• 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!

Recounts barely making dent in election results; Trump gains in Wisconsin

Harshaw said:
Not nearly so much fun as your frequent need to pretend you didn't say what you flat-out did:



But wait! Turns out you did!



I'd certainly be curious as to who said Hillary was going to stuff the ballot boxes, though.
Click to expand...

Yes, as I said your attempts to analyze my posts are always good for a chuckle. Rest assured that even though I don't respond to them they are always a source of amusement.
 
Cardinal said:
Yes, as I said your attempts to analyze my posts are always good for a chuckle. Rest assured that even though I don't respond to them they are always a source of amusement.
Click to expand...

But . . . you're responding NOW. Are you now going to claim that you didn't say you don't respond to me?

I didn't "analyze" anything. I quoted you verbatim. It was what you said.
 
In an attempt to introduce a non-partisan angle to this...

Recounts are problematic by nature.

If something went wrong with the original vote count, how do you know a recount is better?

And partial recounts limited to regions are especially fraught with uncertainty. Candidate A beats candidate B. Four counties are recounted and now Candidate B is the winner.

You still have the question of knowing whether the recount is more accurate than the original. But now you also don't know whether rhe outcome might have been different if you had recounted four other counties, or four additional counties.

It's a can of worms.
 
Blue_State said:
Where are the computer scientists now who said there were irregularities?
Click to expand...

I don't know, but if there was one tangible positive outcome of the election it's that most of us learned for the first time that it's not really practical to do a recount in Pennsylvania because their votes are stored electronically. In other words, there's no paper trail if you really did need to do a recount. That seems massively irresponsible to me.
 
Harshaw said:
But . . . you're responding NOW. Are you now going to claim that you didn't say you don't respond to me?

I didn't "analyze" anything. I quoted you verbatim. It was what you said.
Click to expand...

Well, if all you were looking for was the dopamine hit from seeing another hit in your notification tab, you could have just said so. I'm here to help.
 
ocean515 said:
:lamo

Yea, let's rehash the Bush/Gore election.

USATODAY.com - Newspapers' recount shows Bush prevailed

As Justice Scalia said to those still obsessed with the issue - "GET OVER IT"

Scalia On Bush V Gore: ?Get Over It?

But the justice said his normal answer to people who ask about Bush v. Gore is “get over it.”

Scalia said it was Gore who decided to bring the courts into the battle. “The only question in Bush v. Gore was whether the presidency would be decided by the Florida Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court,” Scalia said. “It was the only question and it’s not a hard one.”

Scalia said he had no regrets about the court’s decision.

“No regrets at all,” the justice said. “Especially because it’s clear that the thing would have ended up the same way anyway. The press did extensive research into what would have happened if (what) Al Gore wanted done had been done, county by county, and he would have lost anyway.”​
Click to expand...

Read the wikipedia article. It clearly states that Bush would have still won if Gore's request for recounts of all ballots in Broward, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Volusia counties was followed through. But Gore would have won if the recount was done statewide.

Also, that SCOTUS decision will be refereed to along with Dred Scott as one of the lowest points in the courts history.
 
Mithros said:
Read the wikipedia article. It clearly states that Bush would have still won if Gore's request for recounts of all ballots in Broward, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Volusia counties was followed through. But Gore would have won if the recount was done statewide.

Also, that SCOTUS decision will be refereed to along with Dred Scott as one of the lowest points in the courts history.
Click to expand...

I didn't know that. I suspect our country would have looked very differently right now if Gore had been president.
 
Cardinal said:
Well, if all you were looking for was the dopamine hit from seeing another hit in your notification tab, you could have just said so. I'm here to help.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile, you said what you said, and I quoted you accurately. :shrug:
 
Cardinal said:
As I've said repeatedly, conservatives have been losing their minds over nothing.
Click to expand...

No doubt for some that is true. For others - I do not think it is possible to lose what you did not have in the first place.
 
poweRob said:
Gore didn't sue to recount. IIRC, the recount was being done by an automatic trigger from how close it was. Bush sued to stop the recount.
Click to expand...

