Looks Like We Will Most Likely Have A Recount

[StormRichards]

Annoyed Dems dismiss recount as ‘waste of time’

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/annoyed-dems-dismiss-recount-as-%E2%80%98waste-of-time%E2%80%99/ar-AAkSfEz?li=BBnb7Kz

[Singuy]

Annoyed Dems dismiss recount as ‘waste of time’

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...fEz?li=BBnb7Kz

Recounting is a waste of time..but if it's more of an audit(hand counting compared to computerized counting) then there's probably some value to this as a case study.

[StormRichards]

Recounting is a waste of time..but if it's more of an audit(hand counting compared to computerized counting) then there's probably some value to this as a case study.

Personally I believe there should be post election audits done. I am sure there would be no shortage of opinions on how they should be conducted.

Clearly that is not what is taking place here though, and the money spent on it is annoying.

[bjl584]

This recount is a waste of time and money.
Why would anyone donate money to this?

[disneysteve]

Why would anyone donate money to this?

The amount of money that regular individuals donate to political campaigns is mind-boggling. I can kind of understand big corporations doing it but not the guy next door.

That money could do so much good in the world if it was directed somewhere useful.

[StormRichards]

Judge rejects Stein's request for hand recount

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/judge-rejects-steins-request-for-hand-recount/ar-AAkVJnV?li=BBnb7Kz

[StormRichards]

And now here come the lawsuits to block...

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-supporters-move-to-block-vote-recount-in-three-states/ar-AAl3pW8

[bjl584]

http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/02/first-day-of-wisconsin-recount-nets-hillary-one-vote/

Hillary picked up one vote in Wisconsin.......

I did see that there were some lawsuits being filed saying that basically Jill Stein can't call for a recount because any recount would not declare her the winner of the election. She is too far out of the running to make any recount worth it or practical.

[StormRichards]

Jill Stein drops Pennsylvania recount case

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/03/politics/jill-stein-drops-pennsylvania-recount/index.html

[JoeP]

This recount is a waste of time and money.
Why would anyone donate money to this?

It's pretty simple, really. There is a lot of anger over Hillary's defeat, and people want to do *something* instead of just accepting the new president-elect. Jill Stein is tapping into this need by raising money and demanding recounts.

Jill may be remembered as "The One Who Stood Against Vote Fraud In 2016" and this could help pull votes away from other parties in the coming years. So don't be tricked into thinking "fairness" is the only driver here.

[Mjenn]

No, I really don't think anything Trump does in the short term is going to make a bit of difference. He has made some goodwill gestures and still the major networks focus on negative stories.

Saw a headline with one of his NYT's quotes regarding the conflict of interest with his businesses. The headline is completely out of context with what he said.

I personally believe the media's bias against Trump is a big reason for why he ended up winning. And I think their continued bias is going to garner more support for him. There is all this talk about undoing things in 4 years. If the next 4 years consists of a nonstop media blitz against Trump, I think we will be looking at 8 not 4.

As someone who has not had a lot of US media on Trump I find this view astonishing. I watched Trump's speeches on the campaign trail. I watched the debates. My view that he cannot keep it together without being diverted by something so mediocre and unimportant comes entirely from watching the man speak and portray himself.

The media gave Trump more attention than any other candidate in this election. But most of it was built not on media spin, but 100% on direct quotes that the man made in public spaces in front of huge audiences.

I know the media spins, and I know it tends to lean left, but this was not spin -- this is Trump's 'political' style and it is what make the fact that he is going to enter the foreign stage so frightening.

[Mjenn]

I have several friends that are Democrats as well that felt the same way. My friends that voted for her were actually voting AGAINST Trump. People just don't trust her, and in my opinion for good reason.

Yes, this is definitely true, for me as well. And I really will never understand why the Democrats got behind her a second time. But to be honest, the only real chance she had to get people out to vote was against Trump. Had the Republicans managed to get Cruz or Rubio I'm pretty sure they would have had the popular vote too, and the country might have actually stood a chance.

[StormRichards]

As someone who has not had a lot of US media on Trump I find this view astonishing. I watched Trump's speeches on the campaign trail. I watched the debates. My view that he cannot keep it together without being diverted by something so mediocre and unimportant comes entirely from watching the man speak and portray himself.

The media gave Trump more attention than any other candidate in this election. But most of it was built not on media spin, but 100% on direct quotes that the man made in public spaces in front of huge audiences.

I know the media spins, and I know it tends to lean left, but this was not spin -- this is Trump's 'political' style and it is what make the fact that he is going to enter the foreign stage so frightening.

There is no doubt that Trump gave and continues to give the media plenty of ammunition. However, there was a ton of media spin during the campaign.

[Mjenn]

For me the problem is that you have a president-elect publicly declaring the vote invalid by saying there were millions of illegal votes. And the rest of the GOP refusing to acknowledge his as a falsehood or exaggeration.

As long as this is the case, there NEEDS to be a recount. Not because the winner is disputed, but to find out where these false votes are coming from, who they were for, and how it happened.

If the president-elect is making claims such as this, and then doubling down on those claims, it is making a mockery of our system to let the vote result stand without a deep study into what happened and a recount of votes and tally of who cast votes to weed out the false votes.

I personally think the results are valid, he won the electoral college, she one the popular vote -- that matches with much of what we see all around us. But as long as the winner is saying this, I don't know how we can not.

I am not a fan of Jill but I think she is right in this (for the wrong reasons) and I think if the GOP is going to double down on the false vote claim, they should be gearing up to get behind this recount as well, or acknowledged that there are two coasts of people that vehemently disagree with them and voted accordingly, legally.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I believe it was you that mentioned we should have a CAP for how much is spent on campaigns. You just know that even if that existed, the politicians and their supporters would find ways around it. Slinging mud during prime time isn't cheap!

We do. We also had a law called McCain-Feingold that was declared unconstitutional (IMO rightly).