Nov 28, 2016

The Marginalization of Dr. Stein


When Jill Stein campaigned for President she defended herself against taking votes away from Hillary.  She claimed that Hillary was just the status quo, and not really progressive.  The Green Party is now saying that they're not doing the recount for the benefit of any one candidate, but for democracy. Well, we know that they're not doing it for Jill, because she only got about 1% of the vote.  She is now getting more contributions for the recount than her campaign generated.  She has become a willing tool for those despondent over Hillary's loss.  Clinton's campaign staff will be on the ground monitoring the recount.

Trump's victory was pure democracy.  He had no get out the vote organization,  no ground game.  If history will show any shenanigans in the 2016 election, it will be in this recount,  not on November 8th.  As someone who ran himself for office twice as an independent,  I find this action disappointing.  It depreciates the Green Party to the children's Junior Achievement section of the Democratic Party. In essence, Stein is a front for Hillary to recant her concession.  Jill Stein's legacy will be the confirmation of Trump's victory, instead of the principles on which she had run.

15 comments:

Dave said...

I find it interesting that Ms Stein wants to recount WI, OH and PA, where, if lightning were to strike twice in the same place on three occasions, would overturn the election in Hillary Clinton's favor. Only a fool would not believe that Stein is acting as a stalking horse for Clinton and that Stein's self described integrity runs exactly in accord with Hillary's self-interest.

If Ms Stein is so concerned with integrity, then why not ask for a forensic accounting of voter eligibility in California? Last I heard, more than three million illegals gave Hillary the popular vote there.

Why not ask for a recount in Maryland, where Hillary won by only a very few votes?

Another fact which makes me certain that Stein is doing Hillary's bidding are her tweets ridiculing the Clinton campaign joining in the recount efforts. They are clearly a case of 'thou doth protest too much'.

It's just more smoke and mirrors from the Queen of Corruption, Hillary Clinton. I'll be very interested to find out just how much of George Soros' money went into this scheme.

Scott Armstrong said...

Mike, You hit the nail on the head. The Green Party is doing this because the Democratic Party doesn't want to dirty its hands with it. They/the so called "Greens" have allowed themselves to become mere stooges of a very corrupt political organization.

Jamie Kelton said...

What I do not understand is why are these states recounting votes for a candidate that has literally no chance of winning? Jill Stein had very few votes in any state. I'm sure that the Clinton Campaign is financing all of this but wants to keep their grubby fingers clean with plausible deniability.

Having already failed to steal the election with as many fraudulent votes coming from illegals and dead people as she could possibly dare to get, one can only imagine what kind of chaos would ensue. She has spent the last 40 years trying to become President and if there is a way - ANY WAY - she will find a way to reverse the decision of the American people.

She would ignite a first-order crisis to seize the Presidency and worse, be backed by that snake Obama that might instigate a civil war for which only the Democrats would be to blame.

Bernie O'Hare said...

The claim that Trump's victory is "pure democracy" is utter nonsense. He lost the popular vote by over two million. If this were "pure democracy", Hillary would be President and Donald would be shopping his next scam on unwitting people. I agree it is stupid to attack the election process, but note you had no problem when the reality TV show star did so.

michael molovinsky said...

jamie@9:12, an rather informed democrat told me this morning that jill has remorse, in that if her votes had gone to hillary in the three states that she is challenging, clinton would have won the presidency. if this is in fact her motivation, and because the Green Party has endorsed the recount, it is incumbent upon the Green Party to dismantle. If they are more worried with themselves as "spoilers", than their platform, they no longer have any validity.

bernie@9:22, although you have a point in your first sentence, this is "presidential" democracy as prescribed by our constitution. i would have no issue if hillary was instituting the recount, as gore did in florida, but this post is about jill stein marginalizing the green party, for the benefit of the democrats.

doug_b said...

@Bernie: "The claim that Trump's victory is "pure democracy" is utter nonsense"

There's good reasons for not having a 'pure democracy'. The Electoral College is there to balance the power of the states. The states elect the POTUS, not the pure democratic vote. Just like the Senate where each state gets two senators, no matter what their population.

The election is a contest. Everyone knew the rules of the contest. It was a democratic election.

michael molovinsky said...

doug@10:15, a clinton campaign worker told me before the election that trump may well win the popular vote, but that hillary had the electoral college tied up; there was no math for trump to win the election. of course the exact opposite happen. hillary underperformed in the urban areas, and trump over-performed in the more rural districts.