Almost correct but not quite - there were lots of things going on.

Gore's team requests a hand count of presidential ballots in four Florida counties (allowed under Florida Election Code 102.166), Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade, and Volusia. These four counties are strong Democratic areas and had a total of about 1.8 million votes cast.
Click to expand...

2000 Post-Election Timeline of Events
 
Cardinal said:
I didn't know that. I suspect our country would have looked very differently right now if Gore had been president.
Click to expand...
Yeah... Damned chaos theory.

No 9/11, no wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, no ISIS, no Bush Tax cuts pushed through budget reconciliation....
 
Cardinal said:
As I've said repeatedly, conservatives have been losing their minds over nothing.
Click to expand...

I've got no issue with legitimately called for recounts that occur within the proper confines of the law. and fully and completely support them.

I do have issue with those attempting to force recounts outside of the standard notion of the law, or for those who are seeking to conduct the recounts for the purpose of delaying and denying a state the ability to cast their electoral votes as opposed to out of any legitimate concern for the legitimacy of the states results.

There's definitely been freaking out on both sides of this, be it those on the Right screaming bloody murder about some giant conspiracy against Trump or attempts to "rig" the process somehow, and those on the Left screaming that if you're not agreeing to recounts in the exact fashion they want in the exact length of time they want in the exact places they want regardless of the legality of any of it then you're against peoples votes counting or fair elections.

I think by and large, the vast majority of people are just ready for this ****ing ****show of an election process to finally be over.
 
Zyphlin said:
I think by and large, the vast majority of people are just ready for this ****ing ****show of an election process to finally be over.
Click to expand...

^
|
|
|
|
 
Mithros said:
Yeah... Damned chaos theory.

No 9/11, no wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, no ISIS, no Bush Tax cuts pushed through budget reconciliation....
Click to expand...

no global warming and al gore would have invented internet 3.0.
 
Zyphlin said:
I've got no issue with legitimately called for recounts that occur within the proper confines of the law. and fully and completely support them.

I do have issue with those attempting to force recounts outside of the standard notion of the law, or for those who are seeking to conduct the recounts for the purpose of delaying and denying a state the ability to cast their electoral votes as opposed to out of any legitimate concern for the legitimacy of the states results.

There's definitely been freaking out on both sides of this, be it those on the Right screaming bloody murder about some giant conspiracy against Trump or attempts to "rig" the process somehow, and those on the Left screaming that if you're not agreeing to recounts in the exact fashion they want in the exact length of time they want in the exact places they want regardless of the legality of any of it then you're against peoples votes counting or fair elections.

I think by and large, the vast majority of people are just ready for this ****ing ****show of an election process to finally be over.
Click to expand...

The notion that the recount was a plot to delay or hamper with the state's ability to cast its electoral votes is an argument that could be used for any attempt to have a recount.

The fact is that if Republicans had ignored the recount altogether it would have had the same exact result: nothing. There was never any reason to have a cow over it.
 
Mithros said:
Yeah... Damned chaos theory.

No 9/11, no wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, no ISIS, no Bush Tax cuts pushed through budget reconciliation....
Click to expand...

Well, I think it's fair odds that 911 would have still happened. How we would have chosen to react to it would of course have been very different. More so than 911 itself the reaction to the attack defined the country.
 
Blue_State said:
Where are the computer scientists now who said there were irregularities?
Click to expand...

They're in the custody of their proctologists. When you're that full of crap, there's no telling when you might blow.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Almost correct but not quite - there were lots of things going on.



2000 Post-Election Timeline of Events
Click to expand...

Well if you recall there were serious irregularities in South Florida. Like how Pat Buchanan surged in votes where even he said he seriously doubted he got that kind of votes from there. Those areas definitely needed checking out.
 
Cardinal said:
The notion that the recount was a plot to delay or hamper with the state's ability to cast its electoral votes is an argument that could be used for any attempt to have a recount.

