Posted on 11/25/2016 10:01:36 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Probably so.
Though I’d like to see the Clintons vs. the Obamas as they spill their commie plans they’ve had and the hidden secrets.
This statement is false.
This is no statewide voting standard in Pennsylvania. In my precinct, where I have been both a clerk and judge of elections for many years until recently, we have optically scanned paper ballots which are retained.
They may recount the numbers on the machines, but it isn’t going to reveal anything new about the people who voted.
There are many places where a hand-count is available.
They take the signature of who showed up to vote, but I doubt those will be looked at in a recount.
They might very well be looked at in a recount if the triggering event was not an automatic recount, because either the county board of elections or a Judge would need some evidence of fraud in order to grant the petition. (You're correct that it wouldn't reveal much except in very egregious cases, where ALL of the clerks, ALL of the judges, ALL of the poll watchers and ALL of the attorneys would have to miss glaring errors.)
Those would only be looked at in a court challenge to voter eligibility.
They would not be looked at in that case unless the ballot cast was provisional. Otherwise, challenging a voter's eligibility would reveal nothing. Where (if it isn't absentee or provisional) is the ballot belonging to voter X?
Yea. I picked out the same statement. Incredible that it even had to be debunked. How stupid are people?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My throat is so sore, I can hardly talk this morning. I think I caught a virus from the internet.
This statement is not entirely true.
In Bush v. Gore the Florida Supreme Court erroneously ruled that an ambiguity in the wording the recount provisions of the Florida Constitution permitted selective recounts.
Whether that finding was in good faith or not (it certainly wasn't) it is now mooted by the Supreme Court's 7-2 decision in Bush v. Gore. In that decision, the Court held that a selective recount of precincts or counties for a statewide office was an Equal Protection Violation of The Fourteenth Amendment.
Liberals like to pretend the court ruled narrowly. No, it did not. In an additional stipulation, the Court ruled 5-4 that there was not sufficient time to conduct a state recount in keeping with the "safe haven" provision of both Federal Law and the Florida Constitution That was the 5-4 part of the ruling.
State's still govern their own elections, but they their rules can not violate parts of the Federal Constitution incorporated against them by Amendment XIV. It thus no longer matters what Florida (or any other state) has to say about a recount: Since 2000 a recount for a statewide result must now include the whole state, without regard to what a state's provisions may be.
There will be Republican representatives at every location in which votes are counted and they will be shoulder to shoulder with whomever his actually doing the recount.
Do not believe just because the Trump people have been silent on this they are not well on top of what is going on around them.
If someone independent starts investigating votes, who did it, who counted it, and actual numbers, a lot of democrats will go to jail. Someone told an airhead someone in the Obama White House that it's best not to turn over that rock. Rahm, in Chicago, DiBlasio, in New York, Cuomo, in Albany, would be lucky if they avoided a noose.
Will they actually release the true recount results when they find that the cheating and hacking all originated on the left in Hillary’s favor?
Fair enough, voting by machine in PA is not 100%, but it is the vast majority, 80%.
“More than 80 percent of voters cast their ballots on a voting machine with no receipts and no paper ballots, making a recount that much more of a mess.”
It’s a Pennsylvania-specific site. Who would know better than them? They cite L.A. Times as one of their sources. The L.A. Times article says PA is “one of the few that relies almost entirely on computerized voting, with no paper backup.” And “Pennsylvania is among those states that rely almost entirely on computerized voting, according to Verified Voting.”
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-pennsylvania-voting-paperless-20161020-snap-story.html
I certainly vote on the exact electronic machines the L.A. Times describes in my PA precinct.
The beautiful part of this is that Jill Stein pulled over 50,000 votes away from Mrs. Bill Clinton in Michigan alone. Obama should have awarded her the presidential medal of freedom for delivering the election to Donald J. Trump.
I’m not going to relax between now and January 21, 2017.
I want to see that we get through January 20 without some Obama-inspired event. If not caused....
But that’s just me.
Do not believe just because the Trump people have been silent on this they are not well on top of what is going on around them.
Which is the smart thing to do--keeping a low-profile and watching them like hawks. Being vocal about it at this early stage I think would lend it a credence these shady shenanigans don't deserve, like we're scared of a recount/s (which is very justified given how the libs operate). Just as Hillary, Obama and their folks are distancing themselves publicly to not seem like the sore losers and hypocrites they are.
MMMMMMMMMMM...............hoping the new administration and the new investgations go easy on them
That's the official position but not the actual position. They can look noble since they don't have to do anything while others do the dirty work.
I am waiting to hear the official obama statement when he DEMANDS that leftists accept the results of the the election and that the recount idea be abandoned. Ah, what a great day that will be! /s
After votes are certified by the Secretary of State, aren’t the machines just put away? The chain of custody will have been broken. There is nothing left to count.
The Feds certify the Electoral College in December, but in the individual states it is over. The individual Secretaries of State have certified, and the counting, and recounting, process is complete.
Possibly because it might expose the thousands of dead person votes and lead to investigation that might blow away their popular vote theory.
It’s not true that it was debunked.
Soros controls the software for most every electronic voting machine and election software system in the United States.
Stein is a tool for drawing attention to ‘Russians’ or anyone else other than the Soros Group. If the Soros people were thwarted, that’s great news.
The machines do not need to be connected to the internet.
8-minute video here explains how easy it is to hack an electronic voting machine that is not connected to the internet:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t75xvZ3osFg
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.