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.
The template has been created. All it will take next time is smarter Judge shopping (like happened with tobacco lawsuits and currently happens with gun control) and you'll see recount after recount with enough Electors not certified in time to throw the election into the House.
Play the long game, people.
Mmm.... I dunno. In general, yeah, I'm afraid you're going to be right, but the judge-shopping part is going to be problematic. In most cases, one of the reasons the candidate lost the state was because it was of a different ideology or - at most - a swing state. Which means that that particular state did not have a significantly strong ideological culture one way or the other, or if it did, that culture probably did not have a very strong ideological bias for the loser - otherwise they wouldn't have lost, right?
So, chances are pretty good that they aren't going to have a deep pool of judges who are biased toward them. Might be hard to find a sympathetic robe. I mean, if for some reason California flipped for Trump this year, Hillary could have found judges lined up ten deep at every tavern, jumping up and down and yelling "pick me pick me pick me!!!" like she was Monty Hall or something. But I think for the most part, Democratic candidates are likely to be arguing with Republican-appointed justices in somewhat-red purple states, and vice versa.
Is she going to refund the millions in unspent "recount" money or is that money still going toward "election integrity" efforts (i.e. toward helping the Green Party in future elections)?
It is going to go to help election integrity by campaigning for the right (Green Party) candidates (which will siphon off votes from Democrats)!
Recount in Wisconsin ends with 133 votes added for Trump!
Sometimes people make themselves look at real losers in the worst way and in this case the Clinton campaign and Jill Stein are for sure the winners of the biggest losers of 2016! What an accomplishment on their record.
Maybe there is some reward for that!
Some wealthy donors have lost more money by giving it to Jill Stein to use for the recount.
IMO the Clinton campaign and Jill Stein should be investigated for this bs lawsuit for recounting votes just to try to make Trump and the GOP look bad.
In the end the media and the Democratic party look so bad.
Even European newspapers call it a joke and waste and yhe democrats are over there also shown as whiners and sore losers.
What will be next for these losers and when is it enough or are they really so stupid to keep digging their hole deeper.
Trump outsmarted them and the people turned out in the thousands for him.
The map is red, aside from liberal sanctuary cities where the rich seem to love to have an illegal work for them.
Maybe the rich in these cities can move with their illegal alien and have them work legally in their home country and consider it a charity to move with them.
Lesser elections are another matter of course, but there has yet to be a Republican supported recount for POTUS. While I find the partisan usage of them despicable, it will be interesting when the time comes that the GOP calls for one or several.
The template has been created. All it will take next time is smarter Judge shopping (like happened with tobacco lawsuits and currently happens with gun control) and you'll see recount after recount with enough Electors not certified in time to throw the election into the House.
Play the long game, people.
It is a greater threat to our democratic process than most people realize. If Stein and Clinton and others had succeeded in tying up all electors from MI, WI, PA and NV and the House were controlled by the Democrats, then this would be a Constitutionally valid means of outright stealing the election. The Democrats would vigorously pound the pulpit screaming, "The popular vote went to Hillary! The people have spoken!" and then proceeded to appoint Hillary Clinton as President. It would be interesting to see if this hurt them in their next bid for reelection or not.
Unless they are very very foolish, every state in our nation needs to put much stronger limits on recounts. What if the GOP uses this tactic to keep CA, IL and NY electors home in 2020? And because many voters and politicians in CA, NY and IL are currently thinking, "No fair! You should have let the recounts proceed!" so they're likely to pass laws that make this recount tactic much easier to use in the future. Laws that prevent even the most liberally biased judge from stopping it. And they'll have unwittingly opened the door to the GOP silencing their state's vote -- just as Stein and Clinton tried to do this year. This is a threat to the election process for both sides.
I WAS going to make a separate thread, but.. I realized: No need.
My question is:
Will Stein apologize to Trump?
Has any liberal apologized to Trump for their malicious lies?
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.
Recount in Wisconsin ends with 133 votes added for Trump!
