Posted:
#1
https://realtimepolitics.com/2016/11/24/breaking-the-recount-is-set-to-proceed-three-states-too-close-to-call/
?????????????????????????????
Posted:
#5
Denial.... Started long ago when they all believed the heir-apparent witch was going to win easily. 2+ weeks and it continues.
I'll predict protests/riots like the country has never seen if the left after having the entire U.S. media (except Fox & Talk-Radio), the Obama Administration and the Justice Department all working together doesn't accept this bitter defeat and try to find a candidate a little less worn out, corrupt, dis-honest and actually has a message better than "I'm with Her" in 2020...
You hang in there Dark1... You have to accept that you have a problem before you can deal with it...
I'll predict protests/riots like the country has never seen if the left after having the entire U.S. media (except Fox & Talk-Radio), the Obama Administration and the Justice Department all working together doesn't accept this bitter defeat and try to find a candidate a little less worn out, corrupt, dis-honest and actually has a message better than "I'm with Her" in 2020...
You hang in there Dark1... You have to accept that you have a problem before you can deal with it...
Posted:
#6
Academics, computer experts, and election rights advocates urge democrats to call for recounts in 3 battleground States because of strong evidence of voting anomalies. According to yahoo news, Clinton received over two million more individual votes than Trump. Audits can only lead to stronger electoral integrity.
Posted:
#7
Well my take is how can we support a system where a candidate wins in the electoral college but loses by TWO MILLION votes?
How does this not enrage you guys?
I seem to recall Trump warning that he would likely not concede if he lost, meaning he would do exactly what is happening now but in reverse to his win.
So hurrah that Trump "won" the electoral college but I dont see how we can continue to support a system that trashes the popular vote like this..
Over two million votes he is losing yet he still wins...makes you wonder.
Posted:
#8
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Well my take is how can we support a system where a candidate wins in the electoral college but loses by TWO MILLION votes?
Dumb argument. No state is better than any other. You would have them campaigning in the four most populated states promising them everything under the sun and forget about everyone else. The 8 or nine swing states are a much better representation of the country and you know it. You say things you don't even believe at times. Stop talking about the popular vote it's a ridiculous argument.
Well my take is how can we support a system where a candidate wins in the electoral college but loses by TWO MILLION votes?
How does this not enrage you guys?
I seem to recall Trump warning that he would likely not concede if he lost, meaning he would do exactly what is happening now but in reverse to his win.
So hurrah that Trump "won" the electoral college but I dont see how we can continue to support a system that trashes the popular vote like this..
Over two million votes he is losing yet he still wins...makes you wonder.
Posted:
#9
The Electoral College was created to make everyones vote count... My God, Wall, you don't know that? If there was no Electoral College, the highest population states would dictate who wins and none of the population of the smaller states would bother to vote because it wouldn't matter.
I'm sure if the shoe was on the other foot you crybabies would be up for throwing out the Electoral College...
Perhaps you should direct you sour grapes at the Democratic Party for anointing such a corrupt/lying elitist hag of a candidate... The lemmings just went right along with 3 stiffs, Bernie & HER from the beginning, no one complained. I swear the first debate was Bernie, HER & 3 mannequins with microphones in front of them (just for show).
Her winning by 2M votes doesn't make me wonder, She beat him by just under 4M votes in California (guess you don't know that either)... If California want to succeed from the Union, I'm all for it. Trump didn't even bother going to California or committing any significant resources knowing he wasn't winning the state.
Do you think about any of this before you start typing?
Posted:
#10
I know...
blah blah blah Trump won blah blah blah electoral college.
I am VERY sure that had things reversed you kids would be b!tching up a storm about the electoral college.
And yeah ya think I know why the electoral college was created and all states having a say blah blah blah blah again?
2 million votes differential is not how elections are made to work, the electoral college is flawed when there is such a discrepancy like this, but I know you guys would be a-ok if the results were switched.
Actually I know what would happen, the same garbage that was being planted all over on election night...sob stories of democratic rigging of voting machines, I read several stories like that when the night was young and Clinton was still in front.
Posted:
#11
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
I know...
HRC was never in front. Trump had her from hello. Once he won FL and NC you knew she was in deep trouble and PA was even. Nobody was talking about democratic rigging voting machines. Show me that post by one person. Stop lying.I know...
blah blah blah Trump won blah blah blah electoral college.
I am VERY sure that had things reversed you kids would be b!tching up a storm about the electoral college.
