JFLNYC wrote:The recounts and other causes are not mutually exclusive.

Limited resources, picking battles, etc etc.

Warszawa wrote:

pacino wrote:They don't allege any hacking, it would appear and did not plan on requesting a recount.

This recount business is stupid to me unless you see an actual issue. Use this energy into fighting systemic suppression (like in Wisconsin), fair congressional maps, money in politics, etc.

But there's always a chance right?

Look at it like a first half Eagles challenge

Warszawa wrote:

pacino wrote:They don't allege any hacking, it would appear and did not plan on requesting a recount.

This recount business is stupid to me unless you see an actual issue. Use this energy into fighting systemic suppression (like in Wisconsin), fair congressional maps, money in politics, etc.

But there's always a chance right?

There's never been a recount where a candidate trailing by more than a couple hundred votes eventually won. She's losing in each of the three states by 10k+ votes, and needs to win all of them. It seems likely there are much better ways to spend money to me. Also I imagine the president elect is happy to have at least some of the attention of the political press on this nonsense rather than the corrupt self dealing or Steve Bannon or whatever else.

What is actually happening?

Saw Stein tweeted something about Hillary being against democracy for getting involved. Wasn't she the one who started this nonsense?

She's a professional troll and always has been. Follow her twitter. It's mind-numbing.

Just saw a Murphy for Gov ad

It's fucking November 2016

jerseyhoya wrote:There's never been a recount where a candidate trailing by more than a couple hundred votes eventually won.

I'm probably disremembering but I'm remembering that, at the outset of this business, voting officials in WI were finding that an oddly disproportionate number of re-examined ballots for drumpf were bogus. Like every re-examined ballot, of hundreds in a particular precinct( maybe several precincts?), was FOR drumpf, vs none for HRC.

If WI, home of drumpf's current chief of staff, and the House Speaker, turns out to have been part of a rigged system folks, well, then, that would be something.

Let's face it, Stein voters are just trying to assuage their well-earned guilty consciences

I suppose this kind of exercise is irresistable for some scribes.... (Him: Slate)

It's just sort of the opposite of what happened in Philly in 2012...certain precincts went 100% for Obama because OF COURSE THEY DID. The opposite occurred here in rural areas.
It's not widespread, but I'd rather not people get cait up in this business of questioning the fucking outcome of our elections. Let's work to change how they're run.

pacino wrote:It's just sort of the opposite of what happened in Philly in 2012...certain precincts went 100% for Obama because OF COURSE THEY DID. The opposite occurred here in rural areas.

it's not really just sort of the opposite, as I understand it. This is ballots double-counted. drumpf's were, in the hundreds(?); HRC's weren't. Did it happen in more than one place? Let's find out.

Kellyanne Conway said Trump gets foreign Intel from 'many sources', not just intelligence briefings (answer to a question asking why he isn't partaking in them much).

Now that the election is over Rubio is back to supporting a legalization plan for undocumented persons.

I hate politics.

Daily texts from Putin.

pacino wrote:Now that the election is over Rubio is back to supporting a legalization plan for undocumented persons.

I hate politics.

So the same position he had before the election was over

Looks like Romney is a no-go...not enough boot-licking. The new foreign Intel briefer nixed it, in the original Russian.

No chance of a competent SoS now.

jerseyhoya wrote:

pacino wrote:Now that the election is over Rubio is back to supporting a legalization plan for undocumented persons.

I hate politics.

So the same position he had before the election was over

You'd be hard pressed to find that during his run for president.

His website for President (er, Senator) has no mention of it, currently.

I'm sure there's some cost-benefit calculation going on of a sort in using firehoses on the pipeline protesters, but seems like bad PR in the context of a response to civil disobedience, what with the indelible footage from Birmingham & so on

pacino wrote:Looks like Romney is a no-go...not enough boot-licking.

I hold out hope that it was Romney's decision to turn down an offer. And that he'll make some kind of public statement essentially to that effect

Jerry Falwell Jr says he turned down Education Secretary because he couldn't afford to take its salary.

Man of the people.