New vote count in Wisconsin and Michigan?

[fantome profane]

I think you've been propositioned.
(He never took such an interest in me.)

Not true. I know that I have offered the exact same invitation to you, at least once.

 

[Sonofason]

Do you think the result could change?

Dream on...

 

[Revoltingest]

Not true. I know that I have offered the exact same invitation to you, at least once.

But not with the same twinkle in your eye.

 

[Lighthouse]

One party is planning to take office on the basis of the results and one isn't and never was.
That's the main difference.
The various Clinton conspiracy theories are what could use a bit of support. Something more substantial than partisanship.
As @Revoltingest pointed out, the Green party is hardly on the Democrats side.
Tom

Do you, Tom.... then believe that the results have been accepted by Green and Democratic parties?

Who, in your opinion gave all those millions for a recount? The Green?

 

[Lighthouse]

Yes, I think we should.
I think a recount should be automatic for all states for a number of reasons, one of which is if the popular vote winner isn't the election winner.

What about the winner of 50 separate popular votes?

 

[columbus]

Do you, Tom.... then believe that the results have been accepted by Green and Democratic parties?

Who, in your opinion gave all those millions for a recount? The Green?

To the best of my knowledge, the Democrats aren't involved.
The money involved is chump change.

Frankly, I would be inclined to donate. I don't see it as a partisan issue. For all three of those states to unexpectedly flip red is just very suspicious to me. And given that I don't find Putin's involvement particularly far fetched(I definitely think he prefers a weak president) I would like a more objective look at the results.

I'm resigned to a Trump presidency. But Trump, Wikileaks, and Putin have put a serious question about the integrity of the election system in this country. A batch of razor thin margins in all three states warrants investigation.
Tom

 

[buddhist]

... Putin have put a serious question about the integrity of the election system in this country.

More conspiracy theories?

A batch of razor thin margins in all three states warrants investigation.

As I understand it, there are other states which Clinton won which had even smaller margins - perhaps they should be investigated too.

 

[freethinker44]

What about the winner of 50 separate popular votes?

I don't get the question.
Do you mean, like if they win the popular vote in all 50 states and still lose the election?
Then yes, something is definitely wrong there.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't foresee it, but if the election results are changed I imagine we are going to be in for a very nasty storm.

 

[Lighthouse]

To the best of my knowledge, the Democrats aren't involved.
The money involved is chump change.

Frankly, I would be inclined to donate. I don't see it as a partisan issue. For all three of those states to unexpectedly flip red is just very suspicious to me. And given that I don't find Putin's involvement particularly far fetched(I definitely think he prefers a weak president) I would like a more objective look at the results.

I'm resigned to a Trump presidency. But Trump, Wikileaks, and Putin have put a serious question about the integrity of the election system in this country. A batch of razor thin margins in all three states warrants investigation.
Tom

The main stat is that the Green Party didn't receive as much funding in total for their entire presidential campaign as it did now for a recount in which peaks the interest of the Hillary faithful who haven't accepted results. Just before it's Stein to file a request, it was Hillary's camp that gave all the reasoning for the suspicions.

Regarding Putin, can you explain why it's better to have a president who wants to view Russia as their enemy as opposed to resolving differences and working together?

Also, why now that "allegations" arise about Russia do people all of a sudden question the integrity of an election? Has there been that much trust in the non-transparent and secretive US government that the US themselves would never do such a thing to fiddle with their own agenda's? The government themselves even assured the integrity of the election.

If people want a recount, great. If people are suspicious of rigging and corruption, great. It's the hypocrisy and intolerance of other people coming from people that do the same things themselves that is problematic for growth. The same will just keep pointing the finger.

 

[Lighthouse]

I don't get the question.
Do you mean, like if they win the popular vote in all 50 states and still lose the election?
Then yes, something is definitely wrong there.

Think of the popular vote deduced into 50 separate popular votes. (50 separate states.)

One wins roughly 30 popular votes to 20 popular votes. Combined they equal the whole. 30-20.

I suppose I'm just having fun and having an open mind to look at the big picture a number of different ways.

 

[Iti oj]

The main stat is that the Green Party didn't receive as much funding in total for their entire presidential campaign as it did now for a recount in which peaks the interest of the Hillary faithful who haven't accepted results. Just before it's Stein to file a request, it was Hillary's camp that gave all the reasoning for the suspicions.

Regarding Putin, can you explain why it's better to have a president who wants to view Russia as their enemy as opposed to resolving differences and working together?

Also, why now that "allegations" arise about Russia do people all of a sudden question the integrity of an election? Has there been that much trust in the non-transparent and secretive US government that the US themselves would never do such a thing to fiddle with their own agenda's? The government themselves even assured the integrity of the election.

