Jill Stein Discusses Recount Campaign Via Facebook: It Looks Like This Was A Hack-Riddled Election [VIDEO]

Mediaite reports:

Jill Stein took to Facebook Live tonight to address her efforts to get recounts going in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. “We are standing up for a voting system that we deserve,” she said, “that we can have confidence in, that has integrity and security and that we know is now subject to tampering, malfeasance, hacking, and so on.”

She referenced previous instances of hacking throughout 2016 to say that this looked like a “hack-riddled election,” claiming that “our voting machines are very open to hacking.” Stein raised questions about the possibility that voting machines in all three states could be susceptible to hacking, though both 538 and New York Times‘ Upshot have significantly pushed back on the idea.

Stein said that she wants the recounts to take place just to see if “there has been trouble,” because they won’t know for sure unless people look. She also had a list of proposals on how elections in America should be reformed, from open debates to getting rid of the electoral college to setting up a ranking system.

Stein said that as of tonight, they’ve raised over $5 million of the $7 million that they need for all three states. Stein’s website, as Mediaite’s sister site LawNewz pointed out earlier, said they can’t guarantee money will go to the recounts and the initial sum they asked for was $2.5 million.

  • Skip Intro

    Okay, Doc – redeem yourself.

  • TheManicMechanic

    I don’t need to raise millions to know the election was hacked and filled with fraud. If a conservatard says it’s RIGGED, it’s because they are the ones rigging it.

    • Blake Jordan

      All the other wrong doings that Donnie accused Sec. Clinton (and the democrats) of he has done, so it stands to reason that Donnie’s side were the ones that rigged the election!!!

      • CanuckDon

        It was like a devious forewarning….the most despicable act.

        • Amanda B. Rekendwith

          The mark of a master CON…he’s telling you what he’s doing while he’s screwing you over.

          • Falconlights

            Precisely. If a con tells me that Dems are doing such and such, I can pretty much safely assume that the cons are actually the ones doing it.

    • Michael R

      They seemed confident that they knew what was going to happen , the same way Giuliani was confident Comey was going to make a shitty fake announcement a few days before he did . Everything seems wrong .

      • Falconlights

        I know feelings are subjective and all, but you’re right. As the states began to be called for Hair Furor, there was the feeling of wrongness to it. And how the hell did Giuliani know that Comey was going to make his bullshit announcement? Because he was in on it.

        You know, no matter how this turns out, people need to realize that the Republicans are willing to commit fraud and sedition just so they can win.

        • LaChatSayWha

          Ghouliani was, in fact, working with a branch of the FBI in NYC. He knew because he had been in meetings discussing the FBI’s future actions.

          All of these guys are so arrogant. There is evidence of massive voter suppression, hacks by Russia (?!!), collusion b/ HO’s closest cronies. They behave as if they’re above the law.

          It makes me worry about how they’ll respond to the recount. But then everything these bandits do makes me worry.

  • MonochromeMouse

    I’m still not sure how I feel about Stein right now, on one hand she, like all third party candidates before and since, ran a spoiler campaign with no reasonable chance of winning and essentially gifted Trump free anti-Clinton attack ads, but on the other hand she has nothing to gain from this recount petition and she seems to be legitimately trying to stop Trump from stealing this election.

    • CanuckDon

      I think she has a level of honour, notability, and leadership quality to gain in all of this…particularly if some rigging is proven. If she, as a third party candidate is to take blame for Trump’s win, proof of hacking would state otherwise.

      • Gerry Fisher

        Yeah, she’s got nothing to lose in all of this. She looks stateswomanly like and semi-heroic. Coming to the rescue. Blech.

        IMO, I don’t think that there’s one reason why Trump one. I think it was a perfect storm of a handful of things. Add them all up, and Trump wins.

        • Robincho

          Drümpf one because two many ‘tards…

    • Librarykid

      “she has nothing to gain from this recount petition”
      Except, and I hope I am very wrong, a lot of money raised for one thing and diverted to another. I gave because I am desperate and it seems to be the only avenue of hopeful action open to us.

      • Dawn

        This. Apparently there has been no promise made to use these funds exclusively for an audit. There is something about Stein that makes me wary of her motives. I hope I am wrong.

      • Dramphooey

        “I am desperate” and she knows it. The essence of of a snake oil salesman.

  • Not a fan of Jill, but if the vote recount is allowed to go forward, we might end up with a different president at the end of December. Wouldn’t that be the best Christmas gift EVER?

    • Jude Newton

      2016 MUST end right for the sanity of all of us. Even the deplorables who have no clue whom they elected.

      • billbear1961

        THIS, JN, for the goddamned deplorables, for ALL of goddamned, two-faced Jesusland, fascist Apartheid Amerika:

        https://youtu.be/K7vbHr_lvu0?t=7m48s

        • Pearlrwilson

          Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj67d:
          On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
          !mj67d:
          ➽➽
          ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash66DigitalGlobalGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj67d:….,……

      • Gerry Fisher

        I just read yet another interesting article about disaffected working class people in the rust belt and how they felt during the election. They didn’t “feel” (key word, IMO), that Clinton understood their concerns. I think this speaks both to Clinton’s not-so-great campaigning skills (for all her empathy and listening tours, she wasn’t able to communicate back outward what she’d heard in a way that working class people believed), and really flawed campaign strategy focused on demographics that excluded the working class in the rust belt (the number of visits she made to Michigan and Wisconsin are very telling). She didn’t hold the Democratic-leaning base of Independents.

        Yes, I realize that these folks just voted against their own economic interests based on a “feeling.” I mention all of this just because I don’t think that these people are deplorable as much as they are low information, gut level voters. Trump communicated economics in a way that felt aligned with how they felt, and they ignored everything else.

        • Gustav2

          And Trump spoke to their anxiety concerning the changes in demographics. They are mostly children of White Flight.

          • Gerry Fisher

            I think that was secondary and “not very conscious” for a lot of these people. One of the frustrations is that that point is clear to us and unclear to them, which makes communicating about it very difficult. I was talking to someone else recently who really gets it, and she reacted saying something like “that just demonstrates their white privilege.” I thought, “That’s exactly the language that they don’t yet understand and that makes them want to vote against us.”

          • Gustav2

            It was also an anti-city vote. There has always been that sentiment, but it has gotten worse(gay marriage) . For some reason they thought the working class (which tends to be more persons of color) in the cities had recovered why the rural areas were left to die. In Ohio it is just the opposite, monies poured into the rural areas. Even the Food Banks in rural areas got more state money than the metro areas.

