Can Hillary Still Win?

Page 3 of 20<123456>Last »
November 24th, 2016 at 1:14:22 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 312
Posts: 10510
Hillary Clinton won't ever be president.

I didn't particularly wanted her to be, but this year's alternative is proving much, much worse.

We'll have to depend on the SMOD, I guess. Or ride out the next four years.

There's a slim hope the Senate will question cabinet appointments on their qualifications. The Orange Man seems to like stuffing the thing with people without any prior experience in an area they'll oversee or do actual work in. I suppose like calls to like. The GOP majority is slim, and a few Republican senators can afford to oppose Trump.

I'm ok with his appointment as UN ambassador. Showing contempt for the UN never goes out of style.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
November 24th, 2016 at 2:45:40 PM permalink
TheCesspit
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 23
Posts: 1929
Quote: AZDuffman
But the question is, how do we know the "review" is right and not the first count?


The reviews should check the paper trail matches the computer count. If there's a large enough discrepancy, you dig further. The issue isn't do we get 12,456,213 each time, but are we close enough, and has the electronic machines worked correctly. I don't suggest a full recount, unless the sample showed a big difference. They recount in the UK when within 1,000 votes, then with 100, then again with a small difference... I can't recall the exact numbers. If you got a difference of 997 first time and 985 second time, then that's good. If you got 997 and then 12, you'd really want to check all your processes.

UK elections are single ballot, with a X mark, so that makes life easier for the count. Ballots are taken to a central location and counted over night.

Canada is much the same, except it does not require an X, just a clear intention against a single candidate. I ran a polling station in last year Canadian elections, and the count was easy, if time consuming. Each Returning Officer counts their own box, and passes the return in for their location. As we knew the number in the box, we could cross reference the totals, and each ballot was seen by at least one observer. It all worked out for us, but one box took an hour extra as they'd miscounted the number of voters without a certain piece of ID (there's rules around ID and vouches and the like), so had to redo it three times.

There are genuine concerns that the various machines used are hackable and corruptable. Some districts don't even have a paper trail.... that feels 'wrong' to me, and allows hijacking of a vote -by any interest group-. And not necessarily for the POTUS.
It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die.... it's called Life
November 24th, 2016 at 2:58:30 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 115
Posts: 4731
Quote: TheCesspit
The reviews should check the paper trail matches the computer count. If there's a large enough discrepancy, you dig further. The issue isn't do we get 12,456,213 each time, but are we close enough, and has the electronic machines worked correctly. I don't suggest a full recount, unless the sample showed a big difference. They recount in the UK when within 1,000 votes, then with 100, then again with a small difference... I can't recall the exact numbers. If you got a difference of 997 first time and 985 second time, then that's good. If you got 997 and then 12, you'd really want to check all your processes.
.


Aside from the fact, if the recount is different but still well out of range of changing the election, I can't see much point of doing a third.
No one has ever proven I am not God.
November 24th, 2016 at 3:37:00 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 312
Posts: 10510
Quote: TheCesspit
Canada is much the same, except it does not require an X, just a clear intention against a single candidate.


"Against"?

I suppose Canadian ballots are one per office. In Mexico that's how they are. There's also an urn for each office (president, senator, deputy, governor, etc.).

In the US system, which is not broken, there are also multiple offices in play, plus a bunch of plebiscites called "initiatives," "propositions," or "amendments," which are a form of direct legislation decided by majority vote, in this country that isn't a "democracy."
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
November 24th, 2016 at 4:35:37 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 115
Posts: 4731
The effort to fund Jill Stein's recount effort of 3 states has already met the goal of 1 state and maybe 2.
No one has ever proven I am not God.
November 24th, 2016 at 5:42:54 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 312
Posts: 10510
Quote: rxwine
The effort to fund Jill Stein's recount effort of 3 states has already met the goal of 1 state and maybe 2.


Will any state do a recount if the candidate requesting it had zero chance of winning?
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
November 24th, 2016 at 5:59:09 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 115
Posts: 4731
Quote: Nareed
Will any state do a recount if the candidate requesting it had zero chance of winning?


All three of these will, as long as someone pays for it. I don't know about the rest.
No one has ever proven I am not God.
November 24th, 2016 at 6:00:34 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 312
Posts: 10510
Quote: rxwine
All three of these will, as long as someone pays for it. I don't know about the rest.


Good.

I don't think the result will change, but it will be interesting to see what happens.

If the result changes, it will be fun to see what happens.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
November 24th, 2016 at 6:30:18 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 106
Posts: 10692
Quote: Nareed
Good.
I don't think the result will change, but it will be interesting to see what happens.


Trump won PA by 70K. WI by 27K,
and MI by 10K. These are not small
numbers. The Dem party is an expert
at recounts, they know it's a waste of
money to recount when leads are
in the 10's of thousands. Hundreds,
yes. never 10's of thousands.

The woman paying for the
recounts is wasting everybody's time.
Hillary's team knew it was over on
election night and hasn't issued a
peep since.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
November 24th, 2016 at 6:38:23 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 115
Posts: 4731
Quote: Evenbob
Trump won PA by 70K. WI by 27K,
and MI by 10K. These are not small
numbers. The Dem party is an expert
at recounts, they know it's a waste of
money to recount when leads are
in the 10's of thousands. Hundreds,
yes. never 10's of thousands.
.


The average football stadium holds 70k people for comparison.
No one has ever proven I am not God.
Page 3 of 20<123456>Last »