If people want a recount, great. If people are suspicious of rigging and corruption, great. It's the hypocrisy and intolerance of other people coming from people that do the same things themselves that is problematic for growth. The same will just keep pointing the finger.

I think that's a healthy out look. if people want a recount then recount but the partisan b.s. must end

 

[idav]

Regarding Putin, can you explain why it's better to have a president who wants to view Russia as their enemy as opposed to resolving differences and working together?

No candidate said Russia is an enemy however I do have grave concerns how Syria is being treated. Should we just ignore it and just let the other side of the world be at war until it hits our backyards?

 

[Revoltingest]

To the best of my knowledge, the Democrats aren't involved.
The money involved is chump change.

Frankly, I would be inclined to donate. I don't see it as a partisan issue. For all three of those states to unexpectedly flip red is just very suspicious to me. And given that I don't find Putin's involvement particularly far fetched(I definitely think he prefers a weak president) I would like a more objective look at the results.

I'm resigned to a Trump presidency. But Trump, Wikileaks, and Putin have put a serious question about the integrity of the election system in this country. A batch of razor thin margins in all three states warrants investigation.
Tom

Wikileaks simply provided us with information, which appears more accurate than
that provided by mainstream media because it was unfiltered (albeit scheduled).
Does integrity require that it be withheld from us?
Should info only be provided by partisan sources like Fox News & the NYT?

What about the razor thin margin by which Hillary won in NV & MN?
A recount in states which could only benefit Hillary would be corrupt
because there are states which could flip to Trump. The only fair
approach would be to recount every close state.

 

[Revoltingest]

No candidate said Russia is an enemy however I do have grave concerns how Syria is being treated. Should we just ignore it and just let the other side of the world be at war until it hits our backyards?

Our intervention doesn't prevent war from coming here.
Moreover, it even encourages war against us.
Our leaders don't have the wisdom to discern which countries we should attack in order to enhance peace decades down the road. The perfect example of this is overthrowing Iran's democratically elected leader in 1953, & installing the Shah. That led to his popular overthrow, & then our killing over a million Iranians by supplying Iraq with WMDs to attack them.
Do you trust either Hillary or Donald to wage war overseas to improve things?

 

[David1967]

I don't foresee it, but if the election results are changed I imagine we are going to be in for a very nasty storm.

That is an understatement. But I think this has more to do with raising money for the Jill Stein 2020 presidential bid than anything substantial. There is no evidence of anything to suggest that the vote was tampered with. Not to mention the precedent this sets for future elections. I.e. If you don't like the results and can get enough money you may get the results turned to your favor.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That is an understatement. But I think this has more to do with raising money for the Jill Stein 2020 presidential bid than anything substantial. There is no evidence of anything to suggest that the vote was tampered with. Not to mention the precedent this sets for future elections. I.e. If you don't like the results and can get enough money you may get the results turned to your favor.

I also find that very doubtful. Recounts are legal and allowed, and you have to allow them to maintain an open society. However, as seems plausible, it could be about electronic voting, which should never have been to begin with. We need a physical paper trail of votes to most ensure the accuracy of the count. It's harder that way, but the most important things rarely are easy.

 

[idav]

Our intervention doesn't prevent war from coming here.
Moreover, it even encourages war against us.
Our leaders don't have the wisdom to discern which countries we should attack in order to enhance peace decades down the road. The perfect example of this is overthrowing Iran's democratically elected leader in 1953, & installing the Shah. That led to his popular overthrow, & then our killing over a million Iranians by supplying Iraq with WMDs to attack them.
Do you trust either Hillary or Donald to wage war overseas to improve things?

Don't know but can't say I trust Putin making the wisest decisions far as what has been going on.

 

[Revoltingest]

Don't know but can't say I trust Putin making the wisest decisions far as what has been going on.

I don't trust him either.

 

[Lighthouse]

No candidate said Russia is an enemy however I do have grave concerns how Syria is being treated. Should we just ignore it and just let the other side of the world be at war until it hits our backyards?

Whole thing is a false flag operation anyhow in my opinion. Turkey officials are on audio planning chemical attacks on Syrian citizens with plans to blame Syrian government to either get US involved or the US were part of the false flag all along. Ironically, the US media never inform the public of the true stories. Ironically, the US has supplied zero humanitarian aide but has helped supply alleged terrorists with many arms.
No, you take on the common threat together, help try and save as many civilians as possible together. You don't arm "alleged" terrorists or get involved against Russia. Russia stays out of our stupid wars in Iraq and Libya. Russia has every right to protect their interests and not play fiddle to the Western government's whose judgements time and time again have been disastrous. What Supreme objective law made the US the king of the world?
I am not a fan of war, but it's the way this world works.