Dec 2, 2016

Recounting America's Preference

Earlier in the week, I was critical of the Green Party and their recount effort.  I thought that they were compromising their principles, to possibly only benefit Clinton and the Democrats.  Indeed, the disheartened Democrats thought much more of Jill Stein after she filed for the recount.  The Clinton campaign is now openly recruiting people to help with the recount in Michigan and Wisconsin. The other day, after my post, I received a call from a local Green Party member. This woman was an avid supporter, who actually was with Stein several times during the campaign.  According to this source, the party itself did not support the recount, and it was more of a renegade action by the good doctor herself.  This was not my impression, or the premise of my previous post.  I also believe that it was not conveyed by the press, or is the perception by the general public.

As an advocate for independents and third parties, I find this revelation disappointing.  I knew that Gary Johnson was using the Libertarian Party as a vehicle for his campaign.  I assumed that Jill Stein was more married to her choice of parties.   However, I certainly understand the difficulty of running completely independently, with no party affiliation.

In photographs of the local Lehigh Valley recount, I recognized vocal Clinton supporters present.  The entire local recount only discovered a few absentee ballots which were not counted.   It in fact reaffirmed the integrity of the existing voting system.

14 comments:

Robert Trotner said...

My main concern is that most of us in Pennsykvania are burdened by just about the worst voting machines in the country, the first generation touch screen computers without a paper trail or any other mechanism for verifying the results the machine spits out short of an expensive and time consuming hand recount. In thus respect my criticism is directed at the local and Washington, DC Democratic ppoliticians who gave us these expensive, security challenged monstrosities in 2005 under the Help America Vote Act.This is not a political statement. I challenge anyone who's voted with both the machines and the computer ballot to sat that they prefer the current machines.

michael molovinsky said...

robert@7:08, then i can trust that had hillary won, you would still have advocated for a recount?

Dave said...

One of the truly great things about the United States is that anyone that is over 35 years old can be President. I suppose that excludes Felons, but I don't think that is in the Constitution, although you can't legally vote if you're a Felon.

Then we have the screwballs, like Dr Jill Stein. Anyone who listens to her for five minutes forms the view she is either brilliant or a total screwball. But she has the absolute right to run for public office. If your beliefs align with Dr Stein, and believe that the election was hacked by the Russian. Then by all means, support her quest. But if you believe that she is a total nutcase, then in Hillary Clinton's words "What difference does it make?"

America.... what a country !!!!

Electronic voting is probably the worst idea since Prohibition. If there is a computer that is "unshockable", it just hasn't been hacked yet. I like the Iraqi way. Put your finger into a bottle of purple ink, and put your inked finger next to the candidate you are voting for. Simple, re-countable, and only can vote once.

I'm sure the Democrats find it unconstitutional however.... Dead people can't vote that way.

doug_b said...

With less than 1% of the vote, I don't see how Jill Stein has any standing to request a recount - even if she pays for it.

I think California is the one state that probably has the greatest chance of illegals voting. But it doesn't matter in this election.

Steven Ramos said...

Not all of PA uses the electronic systems even if available. In West Chester we had the option to use a paper ballot and many did. Each voter gets a stub as a receipt for their ballot. We should have the same options in Lehigh County and all of PA. I do not mind waiting a day or two to have the results in.

TRENT HALL said...

Gary "Aleppo" Johnson turned out to be a flake, and even his VP partner, Bill Weld, ended up urging their supporters to vote for Hillary.
Doctor Stein, despite all evidence to the contrary, denies her vote total cost Clinton the election, even though her total in Penna., Wis. & Michigan exceeded the spread between Trump & Clinton in each state. Her explanation is that her voters either would have stayed home or written in non candidates anyway, rather than voting for Hillary.
The recounts are pathetic and a waste of time, although I guess the money she has raised for them will build up her donor
mailing list,which is a valuable marketable asset these days.
The electronic vs. paper ballot process is a real conundrum; solid arguments have been advanced for both. The real impetus for the trend toward wholly electronic is from the vendors, not the political parties themselves. Both George Romney & George Soros, ironically, have large financial stakes in the manufacturers of the machines.

Scott Armstrong said...

Democrats love and live by voter fraud and everyone with any knowledge of the system understands this. All of the early voting,voting by mail,giving licenses to illegals,registering at motor vehicles, online voting,fighting routine voter list purges, blocking all voter I.D.legislation and then challenging these laws in the courts are Democratic Party babies.Now because the results"weren't what they expected" they are implying fraud. Well who would know better than the masters.It is all so rich!
The Democrats are becoming a laughing stock. I haven't enjoyed watching them and the mainstream media every more than now. It is like a new comedy show!The only question now is; when will they realize they are the joke.

LVCI said...

"The Democrats are becoming a laughing stock"

After the 2016 elections Democrats still control nearly 45% of the House. Republicans lost 8 seats in the House and 3 seats in the Senate. Factoring in the Independents (who caucus with, Democrats) the Senate hold 50 to the Republicans 51. Currently Hillary holds 2.4 million more of the popular votes then Trump--- SOURCE: Ballotpedia

Hence, despite all this vitriol against Democrats this country is nearly evenly divided. There's no clear mandate for either side. I don't see what good it does to anger and alienate the other half on either side if anyone ever hopes to get anything done. This kind of talk only serves these so-called "liberal" enemies to dig in their heels. Everyone needs to knock this BS off.

As far as the recount goes, Trump is still screaming bloody hell about the system being rigged and filing against recounts even after he won. Can anyone imagine if the shoe were on the other foot what he would have done if he hadn't !

LVCI said...

CORRECTION:

Factoring in the Independents (who caucus with Democrats) the Senate holds 48 to the Republicans 51. (1 runoff to be determined)

Scott Armstrong said...

The side that is "screaming bloody Hell" is the Democrats. The side that is using slander and name calling even at normally decorous events such as the Harvard Forum is again the Democrats. The side that said casting doubt on election results is "un-American" is now doing exactly that. That, I believe, is the point of this post.

I think we all know as well that as long as Trump/any Republican is president the vitriol from the base and leadership of the Democratic Party, and the mainstream media will be non-stop. Was there ever a more divisive senate leader than Harry Reed? Answer, not in our lifetime. Was there ever a more divisive house leader than Nancy Pelosie? No, only Newt Gingrich comes close. Now a house member who wrote nice things about Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan is on the road to leading the DNC. That should help with the healing. That's a nice message of unity.

LVCI said...

You don't need a wall... you need a mirror. Look what's happened over the last 8 years since the 61st Speaker of the House John Boehner shouted "HELL NO" on the floor of the House.

Before Obama became president Republicans were already kanoodling how to undermine his presidency everyway possible. I'm not saying Democrats can't be just as bad, but it's a BS argument saying only Democrats are capable of doing this kind of stuff. If you think conservatives are going to get anywhere trashing half of America who disagrees good luck with that.

Scott Armstrong said...

So what Boehner shouted "Hell no".He was the leader of the opposition. He was always courteous to the president as a person and as president, and to his opposites in the House. The difference here is that Republicans oppose policy, Democrats oppose anyone who opposes them and they oppose them personally.
The trashing is on the D side. Republicans are merely bemused by the national spasm of Democratic angst and vitriol.

Robert Trotner said...

If there were grounds. ...

Jamie Kelton said...

I saw Jill Stein on the news today discussing this recount. The phrase "Beyond Pathetic" came to mind.