Bernie O'Hare said...

doug_b, I never claimed that we should have a pure democracy for anything. I detest pure democracy and mob rule. It is Molovinsky who called Trump's victory "pure democracy" when he in fact lost the popular vote. But had the outcome in this race been based on popular vote instead of electoral college, it is entirely possible that Trump could still have won. He and Clinton were campaigning for the electoral college votes in the swing states. Had the result been based on popular vote, they both would have run different kinds of campaigns and he might have still prevailed. I do not challenge the results of the election, though I certainly voted for Clinton and not the Donald. Complaining about the electoral college now is just sour grapes.

doug_b said...

Finally, the adults are now in charge. The Democrats are having a difficult time acknowledging that fact.

I hear it may be possible that Hillary lost some states because Jill Stein took away some of her votes.

Here's what I read at another news source:

Trump won Pennsylvania by 70 thousand votes. Stein would have to prove that fraud was “probable."

"Per Pennsylvania regulations, there is only one way remaining for Jill Stein to get a recount in Pennsylvania and it is a complicated process. 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. "

Dave said...

10:58. With all respect, one of the major bitches we've heard from the Democrats after Hillary lost has been that the Electoral College needs to be gotten rid of.

Whine, whine, whine is all we've heard from the Democrats now since Hillary LOST. Now Lafayette is using the tuition money of the whiners to fight "racism" after the election. I'm sure the parents who have to shell out big bucks for their little darlings to go there are appreciative of how their money is being used.

ninoshinkicker said...

Along the lines of Jamie912: I'm no lawyer but how does she have 'standing' in this recount as she cannot possible win.

Also, let's not be so sure that all the Greenies would have voted for Hillary. Heck, many of those single-issue liberals didn't vote at all. Just look at all the post-election research. The real Greenies hated Hillary as a 'corporatist'. If anything, if they voted at all it most likely would have been for Gary "Aleppo' Johnson.

Robert Trotner said...

One thing that almost EVERYBODY agrees on -- whether or not we voted for Donald Trump -- is that it is NOT OK for him to make national and international policy decisions based on how much it will help or hurt his personal business investments.

Please sign below if you agree that:

1. President-elect Trump should put his personal investments and assets into a blind trust while in the White House (as all his predecessors for the last 40 years have done) in order to avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance thereof.

2. President-elect Trump should immediately release his tax returns (as all his predecessors for the last 40 years have done) so that we can know in advance about his investments and potential conflicts of interest.

3. President-elect Trump and all his appointees should conduct and all their official email correspondences on government servers, where these emails can be retrieved later if charges of corruption should arise.

Robert Trotner said...

https://medium.com/@MedicalReport/how-the-trump-campaign-built-an-identity-database-and-used-facebook-ads-to-win-the-election-4ff7d24269ac#.wabpivo7w

TRENT HALL said...

Hey Robert,
Apparently you didn't get the memo.....when it is the President, there is no conflict of interest.

Releasing tax returns is for losers.....Trump is a winner. So, forget about it.

Congress is too busy investigating Clinton for possible conflicts of interest.....real conflicts are not worthy of investigation because Trump is going to make American great again.

Mr. Molovinsky.....please stop your comments on the national political scene.....your basket of regular deplorables can get their red meat from talk radio & Fox "News." Your few moderates bloggers are tired of reading the same alt right nonsense here, and your Trumplets are tired of reading, as Doug says, the "predictable" rational views in response. Your masthead implies your focus is on being an observer/advocate on Allentown. Stick to commentaries/dams/downtown/parks/zoning/Reilly/housing/etc......issues that hopefully all bloggers can reach common accord/consensus on.

doug_b said...

@Trent: "Mr. Molovinsky.....please stop your comments on the national political scene.....your basket of regular deplorables can get their red meat from talk radio & Fox "News." Your few moderates bloggers are tired of reading the same alt right "

Wouldn't all the leftist's like this. Everyone should just shut-up while a loser candidate (Jill) wants a recount. Obviously, Hillary is behind all this. With her post election behavior, if I was Trump, I'd get a special prosecutor on her ass (that's a big target).

This may have been the greatest election in the last 120 years. It was a defining moment: either sinking into socialism, or rising above it and restoring self determination and the rule of law.

What is Michael fighting? It's the same fight as Trump: Corruption, special interests, and an entrenched Democrat party. Slay the dragon, and the bridges / dams / parks / etc will recover.