Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/23/politics/election-hack-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/

Stein at this point will certainly reach her 2.5 million goal, so what are your thoughts? Do you trust the integrity of our election? Should there be a recount?

Donate here, folks: https://jillstein.nationbuilder.com/recount

Clinton should use some of that foundation money.

No harm in a recount. Doubt anything will come of it but no harm in being thorough.

Originally posted by BackFire
No harm in a recount. Doubt anything will come of it but no harm in being thorough.

We could do that and probably find out that is the exact # of Illegal Votes.

is too lait amerikans, Trump iz your prezident.

Originally posted by BackFire
No harm in a recount. Doubt anything will come of it but no harm in being thorough.
Indeed.

Maybe it will influence the faithless elector vote next month. But probably not.

How do you think people would react if the recount showed Hillary won Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and thus became the new president-elect?

Originally posted by |King Joker|
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/23/politics/election-hack-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/

Stein at this point will certainly reach her 2.5 million goal, so what are your thoughts? Do you trust the integrity of our election? Should there be a recount?

Donate here, folks: https://jillstein.nationbuilder.com/recount




+1 Like

Originally posted by |King Joker|
How do you think people would react if the recount showed Hillary won Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and thus became the new president-elect?

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

No.

It's not going to go anywhere. There wasn't any hacking, and if there was going to be it wouldn't have been in the areas these people are claiming. Even Nate Silver has said this. Though then again he was wrong before so who knows? But still.

So instead of showing at least a bit of dignity, they seem to want just get rid of any they might have had left.

It's going to be entertaining. It's even funnier people donated actual money to this cause lol.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
How do you think people would react if the recount showed Hillary won Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and thus became the new president-elect? As opposed to saying: f*ck you guys, I'm retiring.

Don't know how the data on elections are stored. But any chance the data got hacked within the last few weeks after the election?

hmm

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Don't know how the data on elections are stored. But any chance the data got hacked within the last few weeks after the election?

hmm

Plus just look at the utterly flimsy reasoning they are using for why they suspect this.

Also:

Demographics, Not Hacking, Explain The Election Results

You disagree that the Russian's are coming?

Originally posted by Beniboybling
You disagree that the Russian's are coming?

Sure?

When people don't look at margins of victory you get causes like this...

I'm still laughing at how flimsy their evidence is for this need to do a recount lol.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
How do you think people would react if the recount showed Hillary won Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and thus became the new president-elect?

On the other side, how do you think people would react if the recount showed Trump also won the popular vote?

The same people telling us this shit doesn't happen seem to have now suddenly decided, whoops, it can!

Q-bwY-40QAY

BTW, some of the comments with the highest number of thumbs-up (about 1000 likes):



or

I could understand even if they had a teeny bit of evidence of wrong doing..but they actually don't lol. So I dunno, I find it kind of messed up a politician would be asking for donations to investigate something we haven't been given any legit reasons to investigate.

Has everyone just gone crazy? Who are these idiots giving money? These suspicions don't even have any actual merit when you truly read what they are saying.

So I mean what now? If there isn't a recount(and we haven't been given a sufficient reason for one) then is the money returned? The "no harm in a recount" excuse doesn't fly. See we need valid reasons for one, not because liberals can't accept the election results.

The Clintons are also worth MILLIONS upon millions of dollars. If they legitimately thought this would help..wouldn't they be footing the bill for it? Does anyone ever actually think shit out anymore? Why would someone who isn't even a democrat..trying to raise funds for a recount? Did these people just wake up with amnesia? Do they not know how Hilary is? That she wouldn't hesitate to spend a paltry few million if she seriously thought it would show hacking was done?

Any chances of hacking into the election database post-result to influence the recount? Is it harder/easier to hack into the election database after the election? Somehow, I can picture an attempt to hack the results to give Hillary the W.

Altho I will say that I did 0 research on the manner on how the election results are stored.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
How do you think people would react if the recount showed Hillary won Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and thus became the new president-elect?

Some people would lose their minds. And, I'm sure there would be professional incitors (sp?) to help it make news. It would be interesting af if it happened.

Maybe a second civil war.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Any chances of hacking into the election database post-result to influence the recount? Is it harder/easier to hack into the election database after the election? Somehow, I can picture an attempt to hack the results to give Hillary the W.

Altho I will say that I did 0 research on the manner on how the election results are stored.

I don't know. I guess if it's possible to hack and rig an election it would be possible to do the same with a recount. But then those on the left said the system isn't rigged. But now suddenly it might be?