And yeah ya think I know why the electoral college was created and all states having a say blah blah blah blah again?
2 million votes differential is not how elections are made to work, the electoral college is flawed when there is such a discrepancy like this, but I know you guys would be a-ok if the results were switched.
Actually I know what would happen, the same garbage that was being planted all over on election night...sob stories of democratic rigging of voting machines, I read several stories like that when the night was young and Clinton was still in front.
Such a bitter post. Lets unite and start working together instead of making silly posts about the electoral college.
Posted:
#12
Trump lost the popular vote by 2 million votes.
in 2012, when it appeared that Mitt Romney might win the popular vote and still loses the election, Trump sent a bunch of tweets bashing the Electoral College
Romney led the popular vote for most of the night, but that was before the western United States had their polls closed and ballots counted.
Final count: Obama (65,915,795 51.1%) Romney (60,933,504 47.2%)
Trump has deleted a number of tweets he sent in 2012 because he is now praising the electoral college :
“He [Obama] lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!” (Nov. 6)
“The phoney [sic] electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. The loser one!” (Nov. 6)
“More votes equals a loss…revolution!” (Nov. 7)
But other tweets from that period remain, including:
Donald J. Trump ?@realDonaldTrump
We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!
11:29 PM - 6 Nov 2012
Donald J. Trump ? @realDonaldTrump
This election is a total sham and a travesty. We are not a democracy!
11:33 PM - 6 Nov 2012
31,074 31,074 Retweets 14,240 14,240 likes
Donald J. Trump ? @realDonaldTrump
The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.
11:45 PM - 6 Nov 2012
On Tuesday 15-Nov-2016 Trump tweeted:
Donald J. Trump ? @realDonaldTrump
The Electoral College is actually genius in that it brings all states, including the smaller ones, into play. Campaigning is much different!
8:40 AM - 15 Nov 2016
Donald J. Trump ? @realDonaldTrump
If the election were based on total popular vote I would have campaigned in N.Y. Florida and California and won even bigger and more easily
8:34 AM - 15 Nov 2016
is the world laughing at us now Donald ?Hillary has graciously conceded on 08-Nov-2016
North Carolina Republican sore loser Pat McCrory has not conceded to his Democratic challenger Roy Cooper.
McCrory bragged about black voter and hispanic voters turnout being low due to voter id law, but he still lost the election (Poetic Justice)
A preliminary count by the State Board of Elections, as of late Monday, showed McCrory trailing behind Mr. Cooper, the state's outgoing attorney general, by about 6,500 votes out of 4.7 million ballots cast.
Clinton can ask for a recount after winning the popular vote by 2 millions.
10 reasons why the Electoral College is a problem
https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2012/10/10-reasons-why-electoral-college-problem
Posted:
#14
Quote Originally Posted by Killer_B:
The Electoral College was created to make everyones vote count... My God, Wall, you don't know that? If there was no Electoral College, the highest population states would dictate who wins and none of the population of the smaller states would bother to vote because it wouldn't matter.
The Electoral College was created to make everyones vote count... My God, Wall, you don't know that? If there was no Electoral College, the highest population states would dictate who wins and none of the population of the smaller states would bother to vote because it wouldn't matter.
I'm sure if the shoe was on the other foot you crybabies would be up for throwing out the Electoral College...
Perhaps you should direct you sour grapes at the Democratic Party for anointing such a corrupt/lying elitist hag of a candidate... The lemmings just went right along with 3 stiffs, Bernie & HER from the beginning, no one complained. I swear the first debate was Bernie, HER & 3 mannequins with microphones in front of them (just for show).
Her winning by 2M votes doesn't make me wonder, She beat him by just under 4M votes in California (guess you don't know that either)... If California want to succeed from the Union, I'm all for it. Trump didn't even bother going to California or committing any significant resources knowing he wasn't winning the state.
Do you think about any of this before you start typing?
You really need to look up why the EC was put into place 200 plus years ago.
Posted:
#15
Quote Originally Posted by 1129ken:
It would be the end of our country as envisioned by its founders if all that mattered was running up the votes in New York, California and Illinois. Thankfully, that isn't about to happen. The rest of our United States will not be stupid enough to let that happen.
It would be the end of our country as envisioned by its founders if all that mattered was running up the votes in New York, California and Illinois. Thankfully, that isn't about to happen. The rest of our United States will not be stupid enough to let that happen.
So in your opinion then a person that votes and lives in a state with high population should count less than a persons vote in state with less population? Interesting.
