Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein on Wednesday called for a ballot recount in Wisconsin, Michigan, and and Pennsylvania, and apparently took less than a day to raise more than her campaign's initial goal of $2 million.
Donated. Up to $3.2M total as of this writing.
Thank you Jill Stein, you are a true patriot working in the interest of all the people. Does it mean it is too late for Clinton to piggyback on this?
Counting electrons-gone-a-muck is a thankless job. The hardest part is verifying what you can't count.
Mitt Romney called sore ( sort of, maybe, possible ) winners like you 47%ers, " takers ". That says it all about Trump supporters. They take from the poor, the disabled, women and " the others " and call it a fair election; with honest and fair people presiding over the process of verifying the actual vote tallies. However, that's simply a crock! Look around this corrupt country and see all the state's efforts to deny people the right to vote. Living in a cave, perhaps? Or, merely a professional smearer of anything remotely called, " progressive "; as in, making progress? Or, do you think people shouldn't vote? Or, only certain people's voting rights should be honored and upheld? Don't panic, though. A constitutional crisis won't take place unless Trumpster/Dumpster says it would make America great again, right?
Clinton/Dems are already along for the ride, gratis. The recount is for all parties' votes.
Soros and Clinton probably don't want this recount to happen, because the goal here is to make it impossible for the U.S. government to keep ignoring the fact that there is no reason to believe the "results" of any of our elections, not just for the president every four years, but for every other election, as well.
Easily-hackable voting machines and tabulators, often without even a paper trail, are used in many states, and both the Democratic and Republican parties oppose returning to paper ballots and public counting of those ballots.
Imagine how terrible it would be for the Dem/Repub Big Donors not to be able to make a few changes in election "results" here and there when necessary.
I think Liberty was being sarcastic
You hit the nail on the head! Plus, knowing this one was stolen would call into question all the others (at least back to '96 when the first computerized machines were used) and the country would lose whatever little respect the rest of the world holds for our exceptional democracy.
THIS IS YUGE! You go JILL! You got my vote and now my loyalty!
Donated and volunteered.
The link in the article that leads to the donation page is not clear, so link is provided here:
As to why Jill would do this, I posted this earlier on opednews, in a comment to a related article:
"Before midnight EST on Wednesday, the drive had already raised more than the $2m necessary to file for a recount in Wisconsin, where the deadline to challenge is on Friday. Stein said she was acting due to "compelling evidence of voting anomalies" and that data analysis had indicated "significant discrepancies in vote totals" that were released by state authorities. "These concerns need to be investigated before the 2016 presidential election is certified," she said in a statement. "We deserve elections we can trust."
This is from a link I posted which I believe is important and appears here http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Jill-Stein-raises-over-2m-in-General_News-Recount-161123-903.html
I can think of several reasons, having slept on this for a night. Given in no particular order here, and I did think of more that don't come to mind at the moment.
-To behave as the only adult in the room.
-To possibly heal the wounds so many of us are feeling (she is a healer by profession).
-To show statesmanship rather than talk about it.
-To see what she can actually do.
-To show she is capable of actually leading, when everyone else is floundering.
-To get more news coverage than she has so far, particularly if she literally bends the arc of history.
-To open the door to third parties, and possibly run-off-voting, as Maine has done.
-To offer a hand to someone who is diametrically opposed to all that she herself stands for (called maturity and a lesson to all Americans).
-To show how she would behave in "a real" situation, in terms of defusing it.
-There are three ways to teach: example, example, and example.
-If this were to actually come to pass, she would have a voice that would likely be listened to by many, particularly those who voted out of fear.
I note that I can't vouch for the money claimed to be raised, but the link is from The Guardian, which has its problems, but usually gets things of this importance right. I had sent $50 from my fixed and limited income in the morning, and the goal allegedly reached then was something like $130,000. So it is not inconceivable that this could come to pass. Even if it didn't change the vote count, it shows me who the most "real" leader is, and I'm glad I voted for her.
P.S. hopefully and ideally: To ultimately cause a total re-vote throughout the states, with third parties getting coverage, whilst starting changes that help toss out the electoral college. Yea, most unlikely, but the above reasons are enough for me.
I think the Clinton people feel that they cannot overturn the results in Pennsylvania because the margin is too wide so even if the results in Michigan and Wisconsin can be reversed through recounts she was still lose. Also, she barely won Minnesota and New Hampshire and recounts in those states could given them to Trump. I think unless something really strange turns up in Pennsylvania I do not expect the Clinton campaign to demand a recount.
This is the the academically-written article (by J. Alex Halderman) which substantiates the need for a vote audit/recount in at least 3 rust-belt states. The integrity of our elections and our democracy is at stake. This piece should be required reading for everybody.
Given the vile nature of the past election, Trump-supporters would be screaming "SOUR GRAPES" if Clinton had requested a recount/vote audit. Everybody understands this -- and if they don't they're probably a Trump-supporter. This pursuit (including raising the money quickly before it's too late) was up to Stein or Johnson to initiate.
See my link below to a computer scientist who provides compelling arguments for validating this election.
You count the paper only. That would include actual paper ballots as well as "paper receipts" (pumped out by machines after an automated vote).
I've heard this line before. They're not joking at all. Soros, the ACLU ( member ), BLM and all protesters. are considered " commies " by many of Trumpster's most ardent admirers. True Believers are mostly insane, btw. I voted Green/Stein and love this " great unraveling " taking place. So much bullshit being thrown around by " elites and gatekeepers " that even the cowed are sniveling and udderly baffled by this barnyard brawl.
This is the opposite from what the Supreme Court did in 2000. Rather than stopping the vote, verifying the accuracy and actual vote count.
Jill is doing what Bernie should have done in the primaries.
Glad I voted for Stein.
Excellent post. See my link below to a piece written by a computer scientist who urges the need for a recount/vote audit to validate the election. Recounts in a close election should be mandatory. Of course with Trump behind in the popular vote by more by than 2 million votes (and likely close to 3 million by final tally) we can't state with any substance that this was a close election. It points to the illegitimacy of the Electoral College in determining the outcome of elections in the 21st century -- a polemic that should have been resolved long before now.