            PS I am also a bit tired of east coast journalists or Midwestern acadmics telling us how these folks feel. Unless you have spent post-Thanksgiving Dinner in their basement rec room with the kegorator, my overly polite Midwestern nice in-laws will not tell the foreigners the truth.

          • LaChatSayWha

            “PS I am also a bit tired of east coast journalists or Midwestern acadmics telling us how these folks feel. Unless you have spent post-Thanksgiving Dinner in their basement rec room with the kegorator, my overly polite Midwestern nice in-laws will not tell the foreigners the truth.”

            Thank you! I am very tired of reading opinion pieces by >4th generation ivy leaguers who berate “the left” for misunderstanding the poor, downtrodden, victimized middle-American.

            First, stop infantilizing these people. And second, you have to be a part of them before the speak freely. They are not going to tell some big-league city librul what they really think.

          • Gustav2

            And stop canonizing these folks.

        • Gerry Fisher

          I should also add that one of the dynamics that affected this election was “the slow rate of recovery from the recession.” I really hated how stock holders (and I’m included in that group, I have an IRA) recovered much faster than employment, all the while executive pay continued to skyrocket. It really, REALLY felt as if corporations were purposefully slowing the recovery in terms of employment. It’ll be interesting, now that they got their Republican into the White House, weather employment will tick up. That is, before a Trump-influenced recession hits.

          • Librarykid

            I never heard anything reported during the campaign about how the rethugs blocked any attempt by the President to get recovery bills through the Rethug-controlled congress which would have helped these people, but they are too blinded by hate to realize who their friends are and who their enemies are. If Ryan succeeds in taking away their Medicare, they will be dead sooner than later.

        • Dramphooey

          Stop that right now, Jerry. Examining why we lost the election might lead to serious contemplation. This will distract us from chasing a rainbow for the obvious pot of gold Jill Stein is carefully hinting we might find.

          • Gustav2

            but…but…but we like rainbows.

          • sandollar_man

            But it was Trump who telegraphed to us over and over and over again how the election was gonna be rigged. Seems a shame to dismiss his assertion, outright.

          • Steverino

            As right-wing projection is a well-known phenomenon, Trump obviously was signaling a rigged election (on his end) all along for anybody with “ears to hear.”

          • Bill_Perdue

            When Democrats and their Republican brothers and sisters lose power and support that’s a good thing.

            This year the number of non-voting eligible voters is likely to hit an all time high. That’s becasue there are no real differences between the Democrat and Republican parties.

            “There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt — until recently … and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties.” Gore Vidal.

          • Dramphooey

            They’ll vote next time if they’re permitted because everyone is now seeing the difference you are blind to in your own little world.

          • Bill_Perdue

            If they vote it will be for the left and against your and your
            Republican brothers and sisters. But mostly they’ll just engage in mass actions.

        • I think, though, this this is more about communication than positions. And I’m not saying that it’s because she’s a bad communicator. There’s a lot of blame to go around, and I’m including both the media and the voters here, too. If you look at her position papers, Clinton had detailed positions addressing numerous Rust Belt concerns. She talked about them in her campaign speeches. The problem is, these are complex issues that can’t be boiled down to a bumper sticker slogan, and the media didn’t want to cover them. And not enough voters wanted to focus on more than a 30 second sound bite, or both to actually verify if a meme was based in fact or look up whether one candidate had any substance behind his slogans or whether the other had anything to say beyond the conspiracy theories that the media would repeat under the cover of “So-and-so said today…” without debunking.

          • marshlc

            Well, that’s it in a nutshell, right there. If the concerns of these voters were in fact addressed, but the voters didn’t want to bother listening and thinking, is that the fault of the candidate, or of the voters?

            I just keep hearing, over and over, that the Democrats need to look at what they did wrong. If what they did wrong was not be magic and able to inject good sense into rust belt voters, no amount of post mortem discussion will fix that – they’re not going to be any more magic next time.

            My feeling is that they did get the message across, and that the voters who were capable of understanding complex issues voted for them. More people voted for Clinton than for Trump – even if there was not one single bit of election fraud (something I don’t believe, as the whole thing smells to high heaven) it’s clear that her message got through to more people, and more people were moved to vote. For her.

            Any discussion of what went wrong that ignores the reality that she got more votes isn’t likely to be realistic or useful.

      • Queequeg

        Their votes were based on fear, ignorance and hatred. What an inspiring message!

    • Michael R

      I was looking for a date for the Wisconsin recount and found this which I hope is accurate …

      “Now, every single vote—2,975,313 in all, across 1,853 jurisdictions—must be recounted by December 13th. ”

      https://www.wired.com/2016/11/jill-stein-filed-recount-wisconsin-now/

    • The election is not going to be overturned. Do not get your hopes up. No matter if I want the same gift…

    • I’m so proud to give you your 50th upvote for this outstanding post!

    • Falconlights

      I’m dreaming of a blue Christmas…

      Not a Jill Stein fan, but she did right. You know, if it turns out that Clinton was the winner and all, Stein will have saved our country and it’s people from unimaginable terror. I don’t know about you, but I’m not OK with assholes like Putin rigging our general election. And I’m not OK with fascists and neo-Nazis running around with their stiff arm salutes and ‘Sieg Heil” bullshit. Sure, they can do this stuff, but Americans don’t have to approve of any of it,

  • greenmanTN

    I don’t know, maybe it’s time for me to get fitted for my tinfoil chapeau, but even aside from the voter suppression efforts, something about this election smells fishy.

    But Jill Stein? None of this occurred to you BEFORE the election?

    • MonochromeMouse

      The Russian government definitely had something to do with Trump winning, they flat out said they were working with his campaign, and the DNC and podesta hacks/leaks were traced back to Russia.

      • Ernest Endevor

        And Germany’s security services are gearing up to try to stop happening there what just happened here.

    • Gerry Fisher

      It still bugs me to see her face, especially in stories that show her in a semi-sorta “heroic” light.

  • Gustav2

    Geez, if a Republican or someone on the Right did something similar we would all call it a grift.

    • Agreed….

    • olandp

      “Stein’s website, as Mediaite’s sister site LawNewz pointed out earlier,
      said they can’t guarantee money will go to the recounts and the initial
      sum they asked for was $2.5 million.”

      I think that is what it said.

      • Ross

        Jill had only planned for a recount in ONE state, and began a fundraising for $2.5M.

        She had no idea if people would donate. They did. IN DROVES.

        She then upped the recount to TWO states. And upped the money needed. People donated. IN DROVES.

        She then upped the recount to THREE states. And upped the money needed.

