• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Stein switches tactics in Pennsylvania recount drive

MickeyW

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Washington (AFP) - Former Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein switched tactics in her campaign to force a recount in Pennsylvania, one of three battleground states won by Donald Trump where she has challenged the results.

The party dropped a bid to pursue the recount in a state court, citing difficulties raising a million dollar bond demanded by the tribunal. It said it would instead press on in federal court and file suit Monday.

That was also Stein's deadline for raising the bond money.

"Make no mistake -— the Stein campaign will continue to fight for a statewide recount in Pennsylvania," attorney Jonathan Abady said in a statement.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-green-party-drops-election-recount-bid-pennsylvania-020036851.html
 
MickeyW said:
Washington (AFP) - Former Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein switched tactics in her campaign to force a recount in Pennsylvania, one of three battleground states won by Donald Trump where she has challenged the results.

The party dropped a bid to pursue the recount in a state court, citing difficulties raising a million dollar bond demanded by the tribunal. It said it would instead press on in federal court and file suit Monday.

That was also Stein's deadline for raising the bond money.

"Make no mistake -— the Stein campaign will continue to fight for a statewide recount in Pennsylvania," attorney Jonathan Abady said in a statement.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-green-party-drops-election-recount-bid-pennsylvania-020036851.html
Click to expand...

Wow, the recount efforts cost 7 million? Hoo boy, you'd think that Stein would be more worried about getting ballot access in all 50 states like the Libertarian Party has done but hey, she's free to spend George Soros' money however she sees fit.
 
In Steins case, you can't cure stupid. It'll be funny to see her waste all that money and have no result... a perfect reflection of her continued Presidential bids but on a much smaller scale.
 
MickeyW said:
Washington (AFP) - Former Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein switched tactics in her campaign to force a recount in Pennsylvania, one of three battleground states won by Donald Trump where she has challenged the results.

The party dropped a bid to pursue the recount in a state court, citing difficulties raising a million dollar bond demanded by the tribunal. It said it would instead press on in federal court and file suit Monday.

That was also Stein's deadline for raising the bond money.

"Make no mistake -— the Stein campaign will continue to fight for a statewide recount in Pennsylvania," attorney Jonathan Abady said in a statement.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-green-party-drops-election-recount-bid-pennsylvania-020036851.html
Click to expand...


Why bother carrying on with this charade? What does she hope to gain from this? She missed the deadline in PA, which she knew was there, so now she is having problems raising a million dollar bond to continue, so she's going to federal court and file suit instead? Either I've missed something, or she's making no sense at all! And this woman was running for President? We don't need more divisiveness in this
country! :thumbdown:
 
leoborn said:
Why bother carrying on with this charade? What does she hope to gain from this? She missed the deadline in PA, which she knew was there, so now she is having problems raising a million dollar bond to continue, so she's going to federal court and file suit instead? Either I've missed something, or she's making no sense at all! And this woman was running for President? We don't need more divisiveness in this
country! :thumbdown:
Click to expand...

Likely she's trying to get PA to miss the deadline and their EVs not count.

Which, of course, is a hideously cynical attempt to undermine the election. Really quite abhorrent.
 
Supporters of candidate who declared election illegitimate unless he won, complaining about another candidate calling election illegitimate because they did not win?

There's a word for this. That word begins with an "H."
 
Ockham said:
In Steins case, you can't cure stupid. It'll be funny to see her waste all that money and have no result... a perfect reflection of her continued Presidential bids but on a much smaller scale.
Click to expand...

You really think that money is for a recount?
 
Renae said:
You really think that money is for a recount?
Click to expand...

Of course not, but the pretense is there and apparently that's all the press needs. I'd like to see where that money train is coming from actually..... any odds on the Clinton Foundation money being laundered through other organizations or "donors"? :lamo
 
Ockham said:
Of course not, but the pretense is there and apparently that's all the press needs. I'd like to see where that money train is coming from actually..... any odds on the Clinton Foundation money being laundered through other organizations or "donors"? :lamo
Click to expand...

Why would Clinton have any interest in lining Stein's pockets?
 
Deuce said:
Why would Clinton have any interest in lining Stein's pockets?
Click to expand...

Oh we're speculating now are we? Sure... uhmm.. let me see. Stein could actually switch from the Green to (D) in the next election. The Clinton's still cannot accept they lost to a loud-mouthed rude billionaire who's never held office and would like any shot they can get at a recount through a proxy like Stein.... shall I go on? Speculation is FUN!
 
Ockham said:
Oh we're speculating now are we? Sure... uhmm.. let me see. Stein could actually switch from the Green to (D) in the next election. The Clinton's still cannot accept they lost to a loud-mouthed rude billionaire who's never held office and would like any shot they can get at a recount through a proxy like Stein.... shall I go on? Speculation is FUN!
Click to expand...