I'll say this about Hilary, I think it's a smart move on her part that she doesn't seem to be taking the bait so far. There isn't any evidence of wrongdoing though, so there is no actual basis for a recount at this point.

I'm honestly not sure what Jill Stein's true motive is. I can't even truly understand this. Surely instead of asking for other people to pay for it, she could have just gone to the Clinton campaign directly with her "evidence" ? I guess she knows gullible people will throw money at anything, but this just seems shady. Did the Clinton's suddenly run out of money?

To King Joker: I wouldn't go that far. The U.S. military (sure, there would be a few detractors) would squash any build up to that. Who's side the military would be on, well, that's a different debate I think.

I think unfortunately if something did happen I think people..would basically use the riots of the Hilary supporters in reaction to Trump's victory as an excuse to act the same if Trump suddenly lost.

Originally posted by Surtur
I don't know. I guess if it's possible to hack and rig an election it would be possible to do the same with a recount. But then those on the left said the system isn't rigged. But now suddenly it might be?

I'll say this about Hilary, I think it's a smart move on her part that she doesn't seem to be taking the bait so far. There isn't any evidence of wrongdoing though, so there is no actual basis for a recount at this point.

I'm honestly not sure what Jill Stein's true motive is. I can't even truly understand this. Surely instead of asking for other people to pay for it, she could have just gone to the Clinton campaign directly with her "evidence" ? I guess she knows gullible people will throw money at anything, but this just seems shady. Did the Clinton's suddenly run out of money?

It would be a great gesture if the Clintons paid for the recount. It would certainly save tax payer funds. As, far as I'm aware though, it's not something she's obligated to do. That's something that would have to go through capital hill in the form of a bill, I would think. Good luck having democrats and republicans sign off on it, though.

Originally posted by meep-meep
It would be a great gesture if the Clintons paid for the recount. It would certainly save tax payer funds. As, far as I'm aware though, it's not something she's obligated to do. That's something that would have to go through capital hill in the form of a bill, I would think. Good luck having democrats and republicans sign off on it, though.

I don't think she is obligated to pay for it, but I'm saying that she could easily afford it and it's just odd for someone to ask for donations. Especially when there isn't any actual evidence of any wrong doing. And this person isn't even in the democratic party.

Something seems off here.

Originally posted by Surtur
I think unfortunately if something did happen I think people..would basically use the riots of the Hilary supporters in reaction to Trump's victory as an excuse to act the same if Trump suddenly lost.

That would be unfortunate and a possibility. Call me crazy but I'm pretty convinced there'd be a few well trained paid shills to initiate violence. They exist on both sides, as far as I'm concerned.

Originally posted by Surtur
I don't think she is obligated to pay for it, but I'm saying that she could easily afford it and it's just odd for someone to ask for donations. Especially when there isn't any actual evidence of any wrong doing. And this person isn't even in the democratic party.

Something seems off here.

No offense but, duh. There's few politicians that would do something like that. Bernie Sanders, and Ron Johnson are a few who might. It'd bankrupt them, but I could see them doing it. Things like that have to be made into law. Even then there would have to be a board or committee to oversee it, unbiased of course. Point is ain't nobody gonna pay for somethin if they ain't gotta.

I suppose, but I just don't think Hilary would have waited this long already if she actually thought there was any merit to this.

It would be weird, but satisfying to see them blow millions of dollars for no reason.

How much you wanna bet that a lot of the money she raised for this Disappears into Special Jill Stein "Projects"!?

https://ballotpedia.org/Voting_methods_and_equipment_by_state

The types of voting equipment used in the United States vary significantly from state to state.

Some groups, such as the Brennan Center for Justice, are concerned that some of the devices in use were not meant to be used for a long time without replacement and that outdated machines threaten the integrity of the election process.


v=O8z6n0Lz_dI


v=7ZPMJyIusA4


For The Green Party Of America, Every Single Percentage Point Matters.

At state level:

1% to 5% of the vote count

=

Secure state-wide ballot access when the presidential candidate receives 1-5% of the state vote (% threshold varies from state to state)


Theres no sinister motive.And There is no consipiracy.

But there is zero evidence to back that up. Jill Stein has also said there is zero evidence of any wrongdoing.

Why was this concern not brought up before the election even took place, if there was sufficient evidence to suggest the machines would have problems?

I don't know about conspiracies, but this definitely isn't normal to come out and say "I have zero evidence, but give me your money anyways".