        $6M is needed for recount in PA, WI, and MI.

      • Librarykid

        That was troubling.

    • Friday

      It does depend what actually happens to the money. The recounts often do cost money, but there’s no real guarantees they’ll all be allowed to happen.

      • Gustav2

        It cost the state’s a great deal money. Stein only needs a few lawyers asking for the recount.

        • Friday

          Actually that’s not necessarily the case: who has to pay for the counting varies by state.

      • Ross

        The recounts will cost $6M.

        THIS is what Jill is fundraising for.

  • justmeeeee

    Do we love Jill Stein now? or do we still hate her? Come on, Hill-bots, instruct us how to behave!

    • Gustav2

      Stop asking, we all still hate her. LOL

      • Silver Badger

        Most of us don’t care one way or the other. At least she got the recount going.

        • Gustav2

          The money may or may not go to the efforts of the recount.

          Grifter.

          • Silver Badger

            Could be.

    • Friday

      The bit you maybe don’t understand is that people who knew what is at stake in this election have been pissed at her for being *entirely counterproductive* in her campaign…. if this recount business proves to be productive, that will not be something to be pissed at her about. Go figure, there’s more to the world than ‘us vs them’.

      • justmeeeee

        Be very careful…your status as a Hill-bot may be in jeopardy for that kind of talk.

        • Friday

          That’s because the ‘botness’ was always bullshit.

        • Bill_Perdue

          Nah.

    • Dramphooey

      This cements my opinion of her as nothing but a despicable person taking advantage of the confused.

      • canoebum

        Exactly. Let the Green Party win the Governor’s office in few states first, then think about higher office. They need to show some solid support generally, otherwise, their campaigns are merely divisive and let the idiots take the prize. I guess that would be too much like hard work, you know, starting at the bottom and building up from there. They should just be handed the highest office in the land because they’re entitled to it.

      • justmeeeee

        Oh, you mean….a politician?

  • Henry Auvil

    Does she think a recount of three states will allow her to eke out a win?

    • Gustav2

      No, but will keep some of her friends employed.

    • Silver Badger

      If the recount shows major fraud, other states will become involved.

    • MonochromeMouse

      I think this is more about trying to save her reputation. She knows she helped Trump win and now she is worried that if he turns out to be as bad as he looks like he’s going to that she will be remembered by history as one of his enablers if she doesn’t do something to stop him. I think she, like the rest of us, trusted the polls and ran her campaign for the attention it would get her rather than actually trying to win while assuming Clinton would win in a landslide since Trump is extremely unqualified.

      • Your first sentence is her true sentiment for this undertaking…

      • Ross

        I 100% agree with your thoughts.

        And, to me, no matter Jill’s reasons, I think a recount is vital.

        HOW could every single credible pollster have been so wrong? This has never happened before.

        HOW could every single credible forecaster have been so wrong? This has never happened before.

        HOW could Hillary lose when she had so many demographic groups hugely favoring her?

        HOW could Hillary lose when early voting hugely favored her?

        HOW was this all possible? It makes no sense.

        But one explanation comes to mind which explains it all.

        Donald was at least right about one thing: The election would be rigged.

        But in his favor.

  • billbear1961
    • Oikos

      Secession: IOKIYAR

      • billbear1961

        But treason if you’re a progressive.

        The treason would be caving in to fascism.

  • Blake Jordan

    Correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t recall any of the polls conducted for MI & WI ever had Donnie in the lead!?!?
    The entire time they ranged between +3 to +10 in Sec. Clinton’s favor and somehow Donnie ends up winning…

    Even PA, Donnie was only ever in the lead in one or two polls, and by +1/+2…

    • Gustav2

      Right, then D’s stayed home and rural R’s came out.

      Remember 2004 with the anti-gay marriage amendment in Ohio where people still say it had nothing to do with W winning Ohio?

      • Friday

        Actually, after the fact there really were some serious vote-total monkeyings for Bush in Ohiom, home of Diebold and all. My time in Wisconsin and since really impressed me with how much Republican election fuckery is routine there, …that’s before the Scott Walker ball of wax even was there.

        • Gustav2

          OHIO here, the Diebold stuff was always nonsense and everyone should stop repeating it.

          • Friday

            Frankly, that blanket assertion doesn’t account for the extra Bush votes at the time.

          • Gustav2

            Left wing conspiracies are just as bad as right wing conspiracies.

          • Friday

            False equivalencies: who needs a ‘conspiracy theory’ when there’s certain reliable reports and obvious ulterior motives?

          • Gustav2

            What extra Bush votes? No Ohio Democrats in higher office believe that nonsense.

          • Librarykid

            Do you mean the “We’ll win this election for you, Mr. Bush” statement?

        • what is really sad is how many people keep on buying into “third party spoilers” as the cause for her loss, and not fraud. fraud which is increasingly widespread. anyone who tried to talk about this before this election was branded a wackjob conspiracy nut. but now? when precious HRC’s presidency is at stake? NOW people are willing to open their minds to the idea that republican-made voting machines connected to the internet and a candidate with strong ties to Russia may have befuddled the results? and they don’t see the irony of mistrusting the ONLY candidate, who has no chance of winning regardless of the actual results, who is the one with the stones to raise money for a recount, while precious HRC sits on the sidelines and says to her supporters, “have faith in the system, let’s have an orderly transition” …into fascism.

          really, the disconnect some people are having right now is just driving me insane. and i didn’t even vote for Jill.

          • Friday

            The fact is that yes, the third-party spoilers were one of the many things that had to go right for the bad guys. If *they* hadn’t been a factor like that, we wouldn’t be in this position, especially since they were prime promoters of *voter apathy* with their constant falsehoods about Hillary and claims of ‘they’re both the same’ in the campaigns. There are of course plenty of other factors, some bigger, without which we *also* wouldn’t be in this position, but it took all of them to make this catastrophe, spoilers included.

            They could have said no to Trump, in other words. Not the only ones, but they could have made the difference.

          • Platos_Redhaired_Stepchild

            Third parties aren’t spoilers? Ralph Nader says otherwise.

    • ben

      bradley effect

  • andrew

    Jill got her whopping 1% of the vote and now desperately wants to find another way to stay on stage. Move aside Jill. Your small attempted spoiler role is over.

    • MonochromeMouse

      I’m no fan of Stein, and did not donate to this effort as I believe she will keep at least a portion of the funds to use for future campaign efforts, but any attempt to stop Trump and his corrupt gang of fascists from stealing the presidency is a good thing no matter who is behind it.

  • Election integrity is vitally important no matter the outcome to increase voter confidence and future voter turnout.

  • Michael R

    I’m torn between praising her and wondering if she’s in on something .

    The post-truth era is just not for me !

    https://s14.postimg.org/u4yajh2ch/jill_stein_putin.jpg

    • Dramphooey

      This will do nothing. It’s a recount, not an audit. It won’t find any fraud. She’s grifting off of a group of depressed, horrified and desperate people. Jill Stein is the scum of the earth.

      • Ross

        As part of a recount process, fraud is investigated.

        Moroever, the three states require $6M upfront to begin the recount.

        The money is not going into Jill’s pocket.

        IF the recount fundraising passes $6M, Jill will keep that.

        • Treant

          They do need to pay lawyers and staff, so I wouldn’t think that $7 million is at all unreasonable.

      • Dave Babler

        How do we know an audit is not part of a recount? Do you have a source for this, I’m quite legit interested.

    • Platos_Redhaired_Stepchild

      She’s up to something. I suspect she planned on keeping the money and running but enough people pointed out fraud charges would be brought against her so we got a last minute filing in Wisconsin for the recount.

  • ben

    It would be easier to take her seriously if she weren’t an anti-vaxxer and didn’t subscribe to a bunch of left-wing conspiracy theories that are just are corrosive as the right-wing ones.

    • Ross

      WHY Jill is doing a recount, and WHAT she believes in, is not the point IMO.

      The recount is important.

      • ben

        it matters if she is grifting for money

        • Dramphooey

          She’s grifting for money. She will use this money to hurt progressives in the future.

          • Friday

            That depends, …assuming there’s a surplus in the end there *would* be going back to where the Greens occasionally could do some good, by running progressive candidates for *local* offices, not vote-splitting stunts that don’t even *work* at getting the party message out there. Stein’s a perfect example, all she accomplished was adding to the chorus of trolls and anti-Hillary bullshit and hyperbole, and doing her best to keep those who might have voted against Trump disaffected.

          • Librarykid

            I desperately hope we are wrong in this thought.

        • Friday

          If she makes the recounts happen, that’s what people are donating for. Do I trust her? No. But at least one recount is underway already and one thing we haven’t heard is how much ‘extra money’ there can even be expected to *be.*

        • Ross

          To repeat:

          The money raised is not going to Jill.

          The recount will cost $6M. This money will go to PA, MI, and WI.

          Anything above $6M that Jill raises? Yes, she has stated that she will keep that.

          • Treant

            I really don’t have an issue with enlightened self-interest, actually, so she’s welcome to keep what’s left after the recount, the lawyers’ fees, and whatnot. Price of doing business and all.

          • Robincho

            I’m not a kitchen worker, but that’s not why I don’t charge for my time spent helping in a soup kitchen. Ditto a recounter. Some stuff you just do…

          • Ross

            Helping in a soup kitchen and doing three state-wide recounts are, ah, rather different things.

          • Robincho

            You’ve certainly, ah, got me there…

  • Dramphooey

    This was a hack riddled election. Two of the biggest hacks were Gary Johnson and Jill Stein.

    • dafs

      heyoooooooooooo

  • Gerry Fisher

    I’m not crazy about the idea of undermining faith in the mechanics of our elections. The primary way that Russia “hacked” our system was to influence our social media and fake news. None of this is a reason to stop the recount. It’s just that her wording is eerily similar to the wording of Trump just before the election. There are a lot of other things we can “fix” before we put all of this at the feet of “a hacked election.”

    • Dramphooey

      She knows. She just wants money.

      • Ross

        The money raised is not going to Jill.

        The recount will cost $6M. This money will go to PA, MI, and WI.

        Anything above $6M that Jill raises? Yes, she has stated that she will keep that.

    • Friday

      Frankly, the time to find out how fucked-with the election was is *now,* not ‘after’ ….after what?

    • Social media has you mentioned is ALSO responsible for SO much FAKE news and people are too lazy and selfish (because it asserts their views) to discern the truth.

      Facebook has made SO much money as it is ALL click bait and ad revenue for them…only now are they doing something about it but the damage is done and their actions are TOO little TOO late.

      • Treant

        He was such a wise and forward-looking man.

        • Lazycrockett

          and a vampire hunter.

    • Does Facebook Generate Over Half Its Ad Revenue From Fake News?

      Fake news has been in the news. But one important question about fake news has not yet been answered: How much revenue would Facebook sacrifice if it purged fake news from its site?

      Sadly, I can’t provide a reliable figure — but I’d estimate that getting rid of fake news could cost Facebook about $15 billion in the next year – over half its advertising revenue — if one were to assume a BuzzFeed News analysis of top fake news traffic before the election is a good proxy for Facebook’s fake news revenue.

      READ MORE HERE http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2016/11/25/does-facebook-generate-over-half-its-revenue-from-fake-news/#486b42442f33

      • Friday

        Technically, that seems to assume that fake news wouldn’t be replaced by anything else. Like non-fake news or even other propaganda. 🙂

        • I would rather have silence than utter BULLSHIT AND LIES

          I think that people assume TOO much from social media as if your 300 friends are equipped to inform you on things that are happening around the world and/or that affect you…that is the REALLY sad part…

          I routinely “hide” my friend’s source postings as I do not want to see them EVER AGAIN…

          http://dailyurbanista.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/FAKE.png

    • Skeptical_Inquirer

      If there is something wrong then the faith has been misplaced.

  • billbear1961

    OT: Trump poised to violate Emoluments Clause

    Electoral College must reject Trump unless he sells his business, top lawyers for Bush and Obama say

    Ethics lawyers for the last two presidents are in agreement.

    Members of the Electoral College should not make Donald Trump the next president unless he sells his companies and puts the proceeds in a blind trust, according to the top ethics lawyers for the last two presidents.

    Richard Painter, Chief Ethics Counsel for George W. Bush, and Norman Eisen, Chief Ethics Counsel for Barack Obama, believe that if Trump continues to retain ownership over his sprawling business interests by the time the electors meet on December 19, they should reject Trump.

    In an email to ThinkProgress, Eisen explained that “the founders did not want any foreign payments to the president. Period.” This principle is enshrined in Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution, which bars office holders from accepting “any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

    This provision was specifically created to prevent the President, most of all, from being corrupted by foreign influences.

    https://thinkprogress.org/electoral-college-trump-top-lawyers-8a8b6e0ca916#.apsh6o3om

    • Joe in PA

      Poised? That ship has sailed hasn’t it?

