Was the election rigged ?

Blunted 4 lyfe

Blunted 4 lyfe

Well-Known Member
Justin-case said:
Wtf, Looks like the glass ceiling has a few more cracks in it:-)


Report: Trump’s Margin In Wisconsin Shrinks By Thousands Of Votes Ahead Of Recount
By Sean Colarossi on Fri, Nov 25th, 2016 at 9:32 pm

If this pattern remains consistent across the state, it's feasible – though unclear how likely – that Clinton could end up on top in the state.

Palmer Report, some precincts realized the numbers were padded to benefit Trump and had to revise their numbers. As a result, 5,000 votes were essentially wiped out of Trump’s column in an instant. What’s particularly puzzling, the report noted, is that Clinton’s numbers remained virtually unchanged, despite Trump losing thousands of votes from his total.

If this pattern remains consistent across the state, it’s feasible – though unclear how likely – that Clinton could end up on top in Wisconsin.

More from the report:

Even ahead of the forthcoming recount in Wisconsin, Donald Trump’s lead has already shrunk to just 22,525 votes. That means 18% of his “lead” has already vanished, based on precincts catching some of their own incorrect numbers, and internet gawkers catching others. But the second thing that jumps out is that the revisions have served to erase thousands of votes from Trump, while affirming that Clinton’s vote total was essentially correct to begin with.

Donald Trump has gone from originally having 1,409,467 votes to now having just 1,404,536 votes in Wisconsin. In other words, a total of 4,931 votes were reported for Trump on election night that never existed. In contrast Hillary Clinton has gone from 1,382,210 votes down to 1,382,011 votes, a difference of less than two hundred votes. In other words, Wisconsin essentially had Clinton’s vote total correct all along, but is now acknowledging that nearly five thousand of the supposed votes for Trump simply never existed. Where did these votes come from? Who originally padded his numbers and how? If this was indeed due to an organized effort to pad Trump’s voting totals in various precincts across the state, the recount should fully expose it
While Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes are in Trump’s column for the time being, his margin in the state could be incredibly fragile if the discrepancies found in a few areas turn out to be a statewide phenomenon. A few more precincts uncovering the same errors could easily tip the state in Clinton’s favor.

At this point, much of this is just speculation, but the good news is that this is exactly why recounts exist – not just to expose any vote tampering, but also to give the American people confidence that the electoral process is fair and can be trusted.
Click to expand...
I agree it's a long shot and a hope and a prayer but I don't think just because Hillary conceded means anything if the electoral college that meets in December give their votes to the winner, but let's not get ahead of ourselves I see little hope of changing the inevitable. Just keeping it real.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
see4 said:
She is intentionally avoiding the discussion, she wants to avoid a rational debate.
Click to expand...

IMHO ...A rational debate wouldn't be about which person and which policies the form of the USA's coercion based government will take.

That's sort of a "tastes great / less filling" dance. It erroneously presupposes that the legitimacy of government is a foregone conclusion, which is sort of ironic given your post about "rational debate".

A rational debate worth having might focus on WHETHER there is any legitimate basis for the coercion based government itself, rather than what the coercion based government will look like and who will lead it, etc.

Arguing about how the slaves should be treated and who will be the masters does not strike the heart of the matter, which is, why are people "subjects" in the first place and what can be done to change that ?
 
see4

see4

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
IMHO ...A rational debate wouldn't be about which person and which policies the form of the USA's coercion based government will take.

That's sort of a "tastes great / less filling" dance. It erroneously presupposes that the legitimacy of government is a foregone conclusion, which is sort of ironic given your post about "rational debate".

A rational debate worth having might focus on WHETHER there is any legitimate basis for the coercion based government itself, rather than what the coercion based government will look like and who will lead it, etc.

Arguing about how the slaves should be treated and who will be the masters does not strike the heart of the matter, which is, why are people "subjects" in the first place and what can be done to change that ?
Click to expand...
Cool story bro?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
Says the retard who can't face the fact Bernie Sanders lost in a landslide by 20%

(I'm being generous, it's closer to 25%)

It's obvious you don't give two shits about the will of the people, because the people resoundingly rejected Bernie and they also rejected Trump.
Click to expand...

The "will of the people" is a misnomer. It implies that within a false dichotomy, people who choose the lesser evil, WANT the lesser evil. It also implies that the political process itself can aggregate the myriad "wills" of a mass of individuals into a homogenous "will of the people".

I'm beginning to think you're not a real Ninja.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
The "will of the people" is a misnomer. It implies that within a false dichotomy, people who choose the lesser evil, WANT the lesser evil. It also implies that the political process itself can aggregate the myriad "wills" of a mass of individuals into a homogenous "will of the people".

I'm beginning to think you're not a real Ninja.
Click to expand...
I'm beginning to think you're clinically retarded.

Honestly, do you and Sky live in the same "sheltered living" home?
 
C

Chezus

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
Before we do that recount, might I suggest we start at the beginning and get the Sanders recount done first?

Why do you men have your panties in such a bunch over Crooked Hillary <loss>?

Maybe you should've been part of the Sanders crew here? I dunno, just thinking out loud.
Click to expand...
Well now we know who Shuylaar voted for
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
The computer scientists believe they have found evidence that vote totals in the three states could have been manipulated or hacked and presented their findings to top Clinton aides on a call last Thursday.
The scientists, among them J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, told the Clinton campaign they believe there is a questionable trend of Clinton performing worse in counties that relied on electronic voting machines compared to paper ballots and optical scanners, according to the source.

'I'll tell you at the time..' -Candidate Drumpf he also said he needed to see the 'numbers at the time' to tell..sounds like he's expecting a certain number..perhaps a guaranteed number?


 
Last edited:
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Jimdamick said:
It seems that there is strong evidence that some districts in certain states could have had their election results hacked, handing Trump the win. Apparently there is a 7 point difference between paper ballots and the one's cast electronically, which doesn't add up

Hillary Clinton's campaign is being urged by a number of top computer scientists to call for a recount of vote totals in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, according to a source with knowledge of the request.

The computer scientists believe they have found evidence that vote totals in the three states could have been manipulated or hacked and presented their findings to top Clinton aides on a call last Thursday.
The scientists, among them J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, told the Clinton campaign they believe there is a questionable trend of Clinton performing worse in counties that relied on electronic voting machines compared to paper ballots and optical scanners, according to the source.

All those states were odds on favorites to vote for Clinton, but that ended up not to be the case apparently.
So, the question is should Clinton, or will Clinton ask for a recount of the votes in those areas? I think she should.

.Additionally, at least three electors have pledged to not vote for Trump and to seek a "reasonable Republican alternative for president through Electoral College," according to a statement Wednesday from a group called the Hamilton Electors, which represents them.

It seems that there is still a small hope that this country could be saved, and get rid of that charlatan before he destroys mankind.
Click to expand...
It gets worse. Much, much worse;
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top