It's demographics, not fraud or malfunction. I do find it somewhat strange to ask for millions of dollars for no valid reason lol. How is that not shady? If there was even a tiny bit of evidence I'd get it, but there is not. Because some emails got hacked doesn't really mean the election did, especially when everyone and their daddy on the left said it couldn't be done.

She acts like some huge scientific study was done by all these top scientists, but all they did is look at data and see Hilary didn't perform as well as they *thought* she should have in certain areas with certain methods of voting. That delusion has been a big part of why Hilary didn't get enough votes where it mattered.

If it was a malfunction..that's an awfully specific malfunction. In terms of how much it benefited one candidate. These various places all just happened to "malfunction" in ways to favor Trump?

Oh and if the machines did malfunction, then we need a recount of every single state that had any of them, correct? Since who knows if any of them malfunctioned in a way to benefit Hilary. Will Jill Stein then ask for donations for recounts in every single state with these machines?

Originally posted by Surtur
But there is zero evidence to back that up. Jill Stein has also said there is zero evidence of any wrongdoing.

Why was this concern not brought up before the election even took place, if there was sufficient evidence to suggest the machines would have problems?

I don't know about conspiracies, but this definitely isn't normal to come out and say "I have zero evidence, but give me your money anyways".

It's demographics, not fraud or malfunction. I do find it somewhat strange to ask for millions of dollars for no valid reason lol. How is that not shady? If there was even a tiny bit of evidence I'd get it, but there is not. Because some emails got hacked doesn't really mean the election did, especially when everyone and their daddy on the left said it couldn't be done.

She acts like some huge scientific study was done by all these top scientists, but all they did is look at data and see Hilary didn't perform as well as they *thought* she should have in certain areas with certain methods of voting. That delusion has been a big part of why Hilary didn't get enough votes where it mattered.

If it was a malfunction..that's an awfully specific malfunction. In terms of how much it benefited one candidate. You have to admit it is kind of funny. Trump himself said the elections could be rigged and supporters backed him on this. Now those same supporters are claiming there is no way for it to have been rigged.

Of course Clinton supporters have changed their views as well. It is cringe worthy just how a matter of perception changed can alter people's opinions on the matter.

I've noticed the same behavior from conservatives who talk about everyone uniting under Trump when these same people were burning Obama effigies when he got (re)elected.

Originally posted by Newjak
You have to admit it is kind of funny. Trump himself said the elections could be rigged and supporters backed him on this. Now those same supporters are claiming there is no way for it to have been rigged.

Of course Clinton supporters have changed their views as well. It is cringe worthy just how a matter of perception changed can alter people's opinions on the matter.

I've noticed the same behavior from conservatives who talk about everyone uniting under Trump when these same people were burning Obama effigies when he got (re)elected.

I'm not really the one saying it can't be rigged. I'm saying experts say it's not fraud, but demographics. I'm saying that before the election the democrats swore up and down it couldn't be done.

But like I said, if they truly did find evidence of any kind of hacking or machine malfunctions in these states..wouldn't it be right to then recount every state with those types of voting machines? Especially if it's a malfunction.

Originally posted by Surtur
I'm not really the one saying it can't be rigged. I'm saying experts say it's not fraud, but demographics. I'm saying that before the election the democrats swore up and down it couldn't be done.

But like I said, if they truly did find evidence of any kind of hacking or machine malfunctions in these states..wouldn't it be right to then recount every state with those types of voting machines? Especially if it's a malfunction. I was never trying to put words in your mouth. Just using your post to comment on the situation as whole.

And if voting fraud was found on certain machines then they should check all of those machines.

Lol so Stein filed for the recount.

I mean hey okay if there was indeed any foul play, as much as it would suck, it needs to be exposed. But I just think people are going to get their hopes up and be disappointed. You'd think this kind of thing would send Trump on a twitter tirade, but even he doesn't seem to give a shit.

I'm amused because the reason I see some on the left using is that we need to do this just to give people more faith in the system, and that it's something that should be done all the time and so obviously the best time is to start now. So I just wonder if now in the future in elections they will still call for recounts even if a democrat wins? Even though before they said we should already have faith in this system.

The people in Wisconsin who would do the recount have already kinda said it's not going to be easy to finish by the time the deadline is up. When I say they are doing the recount I mean organizing it, since not just one group will be involved.

BTW, Trump won Michigan. Which I'm also hearing used paper ballots. So there is nothing to hack, and Hilary would have needed all 3 of these states I think to win, correct?

He won it by like 10,000.

Yep Michigan seems to have no electronic voting machines.

