Hacking?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-11-2016, 05:46 PM
RE: Hacked results?
(26-11-2016 02:07 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-11-2016 01:58 PM)Commonsensei Wrote:  I wonder what the reaction would be from the Trump supporters, that have been calling everyone cry baby that didn't agree with the desistion. Would they all agree with the result or call foul play?

I imagine they wouldn't accept a different result. If a recount magically changes the election results there's no way in hell we would believe someone didn't alter ballots or alter the machines to read differently. Two weeks has passed.

If you think those are riots out there right now, you haven't seen anything yet. And the people protesting won't be carrying signs. They'll be carrying guns. I believe that 100%.

Bolding mine. Dodgy Which side of the barricades are you going to be on during these putative riots and gunfights, officer?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Fireball's post
26-11-2016, 05:57 PM
RE: Hacked results?
(26-11-2016 05:20 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-11-2016 05:16 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  But she still has it.

I understand that. I'm pointing out why she leads in the popular vote. A lot of states are close to 50/50 in vote count. California is like 65/35. When you only need to win by 1 vote to win California's entire 55 electoral votes, that's a lot of "wasted votes" added to her tally compared to other states.

This means nothing. California has always been in this Electoral College and this disparity never happened. Why make a useless point?

Check out my now-defunct atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2016, 06:37 PM
RE: Hacked results?
(26-11-2016 02:32 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Recounts and verification should have started IMMEDIATELY after the initial call. Not after two weeks after poll watchers have gone home.

The reason this makes no sense is that the absentee ballots have been coming in since the election and only now has the lead shrunk to a razor thin margin in three states thus the call for a recount.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2016, 06:42 PM
RE: Hacked results?
(26-11-2016 05:46 PM)Fireball Wrote:  
(26-11-2016 02:07 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  I imagine they wouldn't accept a different result. If a recount magically changes the election results there's no way in hell we would believe someone didn't alter ballots or alter the machines to read differently. Two weeks has passed.

If you think those are riots out there right now, you haven't seen anything yet. And the people protesting won't be carrying signs. They'll be carrying guns. I believe that 100%.

Bolding mine. Dodgy Which side of the barricades are you going to be on during these putative riots and gunfights, officer?

I retired early in June. Cashed out my 401k and retirement savings, bought a house in Phoenix and now I'm a stay at home dad.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2016, 06:48 PM
RE: Hacked results?
(26-11-2016 05:57 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  
(26-11-2016 05:20 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  I understand that. I'm pointing out why she leads in the popular vote. A lot of states are close to 50/50 in vote count. California is like 65/35. When you only need to win by 1 vote to win California's entire 55 electoral votes, that's a lot of "wasted votes" added to her tally compared to other states.

This means nothing. California has always been in this Electoral College and this disparity never happened. Why make a useless point?

The gap in California is wider this year than the last time we had a situation like this. In 2000 when Gore won the popular vote but lost the electoral college, he won California by 1.3 million votes. Hillary is on pace to win California by 4 million votes. Maybe more. They still have over a million votes to count.

She is running up the score in one state that always goes democrat anyway.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2016, 06:56 PM
RE: Hacked results?
(26-11-2016 06:48 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-11-2016 05:57 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  This means nothing. California has always been in this Electoral College and this disparity never happened. Why make a useless point?

The gap in California is wider this year than the last time we had a situation like this. In 2000 when Gore won the popular vote but lost the electoral college, he won California by 1.3 million votes. Hillary is on pace to win California by 4 million votes. Maybe more. They still have over a million votes to count.

She is running up the score in one state that always goes democrat anyway.

Well, when it's all said and done, more than 14M will have voted in CA this year, vs. 9M in 2000. Not that much difference in percentage, but I see your point a little better now. Still, quite a huge difference in popular vote.

Check out my now-defunct atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2016, 07:02 PM
RE: Hacked results?
(26-11-2016 06:48 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-11-2016 05:57 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  This means nothing. California has always been in this Electoral College and this disparity never happened. Why make a useless point?

The gap in California is wider this year than the last time we had a situation like this. In 2000 when Gore won the popular vote but lost the electoral college, he won California by 1.3 million votes. Hillary is on pace to win California by 4 million votes. Maybe more. They still have over a million votes to count.

She is running up the score in one state that always goes democrat anyway.
Woulda thought it'd get more Steiners

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-11-2016, 06:07 PM
RE: Hacked results?
(26-11-2016 05:14 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Clinton leads Trump by 4 million votes in California alone.
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/president/

That's a huge part of her popular vote lead.

What lead? There is no lead.

[Image: trumpwins_zps5t9fvkzu.png]

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
27-11-2016, 06:29 PM
RE: Hacked results?
(27-11-2016 06:07 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(26-11-2016 05:14 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  Clinton leads Trump by 4 million votes in California alone.
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/president/

That's a huge part of her popular vote lead.

What lead? There is no lead.

[Image: trumpwins_zps5t9fvkzu.png]

I saw that on Twitter. They need to lock up his phone. Or better they should archive every single one of his tweets as president (with context because that matters) that way future generations can better understand how delusional he sounds.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
27-11-2016, 07:20 PM
RE: Hacked results?
I forsee little good coming from this recount.

In the best least worst case scenario, the results are upheld give or take typical minor discrepancies. This might restore some small faith in the voting mechanics but will do little to restore faith in the system as a whole. Electing a candidate with historically high unfavorability ratings who lost the popular vote by an unprecedented 2 Million votes simply underscores its perceived failings.

Less usefully, a recount could flip Michigan and Wisconsin leaving Trump with a narrower electoral college win and a 2 million popular vote loss. Little change to the power structure except to make Trump more paranoid and his opponents less accepting of his "win".

Flipping Pennsylvania would require a 70,000 vote difference between the recount and the original. A change of that magnitude would require some serious explaining and a lot of heads rolling. It also wouldn't be accepted by Trump and Co. If the recount even narrows the vote in Pennsylvania significantly then you can expect things to get gruesome. Trump doesn't accept the results now and he's winning.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: