Green party begs for RECOUNT to US election results to STOP Trump becoming President

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

A DESPERATE eleventh-hour challenge to the results of three crucial states has been launched in a bid to scupper Donald Trump's surge to the White House.

By Charlie Bayliss
PUBLISHED: 01:59, Thu, Nov 24, 2016 | UPDATED: 02:17, Thu, Nov 24, 2016

Jill Stein, the Green party's Presidential candidate, announced she was launching a £2million fundraising crusade to pay for a recount in the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania – states where Donald Trump is either winning or ahead – to make sure the “election results are reliable”.

It comes just hours after a gaggle of experts and activists urged Hillary Clinton to challenge the result of the election after they say the results in three states may have been hacked or manipulated.

Stein added: “After a divisive and painful Presidential race, in which foreign agents hacked into party databases, private email servers, and voter databases in certain states, many Americans are wondering if our election results are reliable.

"That's why the unexpected results of the election and reported anomalies need to be investigated before the 2016 presidential election is certified. We deserve elections we can trust.

Read more: http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/735826/Jill-Stein-Green-party-recount-fundraising-stop-donald-trump-president-three-states

[lunasun]

1. Didnt she help trump win in a way?

[geomon666]

6. She helped Trump swing Florida

That's for sure.

[Chakab]

9. False. Just like Nader costing Gore Florida. Far more registered

Democrats voted for Trump than for Johnson and Stein combined.


What cost the Democrats the swing states was the deliberate and idiotic plan to ignore blue collar dems and pander to suburban Republicans.

[geomon666]

14. Hillary lost the state by less than 200,000.

Jill got over 200,000 votes. Now we can play patty cake with this and say things like "well if Johnson didn't run then Trump would've gotten even more" but that's not the issue. The issue is simple. Jill got more votes than what Hillary lost to Trump by. She helped Trump win Florida. I'm sorry that you don't like that outcome, I don't either, but it's true.

[Chakab]

17. Hillary had no entitlement to Stein voters. Those were people who

likely would not have voted if there were no Green alternative on the ballot.


I find it bizarre that you're more angry about them than the 10 percent of registered Democrats who voted for Trump.

I also find it strange that the blame is on the voters rather than the shitty candidate who carried so much baggage around that she lost to a spray tanned buffoon.

[eggplant]

18. plus 1

Why the #@$%#^ don't + signs show up in posts?

[Cobalt Violet]

19. 2

[geomon666]

22. You are absolutely correct about that.

Hillary is not entitled to any vote, let alone Stein voters. No argument from me on that.

Second point, I'm not angry at Stein voters. Do I wish they would've went our way? Of course, because then we would've won.

Lastly, I put blame on a lot of things but especially the candidate as I said to someone else in this thread. Hillary was a horrible candidate not because her policies sucked, or because she wasn't qualified, but because of the immense baggage she brought with her and the intense 30 year campaign of hate against her. I don't care who you are, if you have that much hate going against you, you're going to turn off some voters.

But once again, and it's just a simple fact, I don't put any malice behind this: Jill Stein got 200,000 votes in Florida, Hillary Clinton lost the state by less than 200,000 votes.

Now I know people are free to choose who they want to vote for and they should be but as the saying goes, actions have consequences and right now and for years to come, we're seeing the consequences of those actions.

[Bradical79]

29. It's flawed thinking

Those votes can't automatically be counted towards Clinton just because they're both liberal. Personally, I think think a significant chunk of her voter base would more likely just fall into the non-voter category if the Green party wasn't around, or latch onto some fringe movement. You have to pander towards some pretty out there stuff to get the Green support, and I was a bit shocked at how vile some got online.

[Hortensis]

31. Flawed thinking is regarding this as all about the Greens

and Stein. Come on, guys. If Stein follows through, she is serving both democracy and the Democratic Party, whatever what we have good reason to believe would be Stein's flawed, silly, and self-serving motives. And if she elevates herself to some degree, so what?

All elections should be audited. And none more than this one. Period.

Do YOU trust the results of this election? I do not, and we need to be able to. Whether to overset it or to accept the situation and move on.

[JonLP24]

13. If she didn't run under the Green party

Someone else surely would have and they would have voted for whoever that was.

