# What if the recounts go Clinton's way? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 26, 2016, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087 "2016-11-26T21:31:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![crucible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@crucible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crucible)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 10:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/81 "2016-11-28T10:58:08Z")
> [@enipla](#): > > It’s the EC that is the problem here. Not the voting machines. The machines are not connected to the internet. How then, do so many get supposedly ‘hacked’? It would be a conspiracy like trying to fake the moon landing. The software on all digital voting machines has to be updated before each election. Concealed malware in the machines used to upgrade those voting machines could have been planted in many ways. Counting the paper trail votes is the only way to confirm an election. Everyone agrees that emachines could be programmed to produce a systematic switch of votes. Everyone agrees that actually hacking those machines is not easy. People are wrong, though, if they think it impossible. I hope, for the sake of the process, we find no improprieties, but that we redouble efforts to get rid of evoting in favor of paper ballots and optical scanners, followed by random audits of machines vs. ballots totals. ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/82 "2016-11-28T11:20:59Z")
> [@Roderick\_Femm](#): > > Recounts have nothing whatever to do with whether a voter is a valid voter or not. Recounts only check to make sure that votes are counted accurately, i.e. that they are counted as they were cast. That means checking against the paper ballots where they exist; I’m not sure how they re-count where there is no paper ballot to check against. > > In any case, voter id, cleaning up voter rolls (which could take years if done accurately), and election observers have nothing to do AT ALL with a recount. The current recount in the NC governor’s race has focused on both miscounted ballots and challenged ballots. A very few ballot challenges have been successful when it was positively determined that an ineligible person cast the ballot. _ **If** _ there were tens of thousands of miscounts, ineligible ballots, ballots from the dead, and such in sufficient quantities to overturn the initial election results in three states then the public wouldn’t give a damn about how effective a solution is. They would just want something to be done, now! :smack: People are not always consistently rationale, as evidenced by more than 45% of the voters casting ballots for the orange haired monster who must not be named. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/83 "2016-11-28T11:47:59Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > The current recount in the NC governor’s race has focused on both miscounted ballots and challenged ballots. A very few ballot challenges have been successful when it was positively determined that an ineligible person cast the ballot. > > _ **If** _ there were tens of thousands of miscounts, ineligible ballots, ballots from the dead, and such in sufficient quantities to overturn the initial election results in three states then the public wouldn’t give a damn about how effective a solution is. They would just want something to be done, now! :smack: > > People are not always consistently rationale, as evidenced by more than 45% of the voters casting ballots for the orange haired monster who must not be named. So people will want voter ID laws because Trump stuffed the ballot box, in the same way people wanted to invade Iraq because of 9/11. Your implied rationalization of voter ID laws isn’t sounding very good. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/84 "2016-11-28T12:10:05Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Trump’s response has actually been much more reasonable than Bush’s in 2000. Trump is mocking the whole endeavour. Bush saw it as a threat and lawyered up in a hurry. I don’t recall Chimpy threatening to prosecute Gore for proceeding with the recount. One wonders why the recount frightens Hillary’s opponent so. ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/85 "2016-11-28T13:35:49Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > So people will want voter ID laws because Trump stuffed the ballot box, in the same way people wanted to invade Iraq because of 9/11. > > Your implied rationalization of voter ID laws isn’t sounding very good. What I am implying is saying something about the American voter. People, the general masses of people, react to problems with fear-driven, emotionally laden responses. They do not stop to carefully consider a logical analysis. To be clear, _ **I** _ am not saying that I think voter ID laws would address problems found in a recount that, per the Op’s hypothetical, would be so great as to overturn the results of the election. I do think that the American public writ large would not make such a distinction and therefore that I what I think the public would demand. And since the OP asked what if the recounts go Clinton’s way, I answered what I think would be one result. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/86 "2016-11-28T15:19:59Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > What I am implying is saying something about the American voter. > > People, the general masses of people, react to problems with fear-driven, emotionally laden responses. They do not stop to carefully consider a logical analysis. > > To be clear, _ **I** _ am not saying that I think voter ID laws would address problems found in a recount that, per the Op’s hypothetical, would be so great as to overturn the results of the election. I do think that the American public writ large would not make such a distinction and therefore that I what I think the public would demand. And since the OP asked what if the recounts go Clinton’s way, I answered what I think would be one result. I understand this is all speculative and you are offering your best shot at a prediction, but I don’t think that your conclusion makes sense. If it were to be established that Trump’s side somehow rigged the election, and after unrigging it, Clinton won, I don’t believe that the case for voter ID laws is strengthened if the fraud had nothing to do with fake or illegal voters. That’s because when losers get caught cheating, they generally don’t get to offer input on how to fix the cheating and have their suggestions taken seriously. Do we look to Lance Armstrong for advice on how to clean up doping in sports? Do we look to Nixon’s coterie for advice on government ethics? Do we look to Bill Clinton to write the book on fidelity and politicians? If there were to be fraud discovered, which I think is extremely far-fetched, the credibility of the Republican Party on voting integrity would be shot. The idea that an essentially Republican idea for cutting down on fraud - voter ID laws - would gain traction when Republicans of some stripe would have very nearly gotten away with a crime of historic proportions makes zero sense. ---
