities.

From the AP:

Clinton being pushed to seek vote recount in 3 states
BY JONATHAN LEMIRE AND DAVID HAMILTON
Today
NEW YORK (AP) — A group of election lawyers and data experts has asked Hillary Clinton's campaign to call for a recount of the vote totals in three battleground states — Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania — to ensure that a cyberattack was not committed to manipulate the totals.

There is no evidence that the results were hacked or that electronic voting machines were compromised. The Clinton campaign on Wednesday did not respond to a request for comment as to whether it would petition for a recount before the three states' fast-approaching deadlines to ask for one.

President-elect Donald Trump won Wisconsin and Pennsylvania by razor-thin margins and has a small lead in Michigan. All three states had been reliably Democratic in recent presidential elections.

The group, led by voting-rights attorney John Bonifaz and J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, contacted the Clinton campaign this week. That call, which was first reported by New York Magazine, raised the possibility that Clinton may have received fewer votes than expected in some counties that rely on electronic voting machines.

But Halderman, in an article posted on Medium on Wednesday, stressed that the group has no evidence of a cyberattack or voting irregularities. He urged that a recount be ordered just to eliminate the possibility.

"The only way to know whether a cyberattack changed the result is to closely examine the available physical evidence — paper ballots and voting equipment in critical states like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania," Halderman wrote.

Recounts, which are often costly and time-intensive efforts, would likely only be initiated if the Clinton camp pushed for one, though Wisconsin independently announced that it would conduct an audit of its vote. A call for a recount, particularly coming on the heels of a fiercely contested and sharply partisan election, would likely be cheered by Democrats but denounced by Republicans eager to focus on governing.

A request to the Trump transition team for comment was not immediately returned.

Trump's campaign had long believed that his message of economic populism would resonate in the Rust Belt. He frequently campaigned in Pennsylvania and made a late push in both Wisconsin and Michigan, successfully turning out white working-class voters whom pollsters may have missed.

Many pre-election polls showed Clinton with slight leads. While advocating for the recounts, Halderman writes that "the most likely explanation" for Trump's surprise win "is that the polls were systematically wrong."

The deadlines for petitioning for a recount in all three states are in the coming days, with Wisconsin's on Friday. Green Party candidate Jill Stein announced a fundraising effort Wednesday to pay for such recounts.

The focal point of any possible electoral cyberattack presumably would have been electronic voting machines that, whether or not they are connected to the internet, could be infected with malware that could change vote totals. But many of those machines produce a paper record of the vote that could be checked to see if the vote tabulations are accurate.

Pennsylvania is considered one of the states most susceptible to hacking because 96 percent of its voting machines have no paper trail. Wisconsin is far less vulnerable because it uses electronic machines with voter-verifiable paper trails in most counties. Michigan is considered the safest of the three because it uses paper ballots.

Officials in the three states confirmed that no recounts have been ordered. A spokesman for the U.S. Justice Department says it is not tallying the number of voting complaints to determine whether federal action is warranted.

Many election experts have called for routine post-election audits designed to boost public confidence in vote outcomes, by guarding against both tampering and natural vote-counting mistakes. These could involve spot-checks of the voting records and ballots, typically in randomly selected precincts, to make sure that votes were accurately recorded.

In many states, audits involve hand-counting the votes on paper ballots and comparing the results to the totals stored in the state's electronic voting system. Such audits do sometimes turn up mistakes that reverse an election. That happened in Florida's Palm Beach County in 2012, when a post-election audit determined that the "winners" in two city council races were actually losers.

Routine audits also make it possible to confirm the accuracy of elections without putting the onus on losing candidates to call for a recount. In states without regular audits, a candidate who questions the results gets "painted as a sore loser," Pamela Smith, president of the nonprofit Verified Voting, said in an interview earlier this year. "If you do a regular audit, you often don't need a recount. It either shows the count was right or you find something."

Any attempted hack to swing the results in three states would have been a massive and unprecedented undertaking. But electoral security was an issue that loomed large in many Americans' minds this year as the Democratic National Committee and several Clinton staffers had their emails breached and later released. U.S. security officials believe that hack of email was orchestrated by Russian hackers.

[TC Shuts Up]

The Democrat Party is firmly in control of the voting process, certainly in those states. If there was any hacking, it's in their favor.

