Experts Urge Clinton to Challenge Election Results in 3 Swing States

[hanger4]

"Hillary Clinton is being urged by a group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers to call for a recount in three swing states won by Donald Trump, New York has learned. The group, which includes voting-rights attorney John Bonifaz and J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, believes they’ve found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked. The group is so far not speaking on the record about their findings and is focused on lobbying the Clinton team in private."

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/activists-urge-hillary-clinton-to-challenge-election-results.html

"New York magazine is reporting that a group of lawyers and computer scientists is urging Hillary Clinton to challenge the election results in 3 swing states: Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania."

"According to the story, the academics don’t have any evidence of hacking by any foreign government at this point, just this statistical oddity involving electronic-voting machines."

"This story just went up a short while ago but already it is getting some pushback:"

Nate Silver ✔ @NateSilver538
To follow: some *very* quick analysis which suggests the claim here of rigged results in Wisconsin is probably BS: http://nym.ag/2gI6YLP
7:28 PM - 22 Nov 2016

Nate Silver ✔ @NateSilver538
Run a regression on Wisc. counties with >=50K people, and you find that Clinton improved more in counties with only paper ballots. HOWEVER: pic.twitter.com/4swuU70NaY

Nate Silver ✔ @NateSilver538
...the effect COMPLETELY DISAPPEARS once you control for race and education levels, the key factors in predicting vote shifts this year. pic.twitter.com/NYOINx9lEz
7:32 PM - 22 Nov 2016

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/11/22/hillary-clinton-being-pushed-to-challenge-election-results-in-3-states/

Interesting turn of events if it actually turns.

[resister]

Preperation H, apparently does little to soothe butthurt.Whats next?MIA/POW in nam were denied the vote?

[Crepitus]

Trump is the one who claimed the election was rigged. Maybe he was right.

[resister]

Trump is the one who claimed the election was rigged. Maybe he was right.
Hillary already conceded.A long tradition

[Captain Obvious]

"Hillary Clinton is being urged by a group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers to call for a recount in three swing states won by Donald Trump, New York has learned. The group, which includes voting-rights attorney John Bonifaz and J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, believes they’ve found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked. The group is so far not speaking on the record about their findings and is focused on lobbying the Clinton team in private."

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/activists-urge-hillary-clinton-to-challenge-election-results.html

"New York magazine is reporting that a group of lawyers and computer scientists is urging Hillary Clinton to challenge the election results in 3 swing states: Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania."

"According to the story, the academics don’t have any evidence of hacking by any foreign government at this point, just this statistical oddity involving electronic-voting machines."

"This story just went up a short while ago but already it is getting some pushback:"

Nate Silver ✔ @NateSilver538
To follow: some *very* quick analysis which suggests the claim here of rigged results in Wisconsin is probably BS: http://nym.ag/2gI6YLP
7:28 PM - 22 Nov 2016

Nate Silver ✔ @NateSilver538
Run a regression on Wisc. counties with >=50K people, and you find that Clinton improved more in counties with only paper ballots. HOWEVER: pic.twitter.com/4swuU70NaY

Nate Silver ✔ @NateSilver538
...the effect COMPLETELY DISAPPEARS once you control for race and education levels, the key factors in predicting vote shifts this year. pic.twitter.com/NYOINx9lEz
7:32 PM - 22 Nov 2016

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/11/22/hillary-clinton-being-pushed-to-challenge-election-results-in-3-states/

Interesting turn of events if it actually turns.

You just gave Bethere a new purpose in life

[Crepitus]

Hillary already conceded.A long tradition

Don't know what that would mean if it turns out that it is true.

[Ethereal]

You just gave Bethere a new purpose in life
Lord knows he needs one after such a crushing defeat.

[resister]

Don't know what that would mean if it turns out that it is true.
It means she has graciously conceded.If you can concede,and then reneg,what is the point of conceading?

[Crepitus]

It means she has graciously conceded.If you can concede,and then renege,what is the point of conceding?