If Clinton wanted a recount, why go through a proxy?
 
Deuce said:
This again.

A recount isn't "refusing to accept election results." It's verifying election results.
Click to expand...

Verification of election results are done through the Federal Election Commission.... if Stein wants to make the system better she should work with Congress and the FEC, not fund a recount. You realize that BS about verification of election results is laughed at right?
 
Ockham said:
Verification of election results are done through the Federal Election Commission.... if Stein wants to make the system better she should work with Congress and the FEC, not fund a recount. You realize that BS about verification of election results is laughed at right?
Click to expand...

Recounts are part of that process. I'm really not sure why you guys are so offended by the concept.
 
MickeyW said:
Washington (AFP) - Former Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein switched tactics in her campaign to force a recount in Pennsylvania, one of three battleground states won by Donald Trump where she has challenged the results.

The party dropped a bid to pursue the recount in a state court, citing difficulties raising a million dollar bond demanded by the tribunal. It said it would instead press on in federal court and file suit Monday.

That was also Stein's deadline for raising the bond money.

"Make no mistake -— the Stein campaign will continue to fight for a statewide recount in Pennsylvania," attorney Jonathan Abady said in a statement.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-green-party-drops-election-recount-bid-pennsylvania-020036851.html
Click to expand...

It's so interesting the states that she picks. Stating that this is not about reversing the results of the election, she chooses the three states whose electoral votes combined would increase Hillary to just over 270.

And without PA, that couldn't happen.... but based on her argument of auditing the election results, a Wisconsin recount would serve as a statistically exellent sample. She doesn't need PA to prove her point... if there is a point to be proven.
 
kamikaze483 said:
It's so interesting the states that she picks. Stating that this is not about reversing the results of the election, she chooses the three states whose electoral votes combined would increase Hillary to just over 270.

And without PA, that couldn't happen.... but based on her argument of auditing the election results, a Wisconsin recount would serve as a statistically exellent sample. She doesn't need PA to prove her point... if there is a point to be proven.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's about changing the election results.

I think it's about Jill Stein staying in the headlines and pocketing "excess recount funds" for the next campaign.
 
Deuce said:
Recounts are part of that process. I'm really not sure why you guys are so offended by the concept.
Click to expand...

Recounts to validate a winner is part of the process, which you just admitted this was. Thanks for mistakenly being honest about it.
 
Deuce said:
I don't think it's about changing the election results.

I think it's about Jill Stein staying in the headlines and pocketing "excess recount funds" for the next campaign.
Click to expand...

Interesting... then why so determined in just those three states? Why not try for all the states who will let her do it?
 
Mr Person said:
Supporters of candidate who declared election illegitimate unless he won, complaining about another candidate calling election illegitimate because they did not win?

There's a word for this. That word begins with an "H."
Click to expand...

not nearly as bad to say you MIGHT do something as opposed to saying doing that is awful and THEN DOING IT which is what the lying bitch is doing.

anyone who doesn't think the Lying Bitch is not involved in this is an idiot. Hillary's pet monkey, Jill Wein is trying to get past the safe harbor deadline and disqualify the EVs of states that went for Trump.
 
Deuce said:
I don't think it's about changing the election results.

I think it's about Jill Stein staying in the headlines and pocketing "excess recount funds" for the next campaign.
Click to expand...


Milking concerned citizens out of millions for a bait and switch scheme to collect money for unrelated personal gain should be illegal.

You believe she is not truthful about why she is raising money but you also support her efforts?
 
Ockham said:
Recounts to validate a winner is part of the process, which you just admitted this was. Thanks for mistakenly being honest about it.
Click to expand...

Uhh, yes, to validate a winner.

Exactly what part do you think I was mistaken about?
 
Deuce said:
If Clinton wanted a recount, why go through a proxy?
Click to expand...

because she would look like the lying bitch we know she is. She was howling about Trump's stupid comment that he MIGHT not accept the election results and she would look like a complete hypocritical twit.
 
Chillfolks said:
Milking concerned citizens out of millions for a bait and switch scheme to collect money for unrelated personal gain should be illegal.

You believe she is not truthful about why she is raising money but you also support her efforts?
Click to expand...

I support the right of citizens to fund a recount if they feel there's something they want verified.
I also support the right of citizens to stand in big tall buildings and proclaim to the world that their invisible sky wizard is against homosexuality, and to give money to the people who run the house of the invisible sky wizard.

That doesn't mean I personally would engage in either activity, or think either is a good idea.
 
TurtleDude said:
because she would look like the lying bitch we know she is. She was howling about Trump's stupid comment that he MIGHT not accept the election results and she would look like a complete hypocritical twit.
Click to expand...

Again, a recount does not constitute "refusing to accept the election results."

You're being straight up dishonest if you're trying to suggest Trump was talking about recounts all along.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom