Prove me wrong, buddy.
Maybe Trump’s Russian Gangster Buddies are contributing. So people will assume the money’s from Hillary. Even if she’s lost the election, it’s never too late to make her look bad.
If you’re going to fantasize about Secret Conspiracies, show some imagination!
Of course, the one who looks the worst right now is Tweeting Donald…
Still waiting for your cites of Democrats being consistently responsible in asking for recounts in elections that they won.
But thanks for the Hillary quote. A good example of what I said - the recount will change nothing, achieve nothing, and cost a lot of money to do it - but at least some other sore loser is going ahead, so Hillary will join in.
Seen by whom? Marc Elias says that the NC recount is an attack on North Carolina voters and undermining the democratic process. (Cite.) Is that also the case for Jill Stein and Hillary Clinton?
McCrory loses by 4,772 votes. Late on election night, 90,000 absentee ballots come in and shift the election to his opponent, from a county already under criminal investigation for its primary election (cite).
Do you think the protest against this is undermining the election?
Regards,
Shodan
Two can play at that game: How do we know perfectly well that Team Donald hasn’t donated, as part of his plan to inoculate himself so that he can make much more ridiculous and bombastic challenges to the vote when he loses the next time. (Oh wait, he’s doing that already even though he won!)
With the sort of logic being used by certain people in this thread, it is no wonder that Texas Republican’s opposed the teaching of critical thinking skills: http://www.austinchronicle.com/daily/news/2012-06-27/gop-opposes-critical-thinking/
Who ever in the history of humanity has asked for recounts in elections that they won?!?! (Although The Donald’s claim of massive voter fraud in an election that he won is sort of a puzzling step in that direction.)
Perhaps next you will be complaining that sports teams never challenge rulings of officials that went in their direction?
If the Republicans send observers, have they also joined in? I know you’ll conveniently avoid responding, but I do like the question being on record.
Actually, Marc Elias used that language in reference to a lawsuit that is seeking to get votes disqualified, or as he put it, to “disenfranchise legally registered voters” after the Republicans had already tried to disenfranchise them through an election law that was partially blocked by the courts (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/cooper-democrats-pressuring-gov-mccrory-to-concede/2016/11/21/c6a30ba0-b04c-11e6-bc2d-19b3d759cfe7_story.html).
You might try using REAL news sources to get your information.
Certainly not Democrats. Therefore, your claim that they were consistent in their concerns must not be true.
Actually Elias referenced the election results directly in calling for McCrory to concede. And Elias is lying - he just doesn’t want same-day registrations to be verified, because then his client might lose. Again, nothing to do with fairness or a concern for accurate votes. So he isn’t being consistent either.
Regards,
Shodan
Hahahaha. You haven’t proven that you are correct. It’s still your move, grasshopper.
for historical reference -
(underline added)
for historical reference -
(underline added)
(post shortened)
Hahahaha, tell CarnalK about your fantasy theory. He’s the one who claims to know perfectly well that Team Hillary is not raising funds for the recount. Do you think, maybe, he should stop saying that until he offers you some proof?
Whatever, young Skywalker. The money came from a bunch of online donations. I don’t have to prove the money didn’t come from the Clinton campaign, you have to prove it did. They would be required to declare the expenditure and they are currently saying they are uninvolved. So you’re just wrong. But keep up the "hahaha"s. It’s soooo convincing.
The statement “even landslides could be recounted” means exactly that. That “even landslides COULD be recounted”. This isn’t rocket surgery.
Have you found a list of the Green Party recount donators, yet?
You claimed that Team Hillary didn’t donate. I only asked for clarification of your claim.
There is no evidence that the Hillary campaign donated. They have explicitly said they don’t advocate for a recount. Maybe Romney donated all the money.
I shall repeat the oft-forgotten concept: There is no such thing as the popular vote. It is meaningless in the voting system used in the US.
wow. You just blew our minds.
The concept as expressed needs some refinement. There is no such thing as a popular vote for president in the American system, and even that’s not strictly correct because while the majority of *citizen *votes doesn’t apply, the majority of *elector *votes (i.e. the “popular vote” among the electors, with each elector given equal weight) does. It’s the same mechanic, only the electorate (i.e. the group of people who get to vote) is different.
Officially, the presidential election hasn’t even happened yet.
Hahahaha. Maybe Romney did. There is no evidence either way. Why? Because the Green Party hasn’t released their donators list. However, you’re the one who said, “You know perfectly well Hillary is not raising funds for the recount. So maybe, stop saying that”.
Your claim that there is no evidence that the Hillary campaign donated to the recount is similar to a blind person saying, “As far as I can see, Hillary has done nothing wrong”. Get it? A blind person saying they can “see”. Even a blind person can see that the Green Party hasn’t released their contributors list and wouldn’t/shouldn’t/couldn’t say with any degree of certainty, or perfectly well, that the as-of-now-unreleased list proves who didn’t contribute.
No, it’s not similar to that. The Hillary campaign is not donating to the recount effort. Prove me wrong. In fact, you don’t even have to prove me wrong: just point to one remotely reliable newsite that even suggests the Hillary campaign is helping pay for the recount.
Hahahaha. I have no idea who did, or did not, donate to the Green Party’s recount effort. But then, I never claimed to know who did, or didn’t, donate.
You’re the one who said, “You know perfectly well Hillary is not raising funds for the recount. So maybe, stop saying that”.
You’re the one who claims he knows perfectly well Hillary is not raising funds for the recount.
I’m only asking for clarification of your statement. HOW do you know perfectly well that Hillary, or Team Hillary, did or did not donate to the recount effort?
So you don’t think it’s improper to say the Hillary campaign is paying when there’s no proof they’re paying?