Anyone remember shit like this from just..last month? No?? Not at all? I'll give you a helping hand:
Can you rig a U.S. presidential election? Experts say it’s basically impossible.
5 Reasons (And Then Some) Not To Worry About A 'Rigged' Election
Anyone remember shit like this from just..last month? No?? Not at all? I'll give you a helping hand:
Can you rig a U.S. presidential election? Experts say it’s basically impossible.
5 Reasons (And Then Some) Not To Worry About A 'Rigged' Election
BTW, some of the comments with the highest number of thumbs-up (about 1000 likes):
Imagine if they recounted and then Trump ended up winning the popular vote too...IMAGINE THE BUTTHURT
or
Please have the recount, we need to find out how many illegals voted for Hillary.
😂
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.
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?
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.
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 SurturYou 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.
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.
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.