• 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: We want recounts because the polls said Hillary would win

V

volsrock

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
3,995
Reaction score
1,261
Location
Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
In a revealing interview on The Alan Colmes Show Monday afternoon, failed Green Party candidate Jill Stein conceded (perhaps inadvertently) that the reason she’s calling for a recount in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania is, in part, because Hillary Clinton was expected to win those states.

Stein: We want recounts because the polls said Hillary would win « Hot Air


She has been smoking to much pot


Well, fellow lefties ...now pay no attention while she pockets millions on this scheme.
 
volsrock said:
In a revealing interview on The Alan Colmes Show Monday afternoon, failed Green Party candidate Jill Stein conceded (perhaps inadvertently) that the reason she’s calling for a recount in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania is, in part, because Hillary Clinton was expected to win those states.

Stein: We want recounts because the polls said Hillary would win « Hot Air


She has been smoking to much pot


Well, fellow lefties ...now pay no attention while she pockets millions on this scheme.
Click to expand...
While I'm not a fan of President Donald, sometimes one has to "let it go". Egad, I can't believe I quoted Frozen!!
 
So there won’t be voting anymore, just polls? This woman is an imbecile
 
If I take as true that those states had some kind of vulnerability and that the polling definitively favored her then I don't really have any problem with her statement. If the polls were accurate everywhere except these three states (somewhat true), and you have some sort of independent reason to believe their voting system is vulnerable, it makes sense to request some sort of recount.

However, I don't believe that there is any reasonable belief that those voting systems were vulnerable.

I also don't believe that the polling of those states was wrong. Of the 18 polls conducted in those states, only two overestimated Clinton's vote share, and those two only by a single point. People just didn't consider that those undecided at the end might break Trump's way.
 
As I posted on other threads in total or in part:

Pennsylvania is a done deal and there will be no recount--their rules call for demands for a precinct by precinct recount and that isn't going to happen.

The recount in the other two states, if it turned out there were no Trump votes cast at all, would not change the outcome.

Stein says she wants all votes counted but is ignoring the 3 million absentee ballots in California that will likely never be counted. So much for intellectual honesty.

Further:
Remove California's three largest metro areas and Trump wins the popular vote by a substantial margin. If those 3 million absentee votes in California were counted, it is estimated he would still be a bit short on the popular vote but well under 1% less than Hillary.

Trump won 85% of the land area in the USA. Hillary 15%
Trump won 90% of the counties in the USA. Hillary 10%

https://spectator.org/popular-vote-realities-2016-trump-ascendant/

The pathetic scam by Jill Stein, aided and abetted by Hillary Clinton, cannot possibly overturn the outcome no matter what happens. All it accomplishes is helping the ladies' pay off their campaign debts while further undermining Trump which is a huge disservice to the country.

No patriot or intellectually honest citizen should condone it.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Trump won 85% of the land area in the USA. Hillary 15%
Trump won 90% of the counties in the USA. Hillary 10%
Click to expand...

:roll:

That's a pathetic retort to the will of the majority.
No wonder Trump-supporters face the level of condescension that they do. You can't really blame the critics when this is the only answer you guys have.

This is what I've learned this election cycle:


Those who voted Trump prefer it if foreign agents interfere in our elections.
Those who voted Trump prefer the politicization of our federal law enforcement agents.
Those who voted Trump think bragging about sexual assault is "normalized" behavior.


and most important:
Those who voted Trump have apparently always despised and rejected democracy.

The American experiment is beginning to look like an abject failure.
 
AlbqOwl said:
A
Stein says she wants all votes counted but is ignoring the 3 million absentee ballots in California that will likely never be counted. So much for intellectual honesty.

Further:
Remove California's three largest metro areas and Trump wins the popular vote by a substantial margin. If those 3 million absentee votes in California were counted, it is estimated he would still be a bit short on the popular vote but well under 1% less than Hillary.
Click to expand...

I wish this would stop going around because it is completely false. All votes are counted. The myth that some states don't count absentee votes when there aren't enough to change the election is false.

Are absentee ballots counted? - Vote.org

https://www.fvap.gov/vao/vag/appendix/faq
 
RickJames3000 said:
:roll:

That's a pathetic retort to the will of the majority.
No wonder Trump-supporters face the level of condescension that they do. You can't really blame the critics when this is the only answer you guys have.

