Implications of Jill Steins recount

31  2016-11-26 by Europeanquarantined

Hello guys, I have been trying to find some information about the possible outcomes of the recounts filed by Jill Stein for Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. The reason I come to you with these questions is that T_D seem to be over confident that this is either a scam to recoup campaign funding by the Green party or will not result in any significant change to the outcome, saying otherwise or even asking questions gets you downvoted and labeled a "concern troll". I love that sub but I fear that they do not know the globalists to the extent that we do here. My questions are as follows, thankyou in advance for replies/ links:

Is it true that if the recounts are filed and accepted and also not completed before 19th December the electoral votes from those states will not be counted?

I read that due to its own state laws regarding elections, Michigan won't accept a recount due to its votes having already been counted twice, and its ban on electronic voting machines, is this true? I also read that Stein is possibly focusing on absentee ballots, is there enough of those to sway the vote there back to Hillary?

In the event the recounts not being completed before the deadline will the difference between Trump and Hillary in electoral votes still put trump over 270 Ev? If both candidates are below 270 I have been told the House will decide the outcome, T_D seem certain in this case they will go with Trump but is that as probable as they say?

And now one hot off the brain, forgive me for sounding paranoid but how likely do you guys think it is that this is an attempt by our man Soros to spark a civil war by stealing this election from Trump? We know he loves destabilising nations and is set up to profit from any such situation, and it is likely him (or someone else rich and evil?) who is providing funds for the recount filings due to the bot hypothesis. My reason for suspecting this is that republicans would only be likely to resort to violence in the event of blatent use of the system to take the decision out of the hands of the american people, they are for the most part a lot more level headed than their opposition but they also know what is at stake here. The advantage of having the election then fudging it in a recount is the govt now know where the highest concentrations of Trump voters reside from the vote tally and possibly even who supports whom due to reactions on social media to the victory coupled with NSA etc mass surveillance. This is a shot in the dark, a true conspiracy theory but I would appreciate your input on this, even if you tell me I'm just crazy.

Thanks again for your replies

18 comments

15  Dippy_Egg 2016-11-26

I don't think you're crazy. I've had my ear to the ground since election night waiting for the media to pick up steam and start billing the use of the Electoral College as "the smart thing to do" and "what it was created for." And I've seen the narrative clearly shifting that direction this week.

The use of Jill Stein and the Green party to further this end comes as a surprise to me, though. Didn't see that coming. I have to surmise that Stein knows she's being used by the neo-con faction, but has decided that their agenda is less destructive to her pet issues than Trump's. Ok, it is the Green party - environmental issues are their big thing and Trump is shaping up to be an absolute nightmare in that respect.

The neo-con agenda prioritizes limiting the second amendment. Installing Clinton would serve many functions toward that end, to include possibly inciting violence by Trump supporters.

The American populous still operates under the useful illusion that the two parties are separate. Using the electoral college to install Clinton would serve to deepen those perceived divisions, an effective divide and conquer strategy.

I don't believe for one second that Clinton is going to go gentle into that good night. She has been tasked with creating that illusion - this is petty, but here it is - all of her appearances lately, she's been sporting the "no make-up" look. Sends a message that the campaign mask is off, she's no longer putting up a front - gains her points in the "honesty" column - the perception of her as dishonest is what ultimately lost her the election. Also serves to distance her from the movement to install her - she's just a regular grandmother out there hiking and grocery shopping, trying to get on with her life..."oh, wait, what?..you want me to come be President of the United States? Well, I had moved on, but if you all insist..."

Nah, it ain't over until the fat lady sings.

