Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the electoral college is anything fair, both Trump and Clinton should have received 10 electoral votes in Pennsylvania, 8 votes from Michigan and 5 votes in Wisconsin
Florida - 15 electoral votes for Trump, 14 for Clinton
Texas - 21 electoral votes for Trump, 17 for Clinton
Ohio - 10 electoral votes for Trump, 8 for Clinton
Georgia - 9 for Trump, 6 for Clinton
North Carolina - 8 for Trump, 7 for Clinton
Arizona - 6 for Trump, 5 for Clinton
It simply does not make sense that Trump winning by 0.2% in Michigan meant that the whole state voted for him
Don't hate the player, hate the game. Don't like the rules of the game? Change them.
If all 50 states did award electors proportionally, it would change the way candidates campaign drastically. We have no idea what this year would have looked like if such a system was in place for that very reason. Trump won the chess game. There's no way of knowing how the checkers game you're proposing would have gone because that isn't the game that was being played.
Recounts are many times mandated if the margin of victory is within a certain percentage, it varies from state to state.
Candidates can certainly request a recount. Some jurisdictions make that candidate pay for a recount unless it turns out that the results end up changing the winner.
This recount is requested by a candidate who has no chance of winning based on grounds that even the individual who speculated on possibilities of tampering said didn't happen. So the recount is proceeding on a false premise.
If the recount is Court ordered the "aggrieved" party is excused from paying for it so the cost is then borne by the taxpayers.
Ok and does the law stipulate that only likely winning candidates can request one?, I presume not.
Subsequently the Republicans have no legal grounds to stop it.
They could of course, amend the law to close such a loop hole.
Ok and does the law stipulate that only likely winning candidates can request one?, I presume not.
Subsequently the Republicans have no legal grounds to stop it.
They could of course, amend the law to close such a loop hole.
The ones I'm familiar with the answer is yes, a requestor has to be the likely winner if the recount changes results.
Oh so you believe that a judge completely ignored the nuance of the law solely on his or her partisan beliefs?
Why not quote the relevant text of the law and really drive your point home?
Where did you get that? You asked me a question based on my experience and prior knowledge, note I said what I was familiar with. I answered that question.
If you got that from my first post about it I was summarizing what was in the public domain and had been widely reported.
They claim they won fair and square so why so much pushback?
You're smart and you know the answer. Because it's stupid. If the Clinton campaign had requested it there likely would have been zero opposition, well probably some but within the realm of "Ok, it's stupid but go ahead". Instead a pawn is doing it and, quite frankly, besmirching the reputations of election officials in all three states.
They claim they won fair and square so why so much pushback?
Nothing. But why waste millions of dollars based on a theory of hacking that has zero supporting evidence? And, while we're on the subject, why are leftists only seeking recounts in states that Trump won? HRC won narrow victories in several states, including New Hampshire, Maine, and Minnesota. Why aren't those folks concerned about possible "election hacking" in those states?
Ultimately, we have laws that govern who and how lawsuits can be brought. Stein is outside of those laws and her lawsuits should be dismissed, if only for those reasons.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