If you concede under false pretenses does it really count?

[Captain Obvious]

If you concede under false pretenses does it really count?

Ask Al Gore

[Crepitus]

Ask Al Gore

That was the SCOTUS decision. There hasn't been on in this case.

[hanger4]

You just gave Bethere a new purpose in life

I did think of him while reading those links. And have felt a little sorry for him watching him wallow in his self pity. Not really, it's actually rather entertaining, in a perverse sort of way. :grin:

[Captain Obvious]

I did think of him while reading those links. And have felt a little sorry for him watching him wallow in his self pity. Not really, it's actually rather entertaining, in a perverse sort of way. :grin:

I almost get it.

I watched the GOP lose the last two elections and even though I didn't vote for the GOP candidate in either, I didn't shit the bed when both lost. That's how it goes and funny thing, I think this is a common sentiment in this election where whites and rurals and middle class watched the left win both elections and quietly went along with it - because that's what happens, life goes on. But after 8 years of the mess that this administration laid out before us that sentiment turned bitter.

What we're seeing now is arrogance from the left, the suggestion that they're not writing the rules anymore after jamming them down our throats for 8 years. The left can't muster up the class to say "ok, it's your turn", they want to keep writing those rules like drunken idiots and they'll burn the governors mansion down if they don't get their way.

This really could be a pivotal political point in our history in a lot of senses.

[TrueBlue]

It means she has graciously conceded.If you can concede,and then reneg,what is the point of conceading?
Perhaps because she acted way too soon before all was known. She should have waited before conceding! This afternoon as I was changing radio stations I happened upon Rush's program and listened just enough to hear that he is clearly upset that this might actually have traction and go forward. He was, in essence saying, that the Electoral College could technically vote for Hillary Clinton because they are not prohibited from doing so in at least 21 states. And if they did, it could go to Congress but the House being Republican would vote for Trump.

However, the problem with that is that would merely be showing great partisanship of course. Instead, it should go to the SCOTUS as when Dubya found himself in turmoil over the votes. Someone that at least doesn't hold a clear majority in order to be non-partial and fair in this very important situation.

[Subdermal]

You just gave Bethere a new purpose in life
:laughing4:

[Captain Obvious]

Perhaps because she acted way too soon before all was known. She should have waited before conceding! This afternoon as I was changing radio stations I happened upon Rush's program and listened just enough to hear that he is clearly upset that this might actually have traction and go forward. He was, in essence saying, that the Electoral College could technically vote for Hillary Clinton because they are not prohibited from doing so in at least 21 states. And if they did, it could go to Congress but the House being Republican would vote for Trump.

However, the problem with that is that would merely be showing great partisanship of course. Instead, it should go to the SCOTUS as when Dubya found himself in turmoil over the votes. Someone that at least doesn't hold a clear majority in order to be non-partial and fair in this very important situation.

Maybe it should go to the Keebler Elves where they'll all no doubt vote Rodham.

And she can ride a unicorn in to her swearing in ceremony.

:biglaugh:

[resister]

Perhaps because she acted way too soon before all was known. She should have waited before conceding! This afternoon as I was changing radio stations I happened upon Rush's program and listened just enough to hear that he is clearly upset that this might actually have traction and go forward. He was, in essence saying, that the Electoral College could technically vote for Hillary Clinton because they are not prohibited from doing so in at least 21 states. And if they did, it could go to Congress but the House being Republican would vote for Trump.

However, the problem with that is that would merely be showing great partisanship of course. Instead, it should go to the SCOTUS as when Dubya found himself in turmoil over the votes. Someone that at least doesn't hold a clear majority in order to be non-partial and fair in this very important situation.
We shall see, bye, and bye.If she was coronated, they would prosecute her ass with a vengeance.Hard to serve from a cell in kansas

[hanger4]

Perhaps because she acted way too soon before all was known. She should have waited before conceding! This afternoon as I was changing radio stations I happened upon Rush's program and listened just enough to hear that he is clearly upset that this might actually have traction and go forward. He was, in essence saying, that the Electoral College could technically vote for Hillary Clinton because they are not prohibited from doing so in at least 21 states. And if they did, it could go to Congress but the House being Republican would vote for Trump.