This is what I've learned this election cycle:


Those who voted Trump prefer it if foreign agents interfere in our elections.
Those who voted Trump prefer the politicization of our federal law enforcement agents.
Those who voted Trump think bragging about sexual assault is "normalized" behavior.


and most important:
Those who voted Trump have apparently always despised and rejected democracy.

The American experiment is beginning to look like an abject failure.
Click to expand...

It only looks that way to poor losers.
 
Anagram said:
I wish this would stop going around because it is completely false. All votes are counted. The myth that some states don't count absentee votes when there aren't enough to change the election is false.

Are absentee ballots counted? - Vote.org

https://www.fvap.gov/vao/vag/appendix/faq
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure the Spectator research is right that those 3 million absentee votes in California have not yet been counted and added to the totals. And I suspect they won't be until at least they can get as much mileage out of the popular vote as they can to undermine a successful Trump presidency as much as possible.

And the idiocy that I'm witnessing, including this recount nonsense, only reinforces my opinion about that.

Edit: I have worked the polls in several elections and have been part of the team to tabulate the votes in two in New Mexico. It has amazed me how often in a close election, a previously 'overlooked' ballot box containing 500 or so votes is produced. But when tabulating, there is usually a substantial stack of absentee ballots to be counted and they almost never are before the state is called for one candidate or the other.

And in this election an unprecedented large number of absentee ballots were cast.
 
Last edited:
Re: ****ing hypocrite

Lachean said:
You mean tyranny of the majority.



No, the people who do not accept the results of this election reject democracy.
Click to expand...

Again with the foolish sloganeering.

And what's even more amusing... you don't even realize how your reductionist response contradicts itself.
Well done.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I am pretty sure the Spectator research is right that those 3 million absentee votes in California have not yet been counted and added to the totals. And I suspect they won't be until at least they can get as much mileage out of the popular vote as they can to undermine a successful Trump presidency as much as possible.

And the idiocy that I'm witnessing, including this recount nonsense, only reinforces my opinion about that.
Click to expand...

Absentee ballots are counted last, but they are counted. They were counted in 2000 and your source saying Bush probably won the popular vote is unequivocally wrong. In California the absentee vote has traditionally favored Democrats so I doubt that it will come anywhere close to closing Clinton's lead, and will actually probably expand it.
 
Re: ****ing hypocrite

the DNC fought to keep the Green Party off ballots. she rewards them

the DNC fought to keep Bernie's momentum down. he rewards them


boy, I sure am glad I'm not a fan of those two whores.
 
RickJames3000 said:
:roll:

That's a pathetic retort to the will of the majority.
No wonder Trump-supporters face the level of condescension that they do. You can't really blame the critics when this is the only answer you guys have.

This is what I've learned this election cycle:


Those who voted Trump prefer it if foreign agents interfere in our elections.
Those who voted Trump prefer the politicization of our federal law enforcement agents.
Those who voted Trump think bragging about sexual assault is "normalized" behavior.


and most important:
Those who voted Trump have apparently always despised and rejected democracy.

The American experiment is beginning to look like an abject failure.
Click to expand...

Butthurt is a bitch.
 
Re: ****ing hypocrite

ARealConservative said:
the DNC fought to keep the Green Party off ballots. she rewards them

the DNC fought to keep Bernie's momentum down. he rewards them


boy, I sure am glad I'm not a fan of those two whores.
Click to expand...

Meh. Can't really blame them. The Democrats are much closer to their beliefs than either Trump or traditional Republicans, and Sanders at least scored some concessions in Hillary's platform. It's a choice between putting people in power who wronged you, but believe most of what you believe, or people who didn't and believe mostly the opposite of what you do.
 
Anagram said:
Absentee ballots are counted last, but they are counted. They were counted in 2000 and your source saying Bush probably won the popular vote is unequivocally wrong. In California the absentee vote has traditionally favored Democrats so I doubt that it will come anywhere close to closing Clinton's lead, and will actually probably expand it.
Click to expand...

I will respectfully disagree, based on what I have seen thus far, and let it go with that.
 
volsrock said:
In a revealing interview on The Alan Colmes Show Monday afternoon, failed Green Party candidate Jill Stein conceded (perhaps inadvertently) that the reason she’s calling for a recount in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania is, in part, because Hillary Clinton was expected to win those states.

Stein: We want recounts because the polls said Hillary would win « Hot Air


She has been smoking to much pot


Well, fellow lefties ...now pay no attention while she pockets millions on this scheme.
Click to expand...

