First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
37% Of Detroit's Precincts Record Too Many Votes.
Posted 12/13/16
Dragon
68435 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/14/16
Man, that sounds pretty bad, they should really do a recount or something, I guess? I keep hearing about how many votes were irregular.. but I'm also being told that trying to account for such things in a recount or other audits and investigations are bad, that we should all just move on since the election is over.

I'm just never sure which it is these days.
15981 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 12/14/16
Depends on how sick you are of armchair politicians bloviating about their pet conspiracies.

Still, it is Detroit. Maybe some enterprising person automated their election fraud this time. Get some real American Steel on the job.
5560 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
55 / M / Tacoma, WA. wind...
Offline
Posted 12/14/16 , edited 12/14/16
State officials are planning to examine about 20 Detroit precincts where ballot boxes opened during the recount had fewer ballots than poll workers had recorded on Election Day

So they had fewer ballots than were accounted for . . . .

So someone checked off a name on a list and then didn't bother to see if they had left a ballot.

*LOL*

A ballot is what they count and they have too few ballots.....

How do they get more votes out of that?
Posted 12/14/16
yfw hillary loses votes when they do a recount

Dragon
68435 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/14/16

Amyas_Leigh wrote:

yfw hillary loses votes when they do a recount


Really makes you wonder why the winning side is fighting so hard against recounts and other investigations though, doesn't it? You're sure she'll lose votes, the OP is sure she'll lose votes, Trump et all are sure she'll lose votes.. why have your campaign issue court proceedings to shut it down? Crazy! Let those green party folks waste their money?

I'll be honest, I don't think any recount would change the electoral college result. That's partly why I find it all the more strange that folks like you aren't fighting harder to get a recount - get that mandate, after all, right? Otherwise, we're left with questions - from both sides, as you just pointed out. It'd be a good idea to get those resolved, wouldn't it? Otherwise, we'll just be stuck with them again next election.
3704 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 12/14/16
Don't mess with the big D!
84864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M
Offline
Posted 12/14/16 , edited 12/14/16

MakotoKamui wrote:



Really makes you wonder why the winning side is fighting so hard against recounts and other investigations though, doesn't it? You're sure she'll lose votes, the OP is sure she'll lose votes, Trump et all are sure she'll lose votes.. why have your campaign issue court proceedings to shut it down? Crazy! Let those green party folks waste their money?

I'll be honest, I don't think any recount would change the electoral college result. That's partly why I find it all the more strange that folks like you aren't fighting harder to get a recount - get that mandate, after all, right? Otherwise, we're left with questions - from both sides, as you just pointed out. It'd be a good idea to get those resolved, wouldn't it? Otherwise, we'll just be stuck with them again next election.


There is evidently a limited time for recounts to be completed nationwide and that limited time is already past as of yesterday. If the recount isn't completed by that time, then the electors for that state are not counted at all.
Posted 12/14/16

MakotoKamui wrote:


Really makes you wonder why the winning side is fighting so hard against recounts and other investigations though That's partly why I find it all the more strange that folks like you aren't fighting harder to get a recount -.


I'd support a recount in California

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/completed-wisconsin-recount-widens-donald-trump-s-lead-by-votes/article_3f61c6ac-5b18-5c27-bf38-e537146bbcdd.html

Really activates my almonds to be sure.

Dragon
68435 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/14/16

Amyas_Leigh wrote:


MakotoKamui wrote:


Really makes you wonder why the winning side is fighting so hard against recounts and other investigations though That's partly why I find it all the more strange that folks like you aren't fighting harder to get a recount -.


I'd support a recount in California

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/completed-wisconsin-recount-widens-donald-trump-s-lead-by-votes/article_3f61c6ac-5b18-5c27-bf38-e537146bbcdd.html

Really activates my almonds to be sure.



Ooo, almonds, those are tasty. But unrelated, according to ishe above, we're too late for a recount anyway, so this is mostly academic - or for the future. And Trump says recounts are bad. So.. kinda stuck here. Are you anti-Trump, going against his wishes? Do you think a CA recount would help - and if so, should we go for recounts elsewhere as well, or just in states Trump lost?

As I said, I don't think these recounts will change anything, do your almonds disagree?
6895 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Temple of Yaoiism
Offline
Posted 12/14/16
Eh who cares about what Trump thinks about recounts?

I mean it's too late to recount anyways, but I don't see why not if there was time.

Posted 12/14/16 , edited 12/14/16

MakotoKamui wrote:

. And Trump says recounts are bad.


Citations needed

Posted 12/14/16
"Do as I say, not as I do" - Democrat motto
Dragon
68435 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/14/16

Amyas_Leigh wrote:


MakotoKamui wrote:

. And Trump says recounts are bad.


Citations needed



Well, I mean.. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/802866941820071937 . Same result, sad, says the president elect. Not direct enough, I imagine though things can make that hard, I'm sure.

Of course, he also said https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/803926488579973120 , which never happened, so I can see why you'd want citations better than his tweets. Do you want me to keep going? Your image has nothing to do with what I said, so I'm not even sure how to reply there. Is a review of potential hacking bad because Obama triggered it? That's all I can get out of your post. Or do you mean the whining part? I'm very confused again.
Posted 12/14/16 , edited 12/14/16


What are those out of context tweets for? Nothing bad about those, in fact the liberal tears responding to him are extra salty and delicious

"Elections are only hacked if my guy loses!!"

:^)

The elections can't be hacked or rigged, CNN told me so. Or are they the fake news now?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/19/politics/election-day-russia-hacking-explained/


First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.