However, the problem with that is that would merely be showing great partisanship of course. Instead, it should go to the SCOTUS as when Dubya found himself in turmoil over the votes. Someone that at least doesn't hold a clear majority in order to be non-partial and fair in this very important situation.

You really should read and understand the Constitution.

[hanger4]

Another tid-bit;

"Before anyone gets too excited about a possible challenge, be forwarned that at least one unnamed “senior advisor” to the campaign reportedly told magazine the White House has made it clear they do not want Clinton challenging the results.

Without White House support for a challenge, its safe to assume this election is truly and finally over."

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/election-experts-reportedly-held-conference-call-to-convince-clinton-camp-to-contest-election/

[gamewell45]

I think unless they find something really egregious, I say just let it go and move on. It's over and done with and lets focus on 2020.

[Venus]

Democrats mantra - fake but accurate

from the article "While it’s important to note the group has not found proof of hacking or manipulation, "

[Cigar]

Let it go ... this is a new opportunity for Democrats

Trump is leading The GOP, what could be better?

[birddog]

Let it go ... this is a new opportunity for Democrats

Trump is leading The GOP, what could be better?

Just think, if you had taken my bet, we could be enjoying your temporary absence from this forum! :grin:

[decedent]

Preperation H, apparently does little to soothe butthurt.Whats next?MIA/POW in nam were denied the vote?

You don't think that Trump would challenge a close election? He is the one who said he may not accept the results. He's the one with 4,000+ lawsuits.

It's very fishy that Clinton would overwhelmingly win the popular vote yet still lose the electoral vote. Something fishy's going on. We've already seen examples of voter fraud from Trump's team, and I wouldn't be surprised if Trump was right -- that the election was rigged.


Isn't any conservative uneasy with the fact that a candidate can win up to 2.5 million more votes and still lose? This is unprecedented.

[resister]

You don't think that Trump would challenge a close election? He is the one who said he may not accept the results. He's the one with 4,000+ lawsuits.

It's very fishy that Clinton would overwhelmingly win the popular vote yet still lose the electoral vote. Something fishy's going on. We've already seen examples of voter fraud from Trump's team, and I wouldn't be surprised if Trump was right -- that the election was rigged.


Isn't any conservative uneasy with the fact that a candidate can win up to 2.5 million more votes and still lose? This is unprecedented.
I don't doubt but that they have all been rigged in some way or another

[TrueBlue]

We shall see, bye, and bye.If she was coronated, they would prosecute her ass with a vengeance.Hard to serve from a cell in kansas
Uh, no they would not have prosecuted her or they would have ended up looking like great fools since they would have had to invent and concoct new information that would soon be found out. But leave it to right-wingers with literally no sense at all to try to pursue an issue like this and continue beating a dead horse and spending millions of taxpayer dollars in the process as well.

[resister]

Uh, no they would not have prosecuted her or they would have ended up looking like great fools since they would have had to invent and concoct new information that would soon be found out. But leave it to right-wingers with literally no sense at all to try to pursue an issue like this and continue beating a dead horse and spending millions of taxpayer dollars in the process as well.
Silly right wingers, Justice is only applied to the lowly

[Cigar]

Clinton's popular vote lead breaks 2 million




Hillary Clinton's lead over President-elect Donald Trump in the popular vote has surpassed 2 million votes, the nonpartisan Cook Political Report reported Tuesday.

Clinton now has 64,223,958 votes to Trump's 62,206,395, the latest totals show.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307326-cook-clinton-passes-2m-in-popular-vote-lead

[TrueBlue]

You don't think that Trump would challenge a close election? He is the one who said he may not accept the results. He's the one with 4,000+ lawsuits.