8  Europeanquarantined 2016-11-26

Thanks for your input, with you 100%, she was never going to take this lying down. It is totally possible that Trump was a big giant honeypot to help them identify who is against the globalist agenda, I just hope in that case Trump doesn't know he is being used and fights this, but his silence on this issue is deeply concerning, as is the circlejerk happening on T_D. There is plenty of us, we have the power to fight this by raising money for recount filings in the several states Hillary won by small margins, unfortunately being a Brit I can't lift a finger to get the ball rolling bar posting till my fingers go numb. I implore any American who sees this threat to push this hard with friends and family and contact your local representatives, this could be VERY important

9  [deleted] 2016-11-26

[deleted]

5  Europeanquarantined 2016-11-26

It might be too late for that, another reason I suspect this isn't grass roots is that they left it until the last possible moment to file for recount, and from what people tell me it is illegal for any one donor to donate more than $30,000 usd to the recount filing fees. The mods on T_D seem awefully keen to sticky anything BUT posts about this preventing the centipedes from organising and raising funds for a counter filing in states Hillary won by slim margins, whether the mods meant to or not.

4  NoelTrotsky 2016-11-26

  1. I believe there is a way to re-count after Dec 19 and still have the electoral votes count. It's a special situation however and would require court actions. Not unreasonable however so possible.

  2. All the recounts would have to swing the other way for Hillary to win. The odds that happens are beyond small.

The Courts will not allow the election to be hijacked due to delayed recounts. I think your fears here are wasted. It's a fair strategy for a candidate that got so much popular support to request recounts. There is a process to manage that and I haven't seen anything untoward about it so far.

2  Europeanquarantined 2016-11-26

Thanks for this, friend. I appreciate the effort, Oh how I would love to get to Jan 20th with no fuckery, I hope you are right

3  dddphuckwit 2016-11-26

It is likely going to find miscounts that move the popular vote over to Trump's side.

4  Europeanquarantined 2016-11-26

I hope so my friend but I think we should hope for the best and plan for the worst.

3  detcadder 2016-11-26

I'm wondering about the chain of custody on the votes being "recounted" Two weeks is enough time to make a lot of fake ballots.

3  Europeanquarantined 2016-11-26

Thats my worry, who knows what theyve been up to

2  SoundKat 2016-11-26

This is an attention/fundraising ploy. She has raised more money for these recounts this week then she did in her entire campaign. I would venture that much of the money will end up being used for other things.

It's not a serious effort and the chances of anything happening are slim to none.

2  GADBabaganoosh 2016-11-26

I posted this in T_D, but I'll repost it here. "This is pure speculation, but worrying nonetheless. Jill forces a recount of the three states, somehow they fuck it up and flip them for Hillary. They make back room deals with electors in swing states they aren't sueing for recount to flip for Hillary. Trump doesn't make it to January 20th. It worries me."

1  WTCMolybdenum4753 2016-11-26

Flip three states? What amounts of votes have been found to be inaccurate in past elections?

2  Europeanquarantined 2016-11-26

Im not entirely sure she would have to flip any of those states though. i'm under the impression that if the recount isn't completed before the evs are tallied on the 19th the evs for the state cannot be counted. Correct me if I'm wrong about that, I'm not familiar with the US system but I read that if those 3 states are not included there is only a 2 ev lead by Trump, makes it awefully easy for Hillary and Soros to bribe/ threaten their way to power

2  WTCMolybdenum4753 2016-11-26

i'm under the impression that if the recount isn't completed before the evs are tallied on the 19th the evs for the state cannot be counted.

I'd have to see a source for that.

Brass tacks.

the margins in the three Midwestern states are larger than any that has been reversed by a recount.

2  Europeanquarantined 2016-11-26

My only source is a comment I read on T_D I'm afraid, thats why I came here with my questions, I'll see if I can find something when I'm not using mobile internet

1  metastasis_d 2016-11-26

If both candidates are below 270 I have been told the House will decide the outcome

1  alvarezg 2016-11-26

The recount probably will not find any problems. The vote disparity has already been reasonably explained. Hopefully the recount will confirm that the electoral process can still be relied on, a small consolation to those of us who were disappointed by these last results.

3  Europeanquarantined 2016-11-26

Thats my worry, who knows what theyve been up to