      • Friday

        Technically he’s not in office yet, even if obvious corruption is obvious already.

        • Joe in PA

          Of course, duh. 🙂 In particular I was thinking of the Hotel de Trump, but there are so many others.

          • Friday

            (That’s just about the phrasing as ‘poised to violate the emoluments clause.’)

      • billbear1961
    • gaymex1

      Using “ethics” and “Trump” in the same paragraph is a concept that’s new to me.
      Nevertheless, I can dream that members of the Electoral College will do the right thing…but I think not.

  • marshlc

    So if it turns out that at least a few states were actually hacked, and the results were fraudulent. And you add that to the overwhelming lead Clinton got in the popular vote.

    Will that stop the endless “what the Democrats did wrong” breastbeating? If it turns out that they in fact did nothing wrong, but won? We keep hearing “Democrats didn’t turn out and vote” when it actually appears that millions more of them did, than those who voted for Trump.

    It will probably turn out that the election was irretrievably stolen, and that nothing can be done about that. But people could at least stop blaming it on the campaign, and put the blame where it belongs, on those who did the stealing.

    • Treant

      Of course the whining will continue, but it’ll change to, “She wasn’t a strong enough candidate to overcome systemic cheating! It’s all her fault!”

      Dems do tend to be vocal whiners. That’s actually a good thing most of the time (no, really, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and politicians pay attention to the loudest voices under normal circumstances [the last ten years have been far from normal]).

      Even if we prove modest cheating in some precincts, it weakens the Trump regime enough that he’s easier to fight, and less likely to be protected by the Republican Congress that doesn’t particularly care for him anyway.

      • marshlc

        And maybe it will help build some unity. The infighting is so destructive, when there is a real, clear, and very dangerous opponent, and it’s not Clinton, or the DNC, or even, really, Jill Stein.

    • Dramphooey

      If the Democrats did something wrong it is in our interest to correct what we did wrong. Sweeping reflection under the rug to chase this bullshit hope is only going to hurt us. I agree with Michael Moore: the Democrats lost a large group of working class votes and we need to figure out how to win them back.

      • Ross

        The Democrats have not lost anything. Hillary has received about the same votes Obama did in 2012.

        Moroever, why are you SO against the recount????????????

      • marshlc

        I’m not talking about the hope – I agree, there is little to no chance that any of this will change who becomes president. I’m talking about the untrue narrative that Democrats did not turn out and vote. The untrue narrative that Clinton was a terrible candidate who was unable to energize voters.

        There’s a lot that was done wrong, sure. As an example, look at the thread just above, about Trump’s conflicts of interest. Didn’t hear anything about this during the campaign – why not? It’s not like it’s a surprise that he owns hotels.

        But the trouble wasn’t the candidate. Anyone willing to listen could see that she would have been a better choice for working class people.

        Again – Trump did not get more votes. The problem wasn’t about getting votes.

      • Ross

        You blame the Democrats.

        I don’t. I think Hillary and her campaign did a great job.

        I blame the media for ENDLESSY trashing Hillary while largely ignoring the many horrors of the Orange Slime.

        I blame the Republican hate machine.

        I blame the director of the FBI.

        I blame Russia.

        • Dramphooey

          I’m sure you’ll find plenty of people to blame, Ross. When Nate Silver was saying it was closer than we were thinking you insulted him and wished him ill because he said something you didn’t want to hear.

          And now you’ve been taken in by this grifting idiot that actually hurt us during the election because she’s saying what you want to hear.

          • Ross

            I never wished Nate ill.

            I did call him ClickBait Nate. I still think this.

            And Nate predicted a Hillary win.

            In addition, I am not taken in by a grifting idiot. I loath Jill. But my feelings about her have nothing to do with my massive support of a recount. And I think it’s better this be called for by the Green Party than the Democrats as the latter will just get accused of being self-serving.

          • Treant

            +1. I got very tired of Nate’s If-Then-Else-But… articles. However, he ended up being just as wrong as everybody else (I further don’t like that he attempted to spin that to call himself more accurate; he wasn’t).

            The Dems could ask for a recount, but the backlash would be unreal. If the Greens do it, there will still be backlash, but it’s pretty well-known that Hillary and Jill don’t exactly see eye to eye (by Jill’s own statements and Hillary’s blatantly ignoring Jill).

          • Dramphooey

            Nate Silver said the election was closer than we thought and made clear his higher percentage for Hillary didn’t mean she was guaranteed to win; that helped me on Election Day. While I suffered grief that evening I saw friends here devastated because of pie in the sky crap being pushed on them. And here is Jill Stein with more pie. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/78f78b2c97cb5cd62571f43bdb868e4c9d9424648855579b31b98d270733292a.jpg

          • Treant

            You’re cheerful. There’s no harm in looking and the possibility of actually discovering some malfeasance.

            Look at it this way, if it turns out poorly you can spend days being a dick about it.

        • Dave Babler

          I couldn’t agree more with this statement. With one exception. She should have had Bill and Joe campaigning for her in each and every mid-western small town the entire season.

        • fuow

          Actually, some of us DID say we needed to explain ourselves better to the working-poor in the heartland.
          We (as was Bill) told we were senile, over-the-hill, clueless, too young to understand, etc.
          It was a clusterfuck and it’s our fault – but now, when we can at least demonstrate a backbone, all we’re getting is tepid, well – Dr. Stein has the right to contest this, we’ll not get in her way.
          We need to FIGHT and show the low-information and desperate voters in the heartland that we are willing to fight for them.

        • LaChatSayWha

          Thank you! Eloquently spoken.

      • Stephen Elliot Phillips

        I guess we should start telling them lies about how theyre going to get their manufacturing jobs back…and how unions are corrupt.
        Seems that works for republicants

        • Dramphooey

          They’re mad because the manufacturing job that gave a one income home a middle class lifestyle is gone so they turn to the party that breaks the unions that gave it to them.

          • Stephen Elliot Phillips

            Well they very successfully tied hillary to NAFTA and TPP. she didnt do a very good job of untangling herself from their lies. But thats a moot point.
            One really cannot convince a voter otherwise once their mind has formed an opinion.

          • BudClark

            That is what I DO NOT understand!

            He-Who-Must-NEVER-Be-Named is a slave-owner in all but name. He hired illegal aliens, paid them BELOW our PITIFUL minimum wage, and then DUMPED them when he was through with them.

            Surely even the MOST “low-information” voter could figure THAT out!

            What happens when Putin calls in the $90 billion (or whatever it is) that HWMNBN owes to Russian banks?

            Or China?

            I PRAY that the Clinton Foundation and other Center / Left foundations are able to pick up the pieces when our social safety net shatters.

            And, oh, by the way, all you people in the ‘fly-over’ states who voted Republican are going to lose your Social Security, Medicare, Food Stamps, etc. HWMNBN isn’t just coming after poor non-whites; he’s coming after YOU as well.

            Do you REALLY think that a “man” who treats “his” OWN workers the way “he” does gives a tinker’s damn about YOU?

            Better lay in a good supply of whatever you’ve been smokin’ … you’re going to NEED it for the next four years.
            ]
            A “man” who refuses to live in the White House because it’s “too small”
            and everything isn’t gold-plated does not DESERVE the Presidency.

            It’s not the White House that’s too small; it’s the MAN!

      • fuow

        In this, you’re right.

  • says ‘video cannot be played’ for me. i’m on a linux machine, but that usually doesn’t matter.

    but people should be asking why vote counting machines are hooked up to the internet. that’s been going on for a while. if you don’t trust Stein, go read BradBlog. he is the expert on this matter and has been doing work on this for over 10 years.

  • SoCalGal20

    Statement from Clinton campaign lawyer that they will be participating in the WI recount, and the PA and MI recounts should those occur. Interesting statement. Worth reading the entire thing.

    https://twitter.com/gdebenedetti/status/802531850459738112

    • Ross

      Thanks SoCalGal!

      I have reprinted, in full, the statement by Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Erik Elias:

      Listening and Responding To Calls for an Audit and Recount

      Over the last few days, officials in the Clinton campaign have received hundreds of messages, emails, and calls urging us to do something, anything, to investigate claims that the election results were hacked and altered in a way to disadvantage Secretary Clinton. The concerns have arisen, in particular, with respect to Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — three states that together proved decisive in this presidential election and where the combined margin of victory for Donald Trump was merely 107,000 votes.

      It should go without saying that we take these concerns extremely seriously. We certainly understand the heartbreak felt by so many who worked so hard to elect Hillary Clinton, and it is a fundamental principle of our democracy to ensure that every vote is properly counted.

      Moreover, this election cycle was unique in the degree of foreign interference witnessed throughout the campaign: the U.S. government concluded that Russian state actors were behind the hacks of the Democratic National Committee and the personal email accounts of Hillary for America campaign officials, and just yesterday, the Washington Post reported that the Russian government was behind much of the “fake news” propaganda that circulated online in the closing weeks of the election.

      For all these reasons, we have quietly taken a number of steps in the last two weeks to rule in or out any possibility of outside interference in the vote tally in these critical battleground states.

      First, since the day after the election we have had lawyers and data scientists and analysts combing over the results to spot anomalies that would suggest a hacked result. These have included analysts both from within the campaign and outside, with backgrounds in politics, technology and academia.

      Second, we have had numerous meetings and calls with various outside experts to hear their concerns and to discuss and review their data and findings. As a part of this, we have also shared out data and findings with them. Most of those discussions have remained private, while at least one has unfortunately been the subject of leaks.

      Third, we have attempted to systematically catalogue and investigate every theory that has been presented to us within our ability to do so.

      Fourth, we have examined the laws and practices as they pertain to recounts, contests and audits.

      Fifth, and most importantly, we have monitored and staffed the post-election canvasses — where voting machine tapes are compared to poll-books, provisional ballots are resolved, and all of the math is double checked from election night. During that process, we have seen Secretary Clinton’s vote total grow, so that, today, her national popular vote lead now exceeds more than 2 million votes.

      In the coming days, we will continue to perform our due diligence and actively follow all further activities that are to occur prior to the certification of any election results. For instance, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania conduct post-election audits using a sampling of precincts. Michigan and many other states still do not. This is unfortunate; it is our strong belief that, in addition to an election canvass, every state should do this basic audit to ensure accuracy and public confidence in the election.

      Beyond the post-election audit, Green Party candidate Jill Stein announced Friday that she will exercise her right as a candidate to pursue a recount in the state of Wisconsin. She has indicated plans to also seek recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan.

      Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides. If Jill Stein follows through as she has promised and pursues recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan, we will take the same approach in those states as well. We do so fully aware that the number of votes separating Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the closest of these states — Michigan — well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount. But regardless of the potential to change the outcome in any of the states, we feel it is important, on principle, to ensure our campaign is legally represented in any court proceedings and represented on the ground in order to monitor the recount process itself.

      The campaign is grateful to all those who have expended time and effort to investigate various claims of abnormalities and irregularities. While that effort has not, in our view, resulted in evidence of manipulation of results, now that a recount is underway, we believe we have an obligation to the more than 64 million Americans who cast ballots for Hillary Clinton to participate in ongoing proceedings to ensure that an accurate vote count will be reported.

      • billbear1961

        Thank you, Ross.

        • Ross

          And thank YOU.

      • Dramphooey

        “Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides.”

        It’s a waste of time. They’re going along with it because Clinton voters want it. That’s what it says. It’s a waste of time and money and they know it.

        • billbear1961

          This Republic deserves every possible effort to SAVE it from DISASTER.

          • Falconlights

            Agreed, billbear. What the hell is it with the defeatism I see going on? II mean, damn! Are people really going to let our country go down the dark road of hatred, intolerance and all that without fighting?

        • Ross

          You wrote: “That’s what it says.”

          No, that is not what Marc Erik Elias said.

          That is what YOU interpreted.

          Why are you SO against a recount?

          • Dramphooey

            Trump will win and say “they recounted and I still won.”

          • Ross

            And Trump might say: ‘they recounted and I…lost.”

            And I am 1,000% in favor of such a possibility.

          • billbear1961

            Mr. Two-Million-Short (MORE than 2 million short) will always say whatever he wants, and the opposite tomorrow.

            WE will remind him he has no MANDATE to do whatever he wants.

            The PEOPLE did not choose him.

            An outdated and undemocratic E.C. system–a system he himself has derided in the past–which ironically is supposed to PREVENT the PEOPLE from putting a demagogue in the White House–is handing a manifestly unfit MANIAC the White House!

            It is not the PEOPLE who have been proven unworthy of this republic, not the PEOPLE who have been proven unworthy of TRUST, but a body designed by the Founders to PROTECT this nation from DESPOTISM which is FAILING this democracy!!

      • fuow

        Upvote for posting this. It’s one of the most defeatest pieces of blah-blah I’ve read since 2000.
        Jill Stein is doing more for the good of my party than my party is. I’m disgusted beyond words.

        • Dazzer

          The Democratic Party seems to think that the process of the election is more important than the result.

          It’d be wrong to think that Stein is doing this to benefit the Democrats (although that may be one of the results).

          Instead, Stein is using the opportunity to push Green Party policy on electoral reform while at the same time making a show of rattling the Trump campaign (and believe me, they’re rattled. Stein’s recount efforts has been front page news in a lot of European newspapers – and the Putinbots have been paddling furiously to try to oppose this) while the Democrats are wiffling on about respecting the process and the need for a smooth transition of power.

          Whether or not people like or respect Stein, she’s made a remarkably astute political move in presenting her party as one that will speak truth to power.

          • fuow

            Why yes, yes she has. She’s got a spine. Something my party is sadly lacking.

          • Falconlights

            Something the Democratic Party should be doing. And a “smooth transition of power” doesn’t mean squat if that transition of power means you’re handing the country over to a fascist and fraud. And why the hell should Americans “respect the process” when that process has been rigged?
            To quote Mogatu in Zoolander “I feel like I’ve been taking crazy pills!”

        • Dr. Jill Stein is doing this for her own PR reasons… I wouldn’t give money for her and the Green Party’s efforts. There are numerous paranoid theories out there on electronic voting machines, (mainly the manufacturers have proprietary software, and give money to Republicans). The recount process most of the time, is not going to discover some massive nefarious activity. There is lots of grudge work of recounting all the statewide ballots.

          • fuow

            Of course she’s doing it for herself – who denied it?
            It doesn’t change the fact that it is helpful and useful.

          • I don’t see it as helpful or useful. The recounts are going to be drudging, non surprising outcomes, there maybe a change of a couple hundred votes but recounts don’t get a erase a huge couple thousand votes deficit.

            The experts who are making issues on electronic machine voting, are more on speculating besides constantly beating the drum on electronic voting. There has been this paranoia on electronic voting for some time as well..

            I wanted and want Hillary to win, but the only way to overturn statewide results is some pretty strong evidence.. Sadly, there is really none, and we have to deal with Spray Tan Caligula for four years as President of the US.

        • Falconlights

          Yep. Why is it that the Democrat establishment so loves to roll over and play dead? I give kudos to Ms. Stein. I mean she really didn’t have to do this.

          I’m pissed that the Dems didn’t raise hell about getting audits/recounts done since Day One post election. I don’t care what the optics might be–this is our freedom that we’re talking about! I mean like what the hell s wrong with the Democratic Party? Is it some kind of death wish or what?!

    • TuuxKabin
      • SoCalGal20

        Haha! No detecting required, just following the right people on twitter. 😉

  • Michael R

    Are we just going to be endlessly ” punked ” for years ?

    Mark Cuban meeting Steve Bannon this week.

    https://s22.postimg.org/82jsow101/mark_cuban_steve_bannon.jpg

    • SoCalGal20

      Who knows why they met? Just because they met doesn’t mean Cuban’s going to the dark side but I am curious.

      Mark Cuban is very chatty on twitter. Somebody should ask him, see what he says.

      • Michael R

        In the article Cuban said he thinks Bannon is smarter than Trump , Trump acts impulsively and Bannon has a plan .

        • billbear1961

          Yeah, the sick monster’s got a plan, all right: to bring FASCISM to the USA!

    • billbear1961

      Tea and Fascism!

      FUCK Bannon and ANYONE who conspires with the treacherous NAZI!

  • JDS

    Nothing but a self-aggrandizing cow.

    • Ross

      She may be, but a recount is vital.

      From Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Erik Elias:

      “This election cycle was unique in the degree of foreign interference witnessed throughout the campaign: the U.S. government concluded that Russian state actors were behind the hacks of the Democratic National Committee and the personal email accounts of Hillary for America campaign officials, and just yesterday, the Washington Post reported that the Russian government was behind much of the “fake news” propaganda that circulated online in the closing weeks of the election.

      For all these reasons, we have quietly taken a number of steps in the last two weeks to rule in or out any possibility of outside interference in the vote tally in these critical battleground states.”

      • fuow

        Yes, I got the memo.
        It’s worthless blah-blah.

    • fuow

      Well, bless your heart.

  • Mark

    On the day that the Cheeto declared that if he doesn’t win, he will know the election is rigged, I do believe I did declare that yes, the election IS rigged – in his favor. And, i now am leaning more towrds there being much, much more to the rigging than any of us know. I know, I know. Sounds like a vast consipiracy – but! we are talking Republicans here… I rest my case!

    I am hoping like hell that election fraud is unconvered to the degree that a national recount becomes “official investigation” rather than gofundme whining.

    • Chucktech

      What strikes me as really odd about what or if there was rigging by Republicans is the tone of Trump and Fox News regarding how the election might turn out.

      Trump was crying rigged, rigged RIGGED all the way up to election night so that when he lost, he’d say “See? Told you it was rigged.” Obviously he didn’t need that taking point.

      Sean Hannity, on election eve, pretty much melted down on his TV show, hyperbolic with rhetoric that sounded like voters were about to flush America down the toilet with a Hillary win, yet look what happened.

      Just doesn’t strike me as the sound of a party knowingly rigging the results.

  • Wesinoregon

    If it undermines Republicans and gets Trump out by the roots, I’m all for it.

  • Skeptical_Inquirer

    Whatever her motives, as murky as they may be, I’d rather the recounts be done so we can get a definitive answer.

    If she wins outright, good. If she gets within a few votes and a number of electors flip to give her the win, good. If she loses but she does so by a lot fewer electoral votes, I’m not thrilled but it’s nice to give Trump a kick in the teeth.

    Also if a state flips, I agree with Mark,that really should call into question other states that were close.

  • Fight thefuck BACK!

    Meanwhile, Trump and his republican thugs are rushing the White House, and will grab power (perhaps illegitimately) as fast as they can. Very disappointed in the lack of forceful response by Democrats and the Clintonistas. We are very well witnessing a stolen election by Trumputin and the Republicans, who are leaving American citizens compromised and vulnerable to Putin’s totalitarian influence.

    Maybe Clinton was not the best person for the job, given that she is apparently unwilling to stand and fight for the most important position in the world. It is sickening to see it confirmed again that power will go to the most corrupt, most ruthless, most unprincipled candidate who is willing to lie, cheat, steal, and sell the country out. And the progressive stand meekly by and allow it to happen.

    • billbear1961

      I wish Hillary would show the fighting spirit we all know she is capable of!

    • billbear1961

      Fight the fuck back is RIGHT!!!!