It's very fishy that Clinton would overwhelmingly win the popular vote yet still lose the electoral vote. Something fishy's going on. We've already seen examples of voter fraud from Trump's team, and I wouldn't be surprised if Trump was right -- that the election was rigged.


Isn't any conservative uneasy with the fact that a candidate can win up to 2.5 million more votes and still lose? This is unprecedented.
Yes it is unprecedented. That's all the more reason to DEMAND a recount. We need to be absolutely and unequivocally sure that there were no voting irregularities or violations. After all, Trump would not have rested easily had this happened to him. There is still time to contact the Electoral College and also demand a recount and examine carefully what went wrong. And Republicans should not want to stand in the way of this transpiring unless they're hiding something. They should want to be as open and transparent as possible so as to let others know that they welcome a recount with open arms in order to ascertain if something went wrong or not.

[Captain Obvious]

Clinton's popular vote lead breaks 2 million




Hillary Clinton's lead over President-elect Donald Trump in the popular vote has surpassed 2 million votes, the nonpartisan Cook Political Report reported Tuesday.

Clinton now has 64,223,958 votes to Trump's 62,206,395, the latest totals show.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307326-cook-clinton-passes-2m-in-popular-vote-lead

Leu us know when she hits 270

[Cigar]

Leu us know when she hits 270

Who is Leu?

[TrueBlue]

Clinton's popular vote lead breaks 2 million






Hillary Clinton's lead over President-elect Donald Trump in the popular vote has surpassed 2 million votes, the nonpartisan Cook Political Report reported Tuesday.

Clinton now has 64,223,958 votes to Trump's 62,206,395, the latest totals show.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307326-cook-clinton-passes-2m-in-popular-vote-lead
We Must Now Therefore Unequivocally DEMAND A Vote Recount and Reexamine the Situation Before the Votes Are Certified.

[ripmeister]

Silly right wingers, Justice is only applied to the lowly
This has nothing to do with justice. If it did you would have accepted Comeys conclusion and the conclusions of the umpteen Benghazi committees yet you didn't.

[Captain Obvious]

Who is Leu?

The guy who voted 1,800.001

[resister]

This has nothing to do with justice. If it did you would have accepted Comeys conclusion and the conclusions of the umpteen Benghazi committees yet you didn't.From a clearly corrupted DOJ, that has secret meetings on planes?I'll pass

[decedent]

Yes it is unprecedented. That's all the more reason to DEMAND a recount. We need to be absolutely and unequivocally sure that there were no voting irregularities or violations. After all, Trump would not have rested easily had this happened to him. There is still time to contact the Electoral College and also demand a recount and examine carefully what went wrong. And Republicans should not want to stand in the way of this transpiring unless they're hiding something. They should want to be as open and transparent as possible so as to let others know that they welcome a recount with open arms in order to ascertain if something went wrong or not.

Some members of the Electoral College have already said they may vote for Clinton in mid December.

[ripmeister]

From a clearly corrupted DOJ, that has secret meetings on planes?I'll pass
Convenient retort yet not grounded in any facts that you can demonstrate.

[hanger4]

Some members of the Electoral College have already said they may vote for Clinton in mid December.

Link ??

[Croft]

I almost hope they do reverse it. With their illegal immigrant and dead voters why not? Maybe it really does just need to be resolved in a fight.

[decedent]

Link ??


http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/meet-the-hamilton-electors-hoping-for-an-electoral-college-revolt/508433/


Here's my link. I back up my claims. Do you?

[hanger4]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/meet-the-hamilton-electors-hoping-for-an-electoral-college-revolt/508433/


Here's my link. I back up my claims. Do you?

Your post, "Some members of the Electoral College have already said they may vote for Clinton in mid December." implied some Repub electors may switch because it's obvious no Dem elector will switch. That being said your link (thanks) talks of two Democratic electors willing to switch if they convince 135 from each to vote in a moderate Repub.

And yes I always back up my facts when asked but more often than not it's already in my post.