**Author:** ![Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba9def/32.png) [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Asking_Questions)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/87 "2016-11-28T15:42:18Z")
If the recount changes the results and puts Clinton in the White House, I expect Trump to graciously concede and offer his full support to our new president. That he’ll congratulate her on live TV, and all his tweets will call for his supporters to accept the results as fair and honest. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Quatro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bc8723/32.png) [@Mr\_Quatro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Quatro)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/88 "2016-11-28T17:07:06Z")
[http://reno4governor.tripod.com/index-30.html](http://reno4governor.tripod.com/index-30.html) > [@](#): > > A survey of Florida’s 67 counties shows that more than 700,000 Florida voters–or almost 1 in 8–voted absentee. George W. Bush, the governor’s brother, captured about 125,000 more absentee votes than his Democratic rival, Al Gore. > > That margin dwarfs Bush’s official 537-vote edge in the Sunshine State. And Florida in turn put Bush over the top in the electoral college. > > The gigantic but largely invisible absentee ballot blitz was the GOP’s secret weapon in the Florida campaign. But it was almost entirely overlooked during the suspenseful five-week recount of the Florida vote last fall, when the presidency hung in the balance. > > Republicans say it was a smart, successful gambit. But some Democrats believe it took unfair advantage of both the governor’s office and the absentee voting process. Absentee ballots count … not so sure if they count on a recount, but they do count. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/89 "2016-11-28T17:29:09Z")
I have no inside information, but some sources are suggesting seems to me that winning the recount may not be Clinton’s actual strategy. The strategy might be to delay the final result until the Dec 19th deadline so that it would devolve to the House of Representatives to pick the President. Almost certainly they would have to pick Trump. We would then have a president who lost the popular vote, failed to win the electoral vote, and installed by his own party. It would be a stain on Trump, who would go down as the most illegitimate president in history. It would also be a stain on the Republicans who put him there. It would also be a stain on the Electoral College. I have to say I kind of like this. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/90 "2016-11-28T17:35:08Z")
This is the caricature of a President that the caricature of America (a minority of actual voters, of course) wanted. Congratulations, we have officially become every stereotype ever put onto us by the rest of the world. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2016, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/91 "2016-11-28T17:37:15Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Trump’s response has actually been much more reasonable than Bush’s in 2000. Trump is mocking the whole endeavour. Bush saw it as a threat and lawyered up in a hurry. Revisionism in about 30 seconds. So do you admire him for this latest attack on the electoral system (one which, coincidentally, elected him)? ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2016, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/92 "2016-11-29T20:42:01Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > I don’t recall Chimpy threatening to prosecute Gore for proceeding with the recount. One wonders why the recount frightens Hillary’s opponent so. With Trump, _every single thing_ sends his dial up to “11.” (I know I’m trying to get some bucket-list items crossed off; ‘the end is near’ is now more than just a _New Yorker_ cartoon staple.) ---
**Author:** ![Roderick\_Femm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/roderick_femm/32/14875_2.png) [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2016, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/93 "2016-11-29T20:43:25Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > The current recount in the NC governor’s race has focused on both miscounted ballots and challenged ballots. Let’s be clear: this is because the person demanding a recount (Gov. McCrory, the Republican and putative loser) has raised those issues. In the presidential recount, the Democrats have not raised the issue of challenged ballots. My remarks were based on that. I should have said “voter id, cleaning up voter rolls (which could take years if done accurately), and election observers have nothing to do AT ALL with _ **this** _ recount.” Trump’s unsupported and pointless allegation of millions of bogus votes for Clinton are irrelevant to the discussion. He’s sensitive about being a minority president and wants to claim that he has some kind of mandate. His supporters will eat it up, the rest of us see it for what it is. ---
**Author:** ![crucible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@crucible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crucible)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2016, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/94 "2016-11-30T11:20:41Z")
[quote=“Ravenman, post:86, topic:773087”] If it were to be established that Trump’s side somehow rigged the election, and after unrigging it, Clinton won, I don’t believe that the case for voter ID laws is strengthened if the fraud had nothing to do with fake or illegal voters. That’s because when losers get caught cheating, they generally don’t get to offer input on how to fix the cheating and have their suggestions taken seriously. Do we look to Lance Armstrong for advice on how to clean up doping in sports? Do we look to Nixon’s coterie for advice on government ethics? Do we look to Bill Clinton to write the book on fidelity and politicians?.