Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jill Stein to file for recount in three states

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–39 of 39 posts

Re: Jill Stein to file for recount in three states

#31

Post by ant6n »

xapata wrote: post #23
epicureanideal wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anyone put so much time and money into an activity they hope to lose? I think the whole issue was created to make him look bad. "Hey, if you lose, will you accept the results?" After Gore/Bush, I don't know if anybody would immediately say "Yes" without thinking about the possibility of questionable things happening. Would you accept the results of an election with fraud? Until the election happens, you can…

> money He loaned $45 million and gave less than $10 million, but mostly as in-kind gifts not cash. He said back in 2000 he could run for president and make money from the campaign. I think he succeeded, depending on the interest rate of that loan. He spent a bunch of campaign funds by buying from his own businesses. > time and money Maybe he just wanted to be on TV.

> He spent a bunch of campaign funds by buying from his own businesses.

Is that illegal?

Re: Jill Stein to file for recount in three states

#32

Post by narrowrail »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #17

Basically, this is pretty much academic at this point. Hilary would have to gain enough votes to flip all 3 states. Trump will win the recount. However, this will absolutely enrage his base as they see it as an attempt by the elite to steal the election. Trump seems to be moderating on some of his previous stances, but will likely reverse and be even more extreme after he wins a recount. Also, look for pressure on th…

>look for pressure on the Senate to completely suspend the filibuster and push through a very right wing Justice

Currently, Republicans hold the Senate (52,R vs 48,D). And, according to Wikipedia:

"On November 21, 2013, the Senate voted, in a 52 to 48 vote, to require only a majority vote to end a filibuster of all executive and judicial nominees, excluding Supreme Court nominees, rather than the 3/5 of votes previously required. A 3/5 supermajority is still required to end filibusters on legislation and Supreme Court nominees."

So, that is some context for anyone else not up to speed on the specifics.

Re: Jill Stein to file for recount in three states

#33

Post by pvdebbe »

vinay427 wrote: post #28
pvdebbe wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed the same, Obama and Hillary both started to act very sportsmanlike right after the results. As is appropriate. It's the media and other factors that seem to hold on to a distant dream they once had.

What's unsportsmanlike about a recount, especially by a third party candidate that received so few votes? It's not like she's not accepting the results of the election, just challenging the accuracy of the reported results.

I didn't mean Stein, more like meant about all the rioting and the news coverage that tries to paint this grudgy picture.

Re: Jill Stein to file for recount in three states

#34

Post by xapata »

ant6n wrote: post #31
xapata wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> money He loaned $45 million and gave less than $10 million, but mostly as in-kind gifts not cash. He said back in 2000 he could run for president and make money from the campaign. I think he succeeded, depending on the interest rate of that loan. He spent a bunch of campaign funds by buying from his own businesses. > time and money Maybe he just wanted to be on TV.

> He spent a bunch of campaign funds by buying from his own businesses. Is that illegal?

No, just lame.

Re: Jill Stein to file for recount in three states

#35

Post by cmurf »

If there's any modern case to be made for the electoral college, it's in these states. If they aren't all effectively faithless voters, then the founding purpose of the college is not true and should be done away with. Instead, it sounds like the faithless voters, should there be any, and if they defect, would vote for some other Republican. So it's not like Hillary would win just because Donald doesn't get enough votes.

If the election is questionable, the state legislatures can pick its Electors, and they should. That's what authenticates the process. Of course there needs to be more facts than just speculation there's been tampering or fraud; but the way these systems are designed, they may not have sufficient auditing to determine it, itself a big problem.

Re: Jill Stein to file for recount in three states

#36

Post by vinay427 »

pvdebbe wrote: post #33
vinay427 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's unsportsmanlike about a recount, especially by a third party candidate that received so few votes? It's not like she's not accepting the results of the election, just challenging the accuracy of the reported results.

I didn't mean Stein, more like meant about all the rioting and the news coverage that tries to paint this grudgy picture.

Yes, then I misunderstood your comment, and in that case I agree.

Re: Jill Stein to file for recount in three states

#37

Post by postcarnival »

rbanffy wrote: post #24
postcarnival wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not pretend this is some altruistic "academic" endeavor to satiate some curiosity. This is a thought-out play borne out of the rejection of the election result by the left.

Don't you think a significant difference between districts where everything is similar except for the voting mechanism, with a trend to favor a specific candidate on one hard-to-audit mechanism is suspicious?

It might be so, but I also find reports of 3+ million illegals, 4+ million dead people, and other alleged acts of fraud to be suspicious... If we're going to go down that path it won't be pretty and it will likely involve more than just those 3 states. That said from what I read MI has already declared they've certified (recounted) their results so at this point Stein is just hustling money. I do wish technology could advance our voting systems on the whole though.. possibly block-chain based? but might require voter id! oye

Re: Jill Stein to file for recount in three states

#38

Post by Melchira »

postcarnival wrote: post #37
rbanffy wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you think a significant difference between districts where everything is similar except for the voting mechanism, with a trend to favor a specific candidate on one hard-to-audit mechanism is suspicious?

It might be so, but I also find reports of 3+ million illegals, 4+ million dead people, and other alleged acts of fraud to be suspicious... If we're going to go down that path it won't be pretty and it will likely involve more than just those 3 states. That said from what I read MI has already declared they've certified (recounted) their results so at this point Stein is just hustling money. I do wish technology coul…

Citation needed for those claims. As far as I can tell they come from a guy on twitter who refuses to share the data or explain his methodology. Parroting unverified and most likely false claims like this only serves to legitimize the fake "news sites" that publish this stuff without fact checking.

Re: Jill Stein to file for recount in three states

#39

Post by postcarnival »

Melchira wrote: post #38
postcarnival wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be so, but I also find reports of 3+ million illegals, 4+ million dead people, and other alleged acts of fraud to be suspicious... If we're going to go down that path it won't be pretty and it will likely involve more than just those 3 states. That said from what I read MI has already declared they've certified (recounted) their results so at this point Stein is just hustling money. I do wish technology coul…

Citation needed for those claims. As far as I can tell they come from a guy on twitter who refuses to share the data or explain his methodology. Parroting unverified and most likely false claims like this only serves to legitimize the fake "news sites" that publish this stuff without fact checking.

When did I "parrot" anything as truth? I said I find it highly suspicious. If you want to go down the path of "fake news" sites how about we talk about almost every major network that had Clinton winning in a landslide?
Post reply on HN