[Cletus]

Isn't any conservative uneasy with the fact that a candidate can win up to 2.5 million more votes and still lose?

Most Conservatives understand our system of government. They have no reason to be uneasy. It worked exactly as it was designed to work.

[Grizz]

"Hillary Clinton is being urged by a group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers to call for a recount in three swing states won by Donald Trump, New York has learned. The group, which includes voting-rights attorney John Bonifaz and J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, believes they’ve found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked. The group is so far not speaking on the record about their findings and is focused on lobbying the Clinton team in private."

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/activists-urge-hillary-clinton-to-challenge-election-results.html

"New York magazine is reporting that a group of lawyers and computer scientists is urging Hillary Clinton to challenge the election results in 3 swing states: Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania."

"According to the story, the academics don’t have any evidence of hacking by any foreign government at this point, just this statistical oddity involving electronic-voting machines."

"This story just went up a short while ago but already it is getting some pushback:"

Nate Silver ✔ @NateSilver538
To follow: some *very* quick analysis which suggests the claim here of rigged results in Wisconsin is probably BS: http://nym.ag/2gI6YLP
7:28 PM - 22 Nov 2016

Nate Silver ✔ @NateSilver538
Run a regression on Wisc. counties with >=50K people, and you find that Clinton improved more in counties with only paper ballots. HOWEVER: pic.twitter.com/4swuU70NaY

Nate Silver ✔ @NateSilver538
...the effect COMPLETELY DISAPPEARS once you control for race and education levels, the key factors in predicting vote shifts this year. pic.twitter.com/NYOINx9lEz
7:32 PM - 22 Nov 2016

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/11/22/hillary-clinton-being-pushed-to-challenge-election-results-in-3-states/

Interesting turn of events if it actually turns.

Psssssssst, MI uses ALL paper ballots ;)

[Grizz]

Some members of the Electoral College have already said they may vote for Clinton in mid December.

Immaterial, the House has the final say.

[decedent]

Immaterial, the House has the final say.

It's not immaterial. The Electoral College has a change to show everyone that they're not just a rubber stamp organization. They don't just look at the electoral votes. They look at things like qualifications of the President Elect to judge if they are suitable for the position.

Since Trump is extraordinarily unqualified, and an impeachment waiting to happen, the Electoral College could become very relevant next month.


But I don't think the Electoral College will give Hillary the Presidency. I think it will go to Pence after Trump is impeached. It seems that Pence is going to do all the work anyway (Trump has only attended a few security briefings; Pence has attended all of them).

[Captain Obvious]

It's not immaterial. The Electoral College has a change to show everyone that they're not just a rubber stamp organization. They don't just look at the electoral votes. They look at things like qualifications of the President Elect to judge if they are suitable for the position.

Since Trump is extraordinarily unqualified, and an impeachment waiting to happen, the Electoral College could become very relevant next month.


But I don't think the Electoral College will give Hillary the Presidency. I think it will go to Pence after Trump is impeached. It seems that Pence is going to do all the work anyway (Trump has only attended a few security briefings; Pence has attended all of them).

They are a rubber stamp organization by definition.

So if we're going to contemplate the thought that the EC should be eliminated, fine. Make those votes by state mandatory for the state party vote majority.

It might eliminate a lot of the left's bedshitting. Less entertaining though but whatever.

[hanger4]

It's not immaterial. The Electoral College has a change to show everyone that they're not just a rubber stamp organization. They don't just look at the electoral votes. They look at things like qualifications of the President Elect to judge if they are suitable for the position.

Since Trump is extraordinarily unqualified, and an impeachment waiting to happen, the Electoral College could become very relevant next month.


But I don't think the Electoral College will give Hillary the Presidency. I think it will go to Pence after Trump is impeached. It seems that Pence is going to do all the work anyway (Trump has only attended a few security briefings; Pence has attended all of them).

Do you know who chooses the electors ??

[resister]

do you know who chooses the electors ??
bazingaa