Well, I certainly did not send the nutbag any money, but I agree that the polls and the election results do not agree. So...:popcorn:
 
AlbqOwl said:
I will respectfully disagree, based on what I have seen thus far, and let it go with that.
Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence? With respect, this isn't an opinion question on which there can be legitimate disagreement. It is a fact that all votes are counted. It is a fact that all votes were counted in 2000. And it is a fact that in the last several elections absentees in California have favored the Democrats. Unless the election officials are outright lying of course.
 
Anagram said:
Do you have any evidence? With respect, this isn't an opinion question on which there can be legitimate disagreement. It is a fact that all votes are counted. It is a fact that all votes were counted in 2000. And it is a fact that in the last several elections absentees in California have favored the Democrats. Unless the election officials are outright lying of course.
Click to expand...

naderite stein does not want to become another 2000 footnote in history--too late.

stein had 50,000 votes in MI, trump won MI by 11,000.

stein had 30,000 votes in WI, trump won WI by 22,000.

stein had 64,000 votes in FL, trump won FL by 119,000.

stein had 48,000 votes in PA, trump won PA by 68,000.

stein's scathing criticism of Clinton caused a multiple effect on the typical DEM coalition voter.

Some non-trump/non-Clinton typical DEM votes went to a fifth candidate, some went to Johnson, many stayed home, many Sanders voters did not vote Clinton based on stein's criticism.

Staying home was clearest in WI, where Sanders won the primary--as he did in MI.

Finegold led the polls and Bernie's folks loved him. In the end, Johnson won WI by 3.4%, trump by 0.8%.

Sanders people stayed home--reminds me of the disastrous 2010 and 2014 mid-terms--when minorities also stayed home.

The R/D results in swing states are just as bad when you look at the House and state legislatures.

I should add that incumbent GOP Senators in IA, FL, OH, PA, WI all won by more than trump did--reverse coattails--all states that flipped for trump .
 
Last edited:
Anagram said:
If I take as true that those states had some kind of vulnerability and that the polling definitively favored her then I don't really have any problem with her statement. If the polls were accurate everywhere except these three states (somewhat true), and you have some sort of independent reason to believe their voting system is vulnerable, it makes sense to request some sort of recount.

However, I don't believe that there is any reasonable belief that those voting systems were vulnerable.

I also don't believe that the polling of those states was wrong. Of the 18 polls conducted in those states, only two overestimated Clinton's vote share, and those two only by a single point. People just didn't consider that those undecided at the end might break Trump's way.
Click to expand...

Or, really, that many of the "undecided" voters were really just Trump voters all along.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Further:
Remove California's three largest metro areas and Trump wins the popular vote by a substantial margin. If those 3 million absentee votes in California were counted, it is estimated he would still be a bit short on the popular vote but well under 1% less than Hillary.
Click to expand...
Well gee if we just delete a bunch of Trump strongholds Hillary wins the election!
Trump won 85% of the land area in the USA. Hillary 15%
Trump won 90% of the counties in the USA. Hillary 10%
Click to expand...
Empty space doesn't get to vote.
 
Deuce said:
Or, really, that many of the "undecided" voters were really just Trump voters all along.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. My guess, and it's just a guess, is that these are the people who voted for Obama twice and democrats their whole lives but decided to vote Trump this time. The white working class who believed Trump could bring jobs back to them. Maybe Trump votes the whole time, maybe legitimately undecided while they made up their minds to change their long held voting patterns.
 
Anagram said:
Do you have any evidence? With respect, this isn't an opinion question on which there can be legitimate disagreement. It is a fact that all votes are counted. It is a fact that all votes were counted in 2000. And it is a fact that in the last several elections absentees in California have favored the Democrats. Unless the election officials are outright lying of course.
Click to expand...

I can only go by what I have witnessed with my own eyes and what I have been told by people in a position to know and who had no reason to lie to me about it in two different states. Just check it--probably you can get a half dozen hits with a simple google search--are all absentee ballots counted? And you will find that in every Presidential election, absentee ballots are often not counted until well after the election is called and well after the electoral college has certified the next President. And if you can find any evidence that states that are way behind in getting those ballots counted actually take the time and trouble to count them all, I would be happy to see it. I don't think any such evidence exists.
 
Deuce said:
Well gee if we just delete a bunch of Trump strongholds Hillary wins the election!

Empty space doesn't get to vote.
Click to expand...

How big does the point have to be before you won't miss it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom