The Democrats' real strategy in launching recounts

[Gamle-ged]

The recount in Wisconsin, and the coming ones in Michigan and Pennsylvania will not change the outcomes in any of the states.  No recount ever changes thousands of votes.  I do not think that is the purpose.

The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters.  If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232.  No one hits 270.
 
Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump, and Senate selects Pence. This would be first time this happened since 1824, but in that case, John Quincy Adams won in the House, though he had fewer electoral college votes than Andrew Jackson. 

If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it?  The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote  (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/11/the_democrats_real_strategy_in_launching_recounts.html

The Democrats' "Shit on America" ploy?...

[franksolich]

I don't see how it'd make the winner any less legitimate.

If the rules say that (which they do), well, one has to go by the rules.....

[Gamle-ged]

"Seem" less legitimate to those Hillary supporters whose minds were already sub-grade and who will have dejectedly lost interest in politics since the election and would drift away, unless someone tosses them peanuts from time to time...

[Mr Mannn]

The recount in Wisconsin, and the coming ones in Michigan and Pennsylvania will not change the outcomes in any of the states.  No recount ever changes thousands of votes.  I do not think that is the purpose.

The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters.  If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232.  No one hits 270.
 
Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump, and Senate selects Pence. This would be first time this happened since 1824, but in that case, John Quincy Adams won in the House, though he had fewer electoral college votes than Andrew Jackson. 

If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it?  The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote  (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/11/the_democrats_real_strategy_in_launching_recounts.html

The Democrats' "Shit on America" ploy?...

Trump won Penn state by 68 thousand. PA has a rule that you must show evidence for fraud before any recount...no such evidence exists.

methinks this desperate ploy will not work.
(that and I think Jill Stein will abscond with most of the money raised--dooming the whole thing)

[Mr Mannn]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/2016-recount-jill-stein-cannot-005820422.html
2016 Recount: Jill Stein Cannot File Direct Request For Recount In Pennsylvania, Must Take It To Court

While the filing fee and request is all that is needed in Wisconsin, her second state “funded” is much more complicated. Pennsylvania does not allow candidates to file a direct request for a recount, according to the Pennsylvania Election Code. Instead, the filing fee is simply the amount needed to appeal the results.

Per Pennsylvania regulations, there is only one way remaining for Jill Stein to get a recount in Pennsylvania and it is a complicated process. BillyPenn reports that Stein would have to file for a court appeal and present a “prima facie case” showing that voter fraud took place. While prima facie has a lower burden of proof threshold than “beyond reasonable doubt”, it is still significant. Stein would have to prove in court that fraud was “probable.” This is going to be very difficult given that even the computer specialists recommending the recount say there is no proof of hacking or fraud.

[USA4ME]

They're just trying to delegitimize Trump's election. If you're already residing in kookville, this recount isn't going to strengthen your belief or argument. The rest of America doesn't care, they're just glad the election is over and are already into T-giving, X-mas, and New Years. You know, normal stuff.

.

[FunkyZero]

I don't see how it'd make the winner any less legitimate.

If the rules say that (which they do), well, one has to go by the rules.....

and to add to it, it only makes Trump's win "less legitimate" in the eyes of the nimrods who are already breaking windows and pooping on cop cars. Not much gained if you ask me.
Nothing changes other than they cost everyone a lot of time and trouble over nothing more than a hissy fit and the average citizen hates the pansys even more than they already do

[freedumb2003b]

The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters.  If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232.  No one hits 270.

Wrong.  If the recounts are incomplete as of EC voting day, they vote based on the certified results (results have been certified in all PA and MI).

PA will be almost impossible to successfully contest (the last recount day was Nov 18). They have to convince a court there was BLATANT fraud.  The default presumption is the election was OK.

This is all about fund raising and name awareness for stein.  Nothing more.

But hiLIARy has put her equanamity at stake since Trump said he has no interest in pursuing her criminality -- but that was BEFORE she jumped on board the recount bandwagon.  Trump may very well think she violated an implicit gentleman's agreement they had about accepting the election results and will go ahead and go after her.

[RobJohnson]

[ProLapse]

Heard on election night at Hillary HQ:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPZn4rbiB8g

[Gamle-ged]

Warren et al are using this method to try to (a) wrest some more money from the Democrat wet brains and (b) to keep Democrats from slitting their wrists  in the runup to the Trump inauguration. After President Trump is in office Democrats will have only the media to dependably spew Democrat spin, as Democrat donors are disgustedly abandoning that failed political party, making statements like "feel their money got burned."...