Seems like that would be that, then. They could call for a recount, but as I said..no electronic voting machines so they'd be doing it by hand I guess they are saying lol.

Though if Stein isn't doing this for Clinton, why isn't she calling for recounts in all states with narrow victories? Including the Clinton ones?

Now I'm seeing reports that Jill Stein raised more in the last few days for a recount..than she did during the months and months of the election. Wait, what? And she's only calling for recounts in states where Trump won a narrow victory, not just any state with a narrow victory.

Something about this feels off. Her entire thing has been about hacking, but then if true why would she want a recount in Michigan?

Clinton camp is backing her play now.

Was there any chance she wouldn't?

Why do I feel like a "fix" is upcoming...?

hmm

Well the Clinton's kinda have to back it now once Stein did what she did. But they have come out and said they thoroughly studied the results for the past few weeks(like I figured they would) and found no evidence of wrong doing.

So I don't know if the fix is in..but so far it seems like Jill Stein just made a blunder. They have said they don't think it will do anything, but you can't really have some Green party person running this recount.

She forced their involvement, or so it seems. I am still suspicious though since Michigan had zero electronic voting. Why want it there? Is the story they miscounted over 10,000 votes?

So is your point that they are doing this just to get more points. Because that is shady as f*ck.

3:18 to 4:29 (Video 1) 9:12 to 14:00 (Video 1)



f58s3H4Y

Gu4-mXBsQXs

E_QsLV-_Fes

7ZPMJyIusA4

B751qk04FXk

AKwESguSYdY

30JU72czRqc


GPA Publicly Declared KPIs in this election were:

(i) To win automatic ballot access in every state (5%)

(ii) To retain ballot access in the states they held from the last election and to win more ballots (21&lt(1 to 5%)

The Green Party have been honest and clear in their communication. Before the campaign. During the campagin. Post election.

Very likely that Jill Stein is just doing this for publicity, kinda clever in that respect, but hopefully people realize that it's extremely unlikely that anything comes of this. Anyone getting their hopes up that this will change anything is probably going to be sorely disappointed. Then again, this is 2016, the year when the least likely outcome keeps happening.

Originally posted by BackFire
Very likely that Jill Stein is just doing this for publicity, kinda clever in that respect, but hopefully people realize that it's extremely unlikely that anything comes of this. Anyone getting their hopes up that this will change anything is probably going to be sorely disappointed. Then again, this is 2016, the year when the least likely outcome keeps happening.

There's unlikely, and there's not gonna happen. Even Hillary knows it, or she'd have paid for this herself instead of bandwagoning on the Green train (Probably just a ploy to keep them from owning the spotlight. Yes, I believe she'd be that petty.)

waste of time and money, but then again, US government wasted money even worse before

It's just some scam for her.

Originally posted by BackFire
Very likely that Jill Stein is just doing this for publicity, kinda clever in that respect, but hopefully people realize that it's extremely unlikely that anything comes of this. Anyone getting their hopes up that this will change anything is probably going to be sorely disappointed. Then again, this is 2016, the year when the least likely outcome keeps happening.

Well you'd think the people dumb enough to give money are getting their hopes up.

I mean a reason for recounting Michigan hasn't been given, as it has no electronic voting.

Originally posted by Surtur
It's just some scam for her.

Here:

http://www.wikihow.com/Call-911

https://www.stopfraud.gov/report.html

https://tips.fbi.gov/

https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices

Originally posted by shiv
Here:

http://www.wikihow.com/Call-911

https://www.stopfraud.gov/report.html

https://tips.fbi.gov/

https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices

Right, you don't think it's shady if she is doing this just to move up a percentage point or two?

I'm not saying Jill Stein is part of some massive conspiracy. This just seems like standard shady shit politicians do. It's just strange we're all supposed to just shrug our shoulders and go along with these petty games people play.

Tbh, if you're a third party hanging on by a thread, and hear about alleged fraud, than this makes perfect sense.

If anyone should be taken to task, it's the media for making zero effort to answer "what's in it for the Greens?"

Published on Monday 31 October 2016

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein explains.

Each vote builds a party for the 99 percent.


KFKh-W150AM

I think we all completely understand what you are saying. Each vote counts for this person, she's like a vampire who has been starved for centuries, each drop of blood matters.

What I am saying is these people are shady for doing this to get a few more votes. It doesn't have to be a conspiracy to knock out Trump in order for it to be shady, it can be shady on a smaller level.

resuyPt4-Ds

But nobody cares what Stein says, it's what she does, and her actions are shady.

