The way to fix a vote, if you can, is at the counting or the reporting ends, not at the voting end. He probably isn't sure himself, given the unexpected outcome, that there won't be a discrepancy revealed. (Of course one of the audits is being overseen by the same folks who had control of the initial count, by court order, so...)
But presumably with more eyeballs watching and fewer time constraints. If there were any honest mistakes made they will be caught. If there was fraud, it all depends on what kind of fraud. This is why I think it's critical that there be a paper trail for every US election. My understanding is that the Milwaukee County votes will be recounted using the automated system that counted the votes in the first place. Judge ruled that the county can't be forced to hand count since it's too time consuming. So if there are any problems there they could go unnoticed again.
No, Clinton is the one to blame. She didn't step foot in this state. That ********ed her up, not anybody voting for Stein. And I wavered over voting for Stein, but decided it was more important to keep Trump out of office. It was not as important in 2000 with Bush (yes, I voted Nader).
1 - Because "the system is rigged" and he proved it wasn't. 2 - Because he has played the opposition from the beginning, and can't let go of being the opposition. 3 - Because he's tweeting about it, so something else is a problem he wants to deflect to. Na, the recount in Wi will not change enough to flip the state. The problem was the voter ID law and the poor information which was passed downwards. That needs to be looked into. Seriously, I'd guess (based on reports I've come across) there were probably at least 100k voters who didn't vote but could/should have. That is not just Milwaukee/Madison, but state wide.
There is no doubt the 3rd parties have done some damage Highly motivated people like Brummie should have been saving the world from trumpistan!
And third party voters always insist that because they weren't decisive (as they see it), they deserve no blame. As if blame in these instances is some singular, unitary thing, and not the an accumulation of culpability by many, many diverse people.
I have grown quite sick and tired of you using me as a punching bag. I vote-swapped with @dark knight . I campaigned on Hillary's behalf to get more votes. I wanted Gary to get 5%, but his vote total was not my doing. Now... ******** off.
What the hell those 3rd party voters doing, voting their conscience. They need to get their shit together and fall in line.
The problem with too many third party voters is that their conscience is clear. At least @American Brummie ultimately did his best to be responsible. Others just prefer to get offended when people fail to "applaud" their (suspect) consciences.
I was of the view that a US constitutional disaster was inevitable anyway You have such bad OS fail that an critical failure was just a matter of time
As opposed to those of use who voted for the better of the 4 two crappy major party candidates? Seriously, this is the first time in my life when I voted to prevent a candidate, not in support. In hindsight, I should have voted for Stein.
If want a clear conscience, become a monk. That sort of purity has no place in responsible politics. Because politics is always about making the best of a compromised situation. -- edit -- I'll add this: Full analysis of the election in one tweet: Too many democrats demand purity or wont vote, while most republicans want victory, and so vote.— Kurt Eichenwald (@kurteichenwald) December 3, 2016
I'm not sure why it's so hard to understand this. You take Jill Stein off the ballot and most of those voters stay home or vote Johnson. You take Johnson off the ballot and most of those voters either stay home or go to Trump. There is no scenario where Clinton gets the majority of those votes. If you want those voters then adopt more progressive and libertarian messaging. It's pretty simple. If Johnson and Stein appeal to certain peoples' issues, they have every right to vote for those policies. Instead of whining, the Democratic party should look at this as an opportunity. In a way the electorate did them a favor by rejecting Clinton. Her winning would have enabled that cynical corrupt approach to politics and the Democratic party would have suffered long term for it. Today they have an opportunity to start fresh and change. A little purity is not the worst thing. I've been doing a cleansing diet for the last 2-3 years and I feel great. You'd be surprised how good it feels when you stop putting trash in your body.
This is an evasion and an ethical dodge. Culpability for Trump's election is not singular. The issue is that Stein voters contributed to Clinton's defeat, even if they didn't singularly cause it. Do holier-than-thou, purity-minded Stein voters hold some of the blame for Trump. You bet they do.