If someone is so disgusted with the two parties that would vote for her or Johnson then they likely wouldn't have voted for Clinton if an option wasn't there or they would go down to 5th or 6th parties.

I blame the GOP's War on Voting which has been quite effective in Florida.

[geomon666]

15. Hey I don't disagree with you.

Hillary simply wasn't the best choice and she was very unpopular. Personally I didn't have a lot of issues with her policies but she had that stink of 30 years of Clinton bashing by the MSM. She could never escape it.

That being said, what happened is what happened. Jill Stein got more votes than what Clinton lost by and I have to assume that the vast majority of these people probably would've voted for the Dem candidate.

[JonLP24]

16. I've known people to completely skip the top

And vote down the ballot which I could see a lot of them doing if there were only 2 choices same goes Johnson but if I remember my Arizona ballot correctly there was like 8 people on the ticket.

I met one Stein voter briefly at the VA who acknowledged it was a protest vote because of "environmental reasons" didn't seek clarification on that but if someone goes out of their way to not vote for someone they probably wouldn't have voted. There were probably more people that didn't vote than those that voted for Stein.

[geomon666]

23. Well they sure aren't going to like what's going to happen to the environment now.

But that's a good point and you're probably right. But just to clarify my position on this, I'm speaking solely of Florida, which is a swing state, Arizona is not so the person you met at the VA can afford to cast a protest vote or not vote at all. If Florida weren't a swing state I probably would've wrote in Bernie. But people who live here should know, we can't afford to just throw our votes away at Jill Stein or a protest vote. That's just the way it is and believe me I wish it were different.

[elmac]

8. Yes, both Green and Libertarian took votes away

from which party we will never know for sure but my guess the Green party took enough votes away from HC to make a difference. Anyway, its too late to do anything about it now. All the Dems in Congress must obstruct sniffles at every turn otherwise its curtains for the Democratic party.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

28. the interesting question here tho would be

If third party candidates 'swings' lets say 3% of the votes in a state to themselves and 7% of democratic voters in an area decides to vote for the republican candidate leading them to win it by 2%.

now did the third party candidates cause the loss or did the democrats who crossed over cause the loss?

Quite a few here on DU seems to ignore the crossovers and blame the third party for acting as spoilers(numbers are taken from the air and are not accurate since this is a generic question)

[RandySF]

2. What a bunch of idiots.

If they wanted to stop Trump....need I say more?

[question everything]

3. Oh, this is rich. Third party candidats won more votes than the diffrence

between Hillary and Trump in Florida, Pennsylvania and Michigan.

[Ahpook]

4. All for it!

If there are any kind of anomalies it needs to be aired out. If our votes are not secure, we have nothing.

My only question is how a second tally would be any more reliable than the first one? If there is indeed a problem, how would a recount differ if the same corrupt are recounting?

[Tiggeroshii]

7. The question is about the electronic voting

We dont know if the diferemce with the pre election polls and actual vote is because of a decreased turnout -which is likely, or because of tmpering with the machines. Recounting the paper receipts will answer that question.

[cilla4progress]

26. I read that in some states

The way the votes came out, more people voted for her in the primary than in the general?
Doesn't make sense.

My hope - more than expecting a recount to overturn the election, necessarily, is that, 1, we will gain some insight which will lead to greater reliability in the future; 2, it will give us time to pursue other tracks against Trump. I can't believe there has been no leak of his tax returns yet! 3, if we do find evidence of collusion between his campaign and Russia, for example, this will discredit him across the board and 4, just to fuck with him!

[milestogo]

5. "begs"..."desperate"...

A little biased, aren't they?

[emulatorloo]

12. That's the AP for you! Always a negative spin, except for Republicans

[Achilleaze]

20. a "gaggle of experts" also reveals AP spin

AP began to degenerate seriously during the regime of Bush the Lesser (R).

They - like NPR - have continued with their tragic decline.

Our corporate media serves mainly to spin and to divert.

[marybourg]

27. add "gaggle" of experts. nt

[jimlup]

10. I understand the sentiment here against the Greens

and I think it is justified.