Posted:
#16
BREAKING: We've filed in Wisconsin! #Recount2016 will begin next week.
If you live in Wisconsin, or know of anyone who does, please ask them to consider volunteering to help in the recount process: jill2016.com/RecountWI
Posted:
#17
Quote Originally Posted by Killer_B:
The Electoral College was created to make everyones vote count... My God, Wall, you don't know that? If there was no Electoral College, the highest population states would dictate who wins and none of the population of the smaller states would bother to vote because it wouldn't matter.
The Electoral College was created to make everyones vote count... My God, Wall, you don't know that? If there was no Electoral College, the highest population states would dictate who wins and none of the population of the smaller states would bother to vote because it wouldn't matter.
I'm sure if the shoe was on the other foot you crybabies would be up for throwing out the Electoral College...
Perhaps you should direct you sour grapes at the Democratic Party for anointing such a corrupt/lying elitist hag of a candidate... The lemmings just went right along with 3 stiffs, Bernie & HER from the beginning, no one complained. I swear the first debate was Bernie, HER & 3 mannequins with microphones in front of them (just for show).
Her winning by 2M votes doesn't make me wonder, She beat him by just under 4M votes in California (guess you don't know that either)... If California want to succeed from the Union, I'm all for it. Trump didn't even bother going to California or committing any significant resources knowing he wasn't winning the state.
Do you think about any of this before you start typing?
This seems contradictory. If we went by popular vote, it wouldn't matter what state you lived in. It would just simply go by which candidate had the most votes.
A vote by someone (regardless of who they vote for) in a swing state has way more weight and significance than a vote by a Republican in California or a vote by a Democrat in Texas. If anything, the Electoral College makes certain votes more meaningful than others.
Posted:
#18
HRC won California by just under 4M votes. She won the popular vote by 2M. Trump didn't even bother with California because he knew there's no way he could sway it. Same with OR & WA. He played the game the way he needed to play it. He won the swing states. CASE CLOSED. I suggest if you're not happy with the Electoral College process, call you congressman and begin the process of changing the constitution.
So Train, this system has worked for 200+ years, it was devised to give more electoral college votes to the more populated states. It sure looks fair to me. If Trump won the popular vote and lost the election, I promise you this would be a non-issue. These are the rules of the game, sometimes they don't favor your guy or in this case witch... The country rejected her, can we move on.org and give Trump a chance? I rooted for Obama until he proved to me he was a useless empty suit that was going to golf 300x and accomplish nothing.
Posted:
#19
Report: Trump’s Margin In Wisconsin Shrinks By Thousands Of Votes Ahead Of Recount
If this pattern remains consistent across the state, it's feasible – though unclear how likely – that Clinton could end up on top in the state.
Donald Trump’s margin of victory in Wisconsin appears to be shrinking even before the state’s recount gets underway, according to a new report that cites a number of precincts padding the vote count in Trump’s favor.
According to the Palmer Report, some precincts realized the numbers were padded to benefit Trump and had to revise their numbers. As a result, 5,000 votes were essentially wiped out of Trump’s column in an instant. What’s particularly puzzling, the report noted, is that Clinton’s numbers remained virtually unchanged, despite Trump losing thousands of votes from his total.
Even ahead of the forthcoming recount in Wisconsin, Donald Trump’s lead has already shrunk to just 22,525 votes. That means 18% of his “lead” has already vanished, based on precincts catching some of their own incorrect numbers, and internet gawkers catching others. But the second thing that jumps out is that the revisions have served to erase thousands of votes from Trump, while affirming that Clinton’s vote total was essentially correct to begin with.
Donald Trump has gone from originally having 1,409,467 votes to now having just 1,404,536 votes in Wisconsin. In other words, a total of 4,931 votes were reported for Trump on election night that never existed. In contrast Hillary Clinton has gone from 1,382,210 votes down to 1,382,011 votes, a difference of less than two hundred votes. In other words, Wisconsin essentially had Clinton’s vote total correct all along, but is now acknowledging that nearly five thousand of the supposed votes for Trump simply never existed. Where did these votes come from? Who originally padded his numbers and how? If this was indeed due to an organized effort to pad Trump’s voting totals in various precincts across the state, the recount should fully expose it
While Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes are in Trump’s column for the time being, his margin in the state could be incredibly fragile if the discrepancies found in a few areas turn out to be a statewide phenomenon. A few more precincts uncovering the same errors could easily tip the state in Clinton’s favor.
https://www.politicususa.com/2016/11/25/report-thousands-wisconsin-votes-trump-recount-begins.html
Posted:
#21
Quote Originally Posted by Killer_B:
HRC won California by just under 4M votes. She won the popular vote by 2M. Trump didn't even bother with California because he knew there's no way he could sway it. Same with OR & WA. He played the game the way he needed to play it. He won the swing states. CASE CLOSED. I suggest if you're not happy with the Electoral College process, call you congressman and begin the process of changing the constitution.