The fact is that if Republicans had ignored the recount altogether it would have had the same exact result: nothing. There was never any reason to have a cow over it.
Click to expand...

Neither was there any real reason to do the recount to start with. And it's not just the recount. It's the threatening of electors and the constant tearful droning that Hillary won the popular vote. I'm sick of hearing it. It's about time these people act like adults and get over the election results. If democrats and liberals are actually thinking, they need to right their party. We need a viable two party system, so I suggest the left get over the election and get busy rebuilding. Otherwise, Trump is going to roll right over you. You want that?
 
humbolt said:
Neither was there any real reason to do the recount to start with. And it's not just the recount. It's the threatening of electors and the constant tearful droning that Hillary won the popular vote. I'm sick of hearing it. It's about time these people act like adults and get over the election results. If democrats and liberals are actually thinking, they need to right their party. We need a viable two party system, so I suggest the left get over the election and get busy rebuilding. Otherwise, Trump is going to roll right over you. You want that?
Click to expand...

Where rules permit, the only prerequisites for demanding a recount is money and the time on your hands. Oh, and a "hunch," of course. If all three factors apply to you, you too can demand a recount.
 
Cardinal said:
Where rules permit, the only prerequisites for demanding a recount is money and the time on your hands. Oh, and a "hunch," of course. If all three factors apply to you, you too can demand a recount.
Click to expand...

All true, but not necessarily a good reason to demand one. If a recount is not going to change the result, what's the point? The net effect in this instance is to pour more gasoline on the poor loser label. That serves no one well. It would be much more productive to enjoy the holidays and take Trump on over the issues as they present themselves. And, I hasten to add, don't do the GOP rope-a-dope we saw over the past 4 years. That's what got us Trump.
 
humbolt said:
All true, but not necessarily a good reason to demand one. If a recount is not going to change the result, what's the point?
Click to expand...

[Shrug]

Stein's time, Democrats' money, neither of which cost you anything. So it really doesn't matter. For the most part the ability to get a recount is fairly balanced with the glaring exception of Pennsylvania. 96% of Pennsylvania's votes is stored electronically so it's not possible to recount by following a hard paper trail, and you need three signatures from each of the state's 9000 municipalities. While you don't necessarily want a recount to be too easy, Pennsylvania's recount system is straight-up disfunctional.
 
Jesse Booth said:
As have the people calling for a recount. This was an emotionally charged election, Cardinal. People are going to be losing their minds for awhile.
Click to expand...

Not me. I'm already over it.

In fact, I was HOPING to have a couple of years without all this election bull****. Maybe get my TV programming back. Listen to some REAL news for a change.

I really do wish people would just get over it and move on. It is what it is. We survived George W. Bush. How much worse could it be?
 
Cardinal said:
[Shrug]

Stein's time, Democrats' money, neither of which cost you anything. So it really doesn't matter. For the most part the ability to get a recount is fairly balanced with the glaring exception of Pennsylvania. 96% of Pennsylvania's votes is stored electronically so it's not possible to recount by following a hard paper trail, and you need three signatures from each of the state's 9000 municipalities. While you don't necessarily want a recount to be too easy,
Pennsylvania's recount system is straight-up disfunctional.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Heh. I grew up in PA. That's not all that's dysfunctional there.
 
Mithros said:
Sorry.. Tis false equivalence.
Click to expand...

Only if you hold your breath, stomp your feet, and absolutely insist, as a petulant child might, that there must be an incontrovertible 1:1 equivalency, lest any comparison whatsoever necessarily be false.

I'm certainly not doing that, and I fail to see why any other adult would before reasonably considering that there is plenty of butt hurt and embarrassing silliness on both sides when it comes to this issue.

Find me a single Democrat in leadership who's claiming that there is fraud.
Click to expand...

I haven't said a word about "leadership".

From the first word I said in this discussion and straight on through I've been talking about the populace, not the leadership.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom