Clinton leads Orange man by 2 milllion on popular votes. Recount imminent. Lol

[Money Shot]

I've got a hunch this could be overturned. Stein is going to drive a dagger of truth through Trump's fraud win.

[Death_Adder]

This is like whining that some Tennis player outscored Roger Federer in a 6 hour Wimbledon match, but lost in straight sets.

I enjoy watching the left tear themselves apart and refusing to accept reality.

Please use a real man's sports analogy. Nobody knows anything about gay ass tennis.

[.!WAR MIKEY!.]

Trump won fair and square. If anything, it was rigged in favor of hillary. Look at this video in pennsylvania




BUTLER. STOP WHINING ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO BENEFIT FROM GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION ANYMORE

that piece of shit shouldnt be voting anyways, if you have a face tat or hand tats you lost your right to vote.

[Monaco Slim]

Please use a real man's sports analogy. Nobody knows anything about gay ass tennis.

You listen to slayer so clearly you don't know anything about real music nor real sport.

[BrometheusBob.]

I doubt she requests the recount, nor do I even want her to. But I wouldn't blame her if she did.

[Money Shot]

I doubt she requests the recount, nor do I even want her to. But I wouldn't blame her if she did.

Stein is doing it for her. Hopefully we'll see it happen.

[Mighty_Windir]

[SterlingStained]

illegal aliens and dead people votes dont count.

there's a reason why the electoral college exists...

so the entire nation isnt ruled by liberal elites and illegals.

thank you founding fathers.

[JimRaynor]

Not necessarily. The Russians didn't need to hack everywhere; they just needed to make sure the necessary states for winning swung to Donald Trump.

At the very least, a high popular-vote victory for Clinton could serve as a possible signal of discrepancy between state results and state trends.

For example:

"According to the New York Magazine source, the computer scientists and attorneys cited as evidence supporting a recount: In Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that used electronic-voting machines when compared with those that used optical scanners and paper ballots. According to their analysis, Clinton could have been shorted about 30,000 votes, enough to turn the state blue."

Hence, if a scientist analyzing this notices that Hillary enjoyed a lead which was trending throughout a state, with the sole exceptions of areas using electronic voting, that could be understood as a possible discrepancy, which may warrant investigation.

And, as to the assurances by some of offline computers in states:

"'This is more complicated than attacking an online voting system that is directly connected to the internet,” he said. “But it’s within the capabilities of nation-state attackers, and it would not require a large conspiracy.”

Voting machines don't even need to be hooked up to the internet to be hacked, Halderman explained.
“...Their software can potentially be attacked through a stuxnet-style attack that spreads via the memory cards that are used to load the ballot design,” he said."

http://patch.com/michigan/detroit/hi...ntial-election

And:

"In the wake of the messy 2000 election, Congress provided states with billions of dollars to improve their voting systems. Many states “upgraded” to touchscreen voting machines that stored voting results electronically. That proved to be a huge mistake. In 2006, Halderman was part of a team of Princeton researchers that showed how easy it is to hack these machines and make them produce inaccurate results.

Over the past decade, election officials in many states have heeded these warnings and switched to using paper optical-scan ballots. However, this doesn’t totally foreclose the possibility of election hacking, because the machine that counts the votes is still a computer that could be hacked.

These vote-counting computers are not online, so they can’t be hacked directly from the internet. However, as Halderman explains, “shortly before each election, poll workers copy the ballot design from a regular desktop computer in a government office, and use removable media (like the memory card from a digital camera) to load the ballot onto each machine. That initial computer is almost certainly not well secured, and if an attacker infects it, vote-stealing malware can hitch a ride to every voting machine in the area.”

"The good thing about optical-scan voting machines is that a human being can double-check the machine’s work. If a vote-counting machine is systematically shifting votes from one candidate to another, a manual recount of randomly selected ballots should detect the discrepancy. But this only works if someone actually performs the check. And under current election law in most states, that doesn’t happen."

"Making audits a routine part of the election process would have another big benefit too: It would deter foreign governments from trying to steal election results in the first place. Our current procedures create a significant chance that a hacked election would go undetected — which is a huge temptation for someone to try it. Under a system of routine audits, in contrast, hacked results would almost certainly be found, which means a foreign government probably wouldn’t bother."

http://www.vox.com/new-money/2016/11...lection-audits

Overall, it is certainly plausible that Russia could've launched this attack on the US, and there was a good chance of getting away with it, too.

If you're committing a crime, you don't make it obvious that it was committed; you do just enough to acquire the desired result, and the rest is up to luck.

Doing any more equates to ratting yourself out/leaving fingerprints all over a crime scene.

And if you look at what has happened since the results, even if they get caught now, they very nearly got away with it. If it hadn't been precisely for the popular vote calling out attention to the "trends vs results," it would've been a perfect mission.

Now, I just have to hope that I don't die of a "heart attack" for having explained what I understand of this on a public forum.

"Yeah, the official account is that SunSpace was walking up the stairs after having eaten some Thanksgiving turkey, when the young man suffered a fatal heart-attack.

"Neighbors said that when they found his body, the facial expression on the deceased displayed immense pain and horror, which serves to signal just how unexpected and gruesome this must have been for him.

"Neighbors even found blood on the scene, which could possibly be a sign of internal damage to the deceased's organs."

"Meanwhile, in other news, Donald Trump's son met with a pro-Russian figure, possibly leading to a shift in relations as to the conflict in Syria."

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...g-randa-kassis

Wait, let me actually quote the first paragraph of this new story for real:

"A meeting in Paris between Donald Trump’s son and a Syrian politician with strong ties to Russia has strengthened expectations that the new US administration will side with Moscow in the conflict."

LOL!!!! The real one's even better than what I came up with!!

[Sweet Pea 50]

I have a "hunch" about ole Jill Stein and her "grass roots" donations.

They're probably as "organic" as the "protests" following Trumps election.

But if it really is only about voting integrity, why isn't she looking at the state I reside in?




I have a few "hunches" about that, too.