HOWEVER she is almost there! It is the least she can do. Demand a recount! The funds page is at 90% of what is needed in just a few hours!

[milestogo]

11. This is one hell of a fundraiser.

Gotta love social media for spreading the word so quickly.

[Coyotl]

21. "Begs"? What bullshit. Exercising a right in a democracy, to count the votes, is not begging.

She's begging for the money to do it though.

Clinton's lead surpasses the total Trump vote in 10 states already.

[Equinox Moon]

24. Why is this not being done by Hillary?

Where is Hillary in all this? For there to be even a whiff of election hack/fraud, Hillary should be mobilized and in action. I don't get it Hillary. I just don't get it.

Thanks Jill!!!!! I am so pleased to see someone coming forward on behalf of the US democracy!!!

I will donate to Jill for a recount.

[brooklynite]

30. Maybe the fact that Clinton hasn't said anything...

...and Obama hasn't said anything...
...and Biden hasn't said anything...
...and Warren hasn't said anything...
...and Sanders hasn't said anything...


...means there's nothing worth saying.

[tavernier]

32. No. The assholes would be burning down the

White House if they thought HC or the POTUS had anything to do with it.

[Kashkakat v.2.0]

25. Whats the plan - it needs to be audit of all counties , not Gore-style trying to manipulate outcome

by focusing on only the few most likely to yield results. Also Im not sure of the status of the statutes in these states, but if outmoded, obsolete recount procedures are still on the books they are just not equipped to detect electronic fraud and the other side may obstruct investigations outside of what state statutes say.... so is this really the best way to ascertain what happened?

In Ohio 2004 the Secretary of State was a repub operative who even blocked some of the procedures spelled out in their own statutes (eg witnesses weren't allowed to examine or count names in pollbooks to see if totals matched the computer.) As a WI resident I can tell ya that this cabal of right wing govs of these states are very slick and have deep pockets and will throw every wrench they can - like 2004 this will probably get hung up for years in the courts and so getting HRC installed is probably very unlikely.

BUT STILL WORTH DOING, NO????? Please fight for us Dems - stop fretting about the votes you DIDNT get, start working for the people who DID vote for you (many of us white and working class I might add!!!)

For me my main interest in this is I WANT TO know that the system works and the system is secure, verifiable, and if its not I WANT IT MADE RIGHT. I want a new updated 2016 Voting Rights Act to replace the one that was gutted by Repubs in 2013 paving the way for the massive disenfranchisement we are now seeing (as noted on Greg Palast's website.)

If this effort makes any headway at all in revealing whats been going on the last 16 yrs, why the persistent "red shift" in every dang election, and lights a fire under the Dems to fight for voting rights and secure verifiable elections .... then it will be more than worth every penny and then some.

This angry white woman has been reading/looking at this issue since Ohio 2004, non partisan election activists and computer security specialists have been sounding the alarm for years and now look where we are.

Guess Ill leave it up to the atty's who worked on Ohio 2004 whove stepped forward to help in this effort - if they say its a go, I'm all in!

[oberliner]

33. The UK Express is a right-wing British tabloid

The headline, as per usual, is click bait BS.

The Green Party has no interest in stopping Trump from becoming president.

[TomCADem]

34. Jill Stein: Trump Is Less Dangerous Than Clinton; She Will Start Nuclear War With Russia

So, when did Jill Stein come to some epiphany that she would rather have Hillary Clinton as President? She minimized Russia's role in hacking the DNC and Hillary's campaign, called Hillary the Queen of Corruption, and even said that Trump's coziness with Russia was a good thing. So, if Hillary's campaign were to conduct a recount based on evidence that voting results were manipulated, then that would be great. But, Jill Stein?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/12/jill_stein_hillary_clintons_declared_syria_policy_could_start_a_nuclear_war.html

Under Hillary Clinton, we could slide into nuclear war very quickly from her declared policy in Syria.

I sure won't sleep well at night if Donald Trump is elected, but I sure won't sleep well at night if Hillary Clinton elected. We have another choice other than these two candidates who are both promoting lethal policies.

On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary's policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump who does not want to go to war with Russia.

He wants to seek modes of working together, which is the route that we need to follow not to go into confrontation and nuclear war with Russia.