HRC won California by just under 4M votes. She won the popular vote by 2M. Trump didn't even bother with California because he knew there's no way he could sway it. Same with OR & WA. He played the game the way he needed to play it. He won the swing states. CASE CLOSED. I suggest if you're not happy with the Electoral College process, call you congressman and begin the process of changing the constitution.
So Train, this system has worked for 200+ years, it was devised to give more electoral college votes to the more populated states. It sure looks fair to me. If Trump won the popular vote and lost the election, I promise you this would be a non-issue. These are the rules of the game, sometimes they don't favor your guy or in this case witch... The country rejected her, can we move on.org and give Trump a chance? I rooted for Obama until he proved to me he was a useless empty suit that was going to golf 300x and accomplish nothing.
So the guy loses and gets the trophy? Thought you righties didn't like that kind of stuff?
Posted:
#23
Quote Originally Posted by Killer_B:
HRC won California by just under 4M votes. She won the popular vote by 2M. Trump didn't even bother with California because he knew there's no way he could sway it. Same with OR & WA. He played the game the way he needed to play it. He won the swing states. CASE CLOSED. I suggest if you're not happy with the Electoral College process, call you congressman and begin the process of changing the constitution.
HRC won California by just under 4M votes. She won the popular vote by 2M. Trump didn't even bother with California because he knew there's no way he could sway it. Same with OR & WA. He played the game the way he needed to play it. He won the swing states. CASE CLOSED. I suggest if you're not happy with the Electoral College process, call you congressman and begin the process of changing the constitution.
So Train, this system has worked for 200+ years, it was devised to give more electoral college votes to the more populated states. It sure looks fair to me. If Trump won the popular vote and lost the election, I promise you this would be a non-issue. These are the rules of the game, sometimes they don't favor your guy or in this case witch... The country rejected her, can we move on.org and give Trump a chance? I rooted for Obama until he proved to me he was a useless empty suit that was going to golf 300x and accomplish nothing.
First off, "my guy" was never going to win. I went in to the voting both knowing Gary Johnson wasn't going to win. I didn't vote for HRC, nor have I supported her.
Second, this is what is wrong with our political system and how people view it. Everyone thinks you're either a D or an R and that you absolutely have to tow the party lines. These are not mutually exclusive stances. It is possible to share views from each side of the isle, or from neither side. Your way of thinking is antiquated.
I don't care that Trump won the Electoral College. I was never going to vote for him or for HRC. However, you really can't say that the system works if it's supposed to represent the people, especially since it hasn't in two of the last five elections. Our President-Elect got the vote of about 1 in every 4 eligible voters. That is not a system that works. A lot of people don't vote because they know their vote won't matter because of the state they reside in. I'm not sure how this isn't making sense to you.
You can say Trump didn't campaign in California because he knew he would lose. But that also goes both ways. HRC didn't spend any time in areas she knew she would lose as well. Go by popular vote and that changes things up. It also takes away the voting power of swing states.
I'm sure you would agree with me had Trump won the popular and lost the electoral.
Posted:
#24
When Barack Obama won the Presidency,
When Donald Trump wins by Electoral College vote for himself,
The Electoral College is actually genius...--Donald Trump (Nov. 15, 2016)
There is nothing fundamentally correct in Donal J. Trump's view of the rigged "System".
Posted:
#25
Quote Originally Posted by Killer_B:
Stop
already.... He loses in only eyes like yours. The Electoral College is not a new system and it's not the first time this is happened and it won't be the last. The real loser will be out in 55 days...
Stop
already.... He loses in only eyes like yours. The Electoral College is not a new system and it's not the first time this is happened and it won't be the last. The real loser will be out in 55 days... So are you denying that Trump said he would not automatically give in if he were declared the loser? Was his plan not to contest the results if he did not win?
It goes both ways big guy, Trump will end up being a flip flopping louse politician no different than any other. He has made great strides backtracking already and he isnt even in office.
Oh and over/under on how many current and ex investment banking firm cronies he brings on board for his leadership members????
Hot Forum Topics