This is just another attempt to delegitimatize Trump, pure and simple. The people most of us talked to were angry about what has been happening and how H*** segments of the population have been ignored for the last 30 years, and not JUST by Obama, but by Democrats and RINOs.

If you keep "discovering" caches of ballots that mysteriously just happened to be 100% Democrat, you can perpetrate this false story. If you recount just Democrat precincts, and not Republican precincts, this is what happens. It's why the Democrat Party just wanted to count three counties in Florida in 2000, not the whole state.

I knew something was up when Michigan was not called for Trump. Then they blamed an operative that was withholding votes in Genesee County, after all, they are all incompetent there to the point that people leave it off their resumes and Facebook Pages, right? That's the impression hammered by the Newspapers and Broadcast Media.

[bmw]

I understand why recounts are being sought - I'm not one of those who says just move on if there's any evidence of hacking, but what actual evidence is there beyond the results being different from the polls? And Michigan and Pennsylvania aren't really surprises - in fact Trump led in a final poll done in Michigan and in PA, and polls generally showed the gap closing considerably in those states in the final days. Wisconsin was a bit of a surprise, but no polling was done there in the final 5 or 6 days during the time when the gaps closed in the other 2 states. Combine all that with high turnout from Trump supporters in that region and there you go - a Trump victory.

[Deleted User 8570]

Happy Thanksgiving, Trump and Putin!

Hillary ahead by more than 2 million in popular vote total.

Within 24 hours Jill Stein has raised $millions in donations via crowdsource to start recounts in swing states Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

Manipulated or hacked voting machine totals suspected according to election experts.

Don't be sore winners fascist fans. Toast recounts round your Thanksgiving table with Trump wine in your goblets, a copy of the constitution in your pockets, and a prayer of gratitude for every gold star family's sacrifice. Especially sons and daughters who died exterminating fascism in World War II.

Wait a minute. For years now, I've been hearing people of your ilk tell me there is no voter fraud. We don't need to require an ID to vote. Now, you're telling us there is voter fraud. Which is it? No voter fraud only when your side wins?

Second, I love how far left always wants to change the rules after they loose. Both sides went into the election knowing what the rules were. What happened to your blue wall" that was going to ensure a HilLIERy victory? You LOVED the electoral college and the "blue wall" it created when it looked like it was a lock for HilLIERy. Now, the election is over, you lost and you want to change the rules. Typical.

Typical for both sides... the Electoral College is a political football... the blue wall finally crumbled. So what? You can blame only one side for this behavior if you like. Just realize the facts aren't on your side.

bmw I hope you saw that I edited my post to add an article with some in depth explanations. The calls actually look rather non-partisan which is interesting.

[bmw]

As I said I'm not opposed to recounts. If anybody is willing to pony up the money, then I say go for it. But in this particular instance it is a lost cause. And if we're going to recount the 3 swing states that gave it to Trump, then we also had better recount states like New Hampshire and Nevada where Hillary won by 2800 votes and 26,000 votes respectively.

[Deleted User 8570]

As I said I'm not opposed to recounts. If anybody is willing to pony up the money, then I say go for it. But in this particular instance it is a lost cause. And if we're going to recount the 3 swing states that gave it to Trump, then we also had better recount states like New Hampshire and Nevada where Hillary won by 2800 votes and 26,000 votes respectively.

Depends on those circumstances though those went about as expected... the question is how undersampled were Trumps folks. The reason Stein is suddenly so into this is a mystery. She said both were awful so vote for me... I guess she didn't mean it...

[audiophile]

I didn't vote for Trump or Clinton, however this is nothing but a waste of time and money.

It makes democrats look like hypocrites, as Bryce suggested.

[Deleted User 8570]

I didn't vote for Trump or Clinton, however this is nothing but a waste of time and money.

It makes democrats look like hypocrites, as Bryce suggested.

Except that although Democrats would love to recount they didn't suggest it... some security experts and Jill Stein of all people did. Stein raised the money to do it. Let the recounting begin...

But don't blame Democrats for anything... they aren't guilty.

[audiophile]

Ironically Jill Stein took 50,000 votes, enough that Hillary might have won instead...in Michigan.

[TC Shuts Up]

There seem to be a lot of people with questionable agendas. Jill Stein is one example. And who did Gary Johnson take more votes from? Jill Stein certainly prefers HDRC over DJT. Doesn't matter what she calls herself. A Democrat by any other name.