Once again: even if it's just to get more votes or even one more vote: that is shady. Illegal? No. Shady? Yes.

She's not going to come out and admit this, she is delusional enough to think it might help her become president in 2020 or some stupid shit like that.

I don't expext anything to come of the recount, but Trump's tears over a 'not rigged' election is hilarious.

Everyone seems to go back and forth. Trump said it was rigged, but then he mocked others after the election for saying it(though he had the right to call them on their hypocrisy IMO). But then he also is now saying illegals voted. The left said the system wasn't rigged, Stein who is GP also said it, but now after the election suddenly it is, but only in 3 key states Hilary lost of course.

This isn't going to really end with people having a lot of faith in this system. Or really any of the parties. Which is probably why the Obama administration just wanted Clinton to accept the results and be done with it.

Originally posted by Surtur
But nobody cares what Stein says, it's what she does, and her actions are shady.

Once again: even if it's just to get more votes or even one more vote: that is shady. Illegal? No. Shady? Yes.

She's not going to come out and admit this, she is delusional enough to think it might help her become president in 2020 or some stupid shit like that.


George Martin - Green Party of America National Committe. G.P. Wis. Former Co Chairman.


bRHosSs1jxQ

CNN

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.

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.

*Former. Took a couple levels in badass.




http://www.gallup.com/poll/165392/perceived-need-third-party-reaches-new-high.aspx


https://wwwcache.wraltechwire.com/asset/news/2009/08/10/5764134/GrassRoots_image-512x256.jpg

Stein sues after Wisconsin refuses to order hand recounts

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/report-trump-files-lawsuit-after-nevada-extends-voting-hours/article/2606793

Democrat 537,753 Republican 511,319

Donald Trump's campaign filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the Clark County Registrar in Nevada for letting people vote

Judge Rejects

That happened weeks ago, but it's still funny too. Not as funny as the current Stein stuff, but still funny.

People. Incl People with no affiliation with The GP are not paying The Wis Elect Commission + WI County Clerks to fill their coffers and not actually count all of the votes.

Why isn't she calling for recounts in other states that are close? She only did them in close states where Clinton lost.

Originally posted by Surtur
Why isn't she calling for recounts in other states that are close? She only did them in close states where Clinton lost.

I believe she's only targeting states with systems susceptible to cheating/accused of cheating.

Originally posted by cdtm
I believe she's only targeting states with systems susceptible to cheating/accused of cheating.

I find it hard to believe it's only 3 states and only in states Clinton lost that have these systems.

The 3 states don't even have the same systems. Michigan, for instance, has no electronic voting.

The results in New Hampshire I think were closer than in Michigan or Wisconsin, but Trump lost there. Where is Stein for a recount there?

Green Party drops bid for statewide Pennsylvania recount



Bwahahahaha!

I would love to bang to Jill Stein, with our dirty talk consisting of me calling her dirty liberal ****, while she calls me a conservative jack ass.

http://heavy.com/news/2016/12/wisconsin-recount-totals-update-day-2-3-1-returns-two-latest-info-news-live-michigan/

Partial report of Wis recount. Day 2.

Trump gained 6 votes.

Hillary gained 3 votes.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
http://heavy.com/news/2016/12/wisconsin-recount-totals-update-day-2-3-1-returns-two-latest-info-news-live-michigan/

Partial report of Wis recount. Day 2.

Trump gained 6 votes.

Hillary gained 3 votes.

Hilarious, just hilarious. Well since we've solved hunger and disease worldwide, that certainly was millions of dollars well spent.

Stein wants to take it to federal court lol.

*Gets out popcorn*

So if this goes to federal court it's not going to cost us tax payers anything, right? So that is good.

http://heavy.com/news/2016/12/wisconsin-recount-results-day-4-3-totals-update-latest-new-who-leads-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-stein-pennsylvania-website-rules-laws/

Wis recount. Day 3 & 4 completed. 43 counties done. 28 to go (according to comments).

Trump gains: 110
Hillary gains: 71

LMAO. I want to see the faces of everyone who donated money to Jill Stein.

Ah well, they can still maintain their death grip on the popular vote. It's the only thing that helps them sleep at night, clinging to that.

Jill Stein. Proof that you CAN harvest lib tears for $$$.



Hehe. J/k. Don't kill me.

She really puts the green in "Green Party" doesn't she?

U.S. judge rejects Jill Stein bid for Pennsylvania recount