Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2016 9:02:45 GMT -5
Dear President-elect Trump:
I know I've never written you before, but I had something important to say, and naturally, it could only be expressed in courier font.
I am not sure whether you noticed or not, but since our country has this electoral college thingee, you won the election, despite losing the popular vote.
See, and from your point of view, the beauty is that, since the Clinton campaign expressed so much horror and indignation when you said during the election that you might not accept a close result, you now have an excellent opportunity to sneer at their frantic efforts to do just that -- to laugh at their hypocrisy, and to tsk tsk over how they, not you, are threatening the democratic process by questioning the integrity of the vote.
But instead, you are supporting their claims for a recount by asserting that millions of illegal votes were cast, thus not only undermining confidence in the democratic process, but also, potentially, your own victory.
WTF?
Sincerely, CassandraW.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 28, 2016 9:04:35 GMT -5
He really is his own worst enemy. Just when he's getting a little attention for being semi-reasonable, he does this. It's going to be a long four years.TM
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2016 10:14:36 GMT -5
dude hasn't even been sworn in yet, and I already have a flat spot on my forehead from banging my head on the wall.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Nov 28, 2016 12:06:59 GMT -5
I think it's especially foolish of him to Tweet these sorts of things BEFORE the Electoral College meets. That said, it is nearly impossible to find a deeper explanation of what prompted him to Tweet those Tweets. He's being pretty particular, naming three states as having serious problems with voter fraud - New Hampshire, California, Virginia. Where is he getting this information? I personally have no doubt plenty of illegal aliens voted in this election. Of course they did, with Trump's threats of deportation and the wall. What number plenty is, I have no idea. IMO, though, one is too many. And THAT said, why is it OK for Jill Stein to demand recounts? Is she not also claiming, by demanding recounts, that there are serious problems with the votes? The Green Party is worried about computer hacking into the voting computers, I believe. That, too, is voter fraud. And lastly, I have heard that California has millions of absentee votes not yet counted, and that close to 70% of these could be for Trump, since they consist of a lot of military and elderly votes. In 2014, around 6,700,000 California ballots were absentee. www.sos.ca.gov/elections/historical-absenteeThis is all giving me a headache. EDITED TO ADD: I just looked up the numbers of active military and total is around 1,400,000. So I highly doubt the statistic I heard that absentee ballot results in California would be mostly for Trump.
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Nov 28, 2016 12:24:11 GMT -5
From what I've read the recount has little to do with vote fraud and more with Jill Stein getting lots of news frontage for the green party.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2016 12:31:56 GMT -5
From what I've read the recount has little to do with vote fraud and more with Jill Stein getting lots of news frontage for the green party. ding ding ding And you, sir, win a cigar. I'm having a hard time finding something or someone not to be cynical about in this whole situation.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 28, 2016 13:15:54 GMT -5
There's as much evidence of "plenty of illegals aliens" voting in this election as there is of Russian hackers delivering critical counties in critical States to Trump. So why are millions of dollars being spent on the latter? Why is it getting coverage in the media like it is somehow a legitimate concern that needs to be investigated? Oh, that's right: because Clinton lost and because a whole lot of know-nothings are signing petitions at Change.org and pestering the Justice Department with pointless phone calls.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Nov 28, 2016 14:09:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 28, 2016 14:54:26 GMT -5
True the Vote is about as unbiased a source as MediaMatters, 'cept it's coming from the far right, as opposed to the far left. I wouldn't put much stock in any reports they produce.