Meh ... This election thing is not a zero sum game because there's always an extra category of potential voters who stay home. So if Stein's voters get swallowed up by Clinton's coalition it might push an equal number of voters out of the party at the other end. I don't think the people that vote Stein can be considered natural parts of the Democratic coalition, if only they'd stop being so pure. On some level they must be fundamentally opposed to the Democratic Party and the Republican Party which to me doesn't seem like an unreasonable position to be at all. In fact I'm surprised more people don't express their protest by voting 3rd party (this is probably explained by the general incompetence of the 3rd party candidates). Another thing to consider is that people on the left generally lauded McMullin voters as principled people. But for some reason Stein voters are accomplices. The criticism comes across as entitled ... as if the Stein voters are property of the Democratic Party and should go back home where they belong.
Heard an analysis of the Libs/Johnson supporters which indicated that most would probably have not voted for Trump. Trump is too interventionist, too much about government interference. What is very interesting to me is that all of the 4 main candidates are over 60. The Reps have a dearth of youth (relative), but who do the Dems have? What about the Greens or Libs?
What you are saying is that it is okay to vote your conscience if the vote is a blow out, but not if the vote is close.
I agree. At the end of the day most Stein and Johnson voters would have stayed home or left the top of the ballot blank. I certainly can't see Johnson voters going to Clinton. She is about as far away from the libertarian wing of the Democratic Party as is humanly possible. It's all a moot point anyways for the thread topic. It was clear for months that the 3rd party vote was going to be significant this year. That's not where the electoral battlefield was really fought. Neither party made any overtures to libertarians. And Clinton made some lukewarm appeals to the far left, but nothing that didn't come across as fake. In the end she made a play for the middle ... the suburbs and the educated middle class. Obviously it didn't work and running up the popular vote in California meant squat.
There are multiple factors and people to blame for Trump's victory. I do not think that third party voters are at the front of the line but they do have their share of culpability to carry. From their campaign messages (#bothpartiesarethesame) to their excessive and uncalled purity tests (#iamaspecialunicorn) they had a role on Clinton getting less votes than needed, specially in the Rust Belt. Yes, there are other major factors (MSM coverage, Clinton messaging, Clinton campaign, unethical GOP voters, voter suppression, etc, etc) but the inability of some third party voters of seeing the big picture is definitely in the list. IOW it is not only the votes that went Stein or Johnson's way, the pervasive message from the GP and libertarian campaigns, was that Clinton was as corrupt as Trump and that resonated with a lot of people. Let me spell it out for you: The Trump administration is a yuuuge risk for the planet, so instead of focusing on petty grievances, everyone should have done everything necessary to prevent it, including voting for the lesser evil. Thanks to all the above mentioned actors, we will now have to live with the orange maniac and his cadre's antics for 4 years, maybe 8. And the damage they will cause will be incalculable.
Anecdotally I'm not sure I agree. In my experience, there are voters and there are non voters; people who give a shit about this stuff and people who don't. Once you break off the first half, then you start dividing voters into ideologies. In other words, I don't think there are many people who voted for Stein that wouldn't have voted for Clinton if they had to. Also, I know it seems weird but I think there were a sizable number on the left who did indeed vote for Johnson, possibly because Stein is a clown unworthy of even a protest vote (although she got mine). Again anecdotes aren't stats but it felt that way.
As I've said before as an actual green voter () in a PR system, most of us are ex lefties e.g. The Green party is usually to the left of the labour party on most issues Also green party voters are highly politically engaged. The stumbling block with Hildawg is her acceptance of Fossil $$ which would be a deal breaker for some green voters - but again this is why more official use should have been made of Bernie who renounced Fossil cash
So white people with hurt feelings vote Trump, minorities with hurt feelings vote Clinton, I guess we knew that already. https://www.yahoo.com/news/poll-rac...ed-youth-vote-choice-080820556--politics.html