    • Ross

      Just because we are not seeing Hillary on a very big stage screaming about a rigged election does not mean that she is not working hard to assure that the election was not rigged.

      • you know she is working on this issue, how? i’ve seen nothing that suggests she and her campaign crew are doing anything other than telling her supporters to accept the results. i’m happy to be proven wrong. give me a link that shows she’s doing more than sitting on the sidelines in this.

        • TrollopeReader

          Joy Reid just had a “statement” from HFA (Hillary for America) that they will monitoring what is happening with the recount … nothing on her website.

          • fuow

            Precisely. We’re just taking it up the butt again. Dry fucked without a reach-around or even a kiss.

          • Tiger Quinn

            Okay, but other than bitching about it here, what are you fucking doing?

          • fuow

            1) Donated to Dr. Stein to finance recounts.
            2) Stopped by every single, solitary door I knocked on in town to say ‘thank you’ for having listened to me REGARDLESS of how they voted.
            3) Fought in the local party for a change of course away from the blah-blah to clear lines.
            4) Written every single Democrat in the House and Senate and asked them to focus on protecting the country from the worst. Also asked them to be more forceful in protecting the working poor.
            5) Subscribed to three ‘reasonable’ conservative journals which had meaningful discussions on the election from the beginning.
            6) Increased my financing commitments and grunt-work time in the local Democratic Party.

            And what have you done?

          • Dazzer

            As I’m not an American, my conribution to your effort will be standing on the sidelines cheering and applauding you wildly.

            (I will also send cookies if you need them.)

        • Ross

          Read below. SoCalGal posted a link to a statement by the Clinton campaign lawyer.

          I also posted the statement in full.

          The campaign also sent out an email asking that people donate to the recount effort.

          Moreover, Hillary has a very long history of quietly working BEHIND the scenes. This is her style. The point is, none of know what she doing right now. But why do people assume she is doing nothing?

          If I were her though, after what she has been through, I would be in bed 24/7 in a fetal position.

      • fuow

        That’s nice. I’m very active in the party locally and haven’t heard a word except to shush my mouth and stop bellyaching.
        Vox populi, vox dei, that sort of shit.
        So – where are you drawing your information from?

      • Skeptical_Inquirer

        I can prefer someone but I can still criticize them if they fail to fight as hard as they should or make the wrong decisions. The Democratic Party has made a lot of wrong decisions like not fight for every position on all levels. I really don’t get why an incompetent like DWS had the damn job and if it was because she was friends with Hillary, that is a terrible reason.

        It’s not JUST the Presidency. The Majority of governors are GOP and a lot of our state legislatures are GOP so we need to deal with that crap as well AND build a bench of people for 2020.

    • no, liberals are the ones dissing the effort. actual progressives have been screaming for investigation into our vote counting system for going on two decades now. liberals always treat us like conspiracy nuts, except for now when their candidate is the one to feel the effects of fraud. this thread is proof of that.

      • fuow

        Actually, once upon a time, ‘liberal’ meant the good folks on the left and ‘progressive’ was a PC term so as not to fright the horses in the street.
        Regardless, we need to fight back. Finally.

        • petewestcentral

          I think the PC progressivism was co-opted during the Reagan years, wasn’t it?

          • fuow

            A bit, but mainly under Bill Clinton, sadly.

  • fuow

    Ever since the 2000 elections, I’ve had to put up with a lot of ‘let’s not fight it’, ‘let’s take the high-road’ ‘we don’t dirty our hands’ bullshit.
    Mindfulness and SJW argot and PC-Politessa screaming.
    And what has it got us?
    Bush #43 and hundreds of thousands of dead people.
    An attack on Obamacare from the beginning which will, in a few weeks, lead to the full repeal of the ACA.
    And now: Trump.

    It’s time to acknowledge that the whole approach of my party for the last 16 years has failed.
    Fight back. Fight back hard. Legally, constitutionally, but hard.
    How long will it be until we’re in a war with Iran under these people?

    • Mike__in_Houston

      The post of the century, eloquently stated. The Democrats have to start fighting as dirty as the Republicans have been doing. I just fear that the Republicans have consolidated so much power that it may take decades to reverse the damage, and this while the effects of climate change continue to increase. Time is running out or maybe already has run out to fix this mess.

    • Ross

      You wrote: “It’s time to acknowledge that the whole approach of my party for the last 16 years has failed.”

      Really?

      Have I just been imagining a great Democrat in the White House these past eight years?

      • he made a lot of upper and upper middle class people with stocks happy. he did nothing for the people who live in neighborhoods like mine. had he done so, more people here would’ve been energized to vote for ‘more of the same.’ don’t be so surprised that they didn’t.

        • Ross

          No President is all powerful.

      • fuow

        Upvote for President Obama – however: Yes, we failed miserably to communicate the value of voting for us as opposed to the rethugs.
        President Obama tried to the very end to work with the rethugs, with the result that those of us who wanted to fight (to name but one example, for the ACA) were told not to rock the boat.
        So, yes, Ross, our party did a horrible job the past eight years. President Obama did as well as he did DESPITE us, not because of us.

      • CottonBlimp

        Look at everything Trump is planning to do in his first few days in office. Now, how much did Obama get done in his first 100 days, when he had a massive mandate and a fillerbuster proof majority in Congress?

        If he’d actually fought for a liberal agenda back then instead of trying to unify with the GOP, America would have had a lot more evidence of how Democrats in office benefit them and the GOP wouldn’t be able to undo it all in a couple days, as they’re planning to.

        • Chucktech

          IMO, that was Obama’s biggest mistake: Bipartisanship, when he KNEW they were bound and determined to see him fail.

          • Falconlights

            I have to agree with you, Chucktech. And we wonder why some people see the Democratic party as being “just like the Republicans”. I mean, he already knew what the Rethugs were going to do, so why didn’t he just do what he had to do and not give a crap what the Rethugs thought about it?

          • fuow

            As much as it pains me, a large number of Democrats in those days were blue-dawgs.
            They’re all but gone, now. Back then, though, they not only could but they did throw a spanner in the works.

        • sandollar_man

          The ACA is a major accomplishment. He decided to tackle the entrenched health insurance interests in his first 2 years. That’s a BFD, as Biden would say.
          And especially after he had seen how Hillary had been kicked from one side of the country to the other, by those same entrenched interests.
          I call that courageous.

          • CottonBlimp

            The hell do you mean he “tackled” entrenched insurance interests with the ACA? They helped write the fucking thing.

          • sandollar_man

            When Obama was on the campaign trail, he was bombarded with stories of pre-existing conditions, denied heathcare, terminated