Imo, there is plenty of voter fraud taking place. But I don't think much of it--any of it, really--is organized fraud. As such, I doubt it benefits specific candidates in national or statewide elections. The idea that there were millions of fraudulent votes cast for either Clinton OR for Trump is, I think, not reasonable. Allowing that there were fraudulent votes, common sense suggests that the numbers were split more or less down the middle. How many? Who knows. No one in either party REALLY wants to find out. There's nothing to be gained.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 28, 2016 15:55:43 GMT -5
What do you mean there's nothing to be gained? Doesn't it matter that "there is plenty of voter fraud taking place?" If it doesn't, it SHOULD matter because how can anyone trust the results of an election if the system is being gamed? "Common sense" is a lazy cop-out because sense isn't common. Not in this election. A lot of people do care and they want to know they can trust in the fairness and accuracy of the electoral system. It's not about trying to relitigate the results of the 2016 presidential election. There was a winner and there was a loser. Same as there always is, but if one side or both cheated and one cheated better than the other, that's not a waste of time and money. That's a problem and one which needs to solved, but first it has to be faced. It means there's nothing to be gained for the two major parties. And I wouldn't characterize it as the "system being gamed," at all. The fraud taking place is not organized fraud at all, imo. It's just run-of-the-mill cheating. A lot of people cheat all the time. They break laws when they think they won't get caught. They cheat on their taxes, they ignore local codes, they fail to get their dogs licenidsed, they break all sorts of traffic laws (including driving without insurance), they commit petty theft. But that doesn't mean what they are doing is a part of an organized conspiracy. I know there are still people double-voting in Florida because I've heard them openly brag about it (they have a home in Florida and one in another States, and they get the absentee ballots sent to them in one place, then go to the polls in the other). They have justifications for this, to be sure, but it's still fraud. But no, there's no evidence that Russian hackers manipulated the actual vote for Trump's benefit. Those pumping the recount are arguing that this is a "possibility." It's also a "possibility" that we're all part of some huge experiment being orchestrated by aliens from Alpha Centauri.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2016 16:06:11 GMT -5
It's also a "possibility" that we're all part of some huge experiment being orchestrated by aliens from Alpha Centauri. If only. Then we could hope for a funding cut and a swift, merciful end.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 29, 2016 2:33:15 GMT -5
There's no evidence only if you deliberately choose to ignore the evidence. Which is probably what the aliens from Alpha Centauri who are anally probing you want you to do. Where in that article is there evidence of Russian hackers manipulated the actual vote? There isn't any. The DNC hack is not the same thing as hacking voting machines to give Trump more votes and/or give Clinton fewer. The "possibility" of the latter is the supposed point of the recount. And there is no evidence that it happened, aside from this: Clinton lost. Coping mechanisms: we all need 'em.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 29, 2016 7:57:21 GMT -5
A good piece by Amy Davidson (probably deserves it's own thread): www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/another-call-for-a-recountFrom it: So again, there's no evidence that Russian hackers handed the election to Trump. Zero. Nada. Zilch. There is just hope that this might possibly be the case, driven by angsty liberals who can't cope with reality and a Green Party candidate who has finally found a way to get into the news cycle, without being arrested or flying to the wrong city.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Nov 29, 2016 13:18:24 GMT -5
Are you saying the Russians influenced the vote with hacking of emails, wikkileaks, etc, or that they hacked into the votes themselves?
Because, there's a difference.
Somebody did hack emails which probably had an effect on the election, but what effect nobody could really say. And hacked emails aren't going to have much influence if all they had was "What do you want for lunch today?"
It was the leaks that showed stuff about FOB and other such things that were the issue. abcnews.go.com/Politics/fobs-hillarys-state-dept-gave-special-attention-friends/story?id=42615379
So while it's all fine to blame the people who exposed the skeletons in the closest, lets not forget the ones who put those bones there in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 29, 2016 13:36:50 GMT -5
If your opinion is unless the Russians hacked into the voting machines and changed the results, there was no manipulation of the actual vote, you are displaying an appalling lack of imagination. That is exactly my opinion, because when I say "actual vote," I mean "actual vote." Sorry if that was unclear. My initial point: There's as much evidence of "plenty of illegals aliens" voting in this election as there is of Russian hackers delivering critical counties in critical States to Trump...That's what I'm claiming. Your response was that there is evidence of Russia "putting their thumb on the scale." Again, with regard to the actual vote--which is the basis for the recount--no there isn't. Is there evidence that Russian-based hackers got into the DNC? Sure. Is there evidence that Russia sought to influence the election in other ways? Sure. 'Course, our government, media, and citizens can and do engage in similar behavior, with regard to foreign elections. LoL. Sure it's been "proven." But regardless, it doesn't change the fact that there is no evidence of Russian hackers messing with the actual vote. Well, one can't produce counter-evidence for conspiracy theory claptrap. That's the beauty of a conspiracy theory. No one can talk you out of it, actual evidence isn't required.
|
|