\>\>\>\>\>\> But, we do. Look at the stream of Republican conservatives who rail against, preach against, threaten against all sorts of what they consider sexual aberrations, then it turns out they are sleeping around, propositioning pages, etc. etc. Look at the stream of Republicans who call Democrats fiscally irresponsible, who then when their man is POTUS run us up trillions in debt. Look at the steady stream of Republicans who say that Democrats are to blame for all sorts of ills around the world, then go out, when they have the power, and invade countries just to see if the military is still able to function, then abandon the soldiers who obeyed their foolish commands… and, still, they get voted for, time after time. The American public, some half of it at least, believes the crap they are fed by the conservatives and demonstrate actual hatred for those who spend their lives trying to improve the lot of the public. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2016, 11:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/95 "2016-11-30T11:34:43Z")
> [@crucible](#): > > But, we do. Look at the stream of Republican conservatives who rail against, preach against, threaten against all sorts of what they consider sexual aberrations, then it turns out they are sleeping around, propositioning pages, etc. etc. Do you seriously think that anyone is looking to, or taking advice from, Mark Foley on anything relating to ethics and personal relationships? Because that is literally what you’re claiming, and it is totally absurd. > [@](#): > > Look at the stream of Republicans who call Democrats fiscally irresponsible, who then when their man is POTUS run us up trillions in debt. Look at the steady stream of Republicans who say that Democrats are to blame for all sorts of ills around the world, then go out, when they have the power, and invade countries just to see if the military is still able to function, then abandon the soldiers who obeyed their foolish commands… This rant here has nothing to do with what I posted. > [@](#): > > The American public, some half of it at least, believes the crap they are fed by the conservatives and demonstrate actual hatred for those who spend their lives trying to improve the lot of the public. I think you need to remember what I actually posted, as opposed to your list of greivences with the Republican Party. The other poster claimed that if the recount were thrown Clinton’s way, that people would demand voter ID laws that Republicans have been pushing. I said that if Clinton ended up winning, the perception that Republicans very nearly stole an election would mean that people, generally, would not swarm to support a Republican voter ID policy (contrary to the other poster’s belief). Let me use another analogy: after it became clear that the Bush invasion of Iraq was a mistake, people would not have bought a case for Bush invading Iran. And you disagree with this? ---
**Author:** ![Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omg_a_Black_Conservative)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2016, 11:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/96 "2016-11-30T11:54:48Z")
> [@Honey](#): > > **It’s been said a few times in this thread that changing the outcome is not what’s most important here**. Finding out if there was _any_ hacking is the main objective. > > Isn’t that something you’d want to know? 😕 Yes, it is. Ergo, why they didn’t bother with recounts in NH, Nevada, Minnesota, California, Virginia or any other state Clinton won. Please, stop trying to insult people’s intelligence. Let’s just call it what it is; sour grapes. Leftists are hoping and praying that the outcome is changed in favor of Clinton. I know it, you know it and everyone here knows it. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2016, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/97 "2016-11-30T12:13:28Z")
A real audit, which must never be done lest it expose something liberals don’t want exposed, would be to select 10,000 voters at random who voted and audit their registration to make sure they are eligible to vote. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2016, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/98 "2016-11-30T13:34:37Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > A real audit, which must never be done lest it expose something liberals don’t want exposed, would be to select 10,000 voters at random who voted and audit their registration to make sure they are eligible to vote. So, you agree with Trump’s brain-damaged claim that he _really_ won the popular vote. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2016, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/99 "2016-11-30T13:39:04Z")
No, I do not agree with his claim because he has no evidence to support it. However, there is no evidence disproving it either, because no one has actually tried to find out how many people vote illegally. Going over a large sample of confirmed votes nationwide and tallying how many were illegally cast would tell us something we need to know. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2016, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087/100 "2016-11-30T13:50:55Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > Let’s just call it what it is; sour grapes. As an aside, how is it that so many people are using this phrase after the election, apparently with no understanding of what it means? It’s like if Clinton had won the election, and Democrats went around crowing that Donald Trump had gotten a meal fit for a king. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-recounts-go-clintons-way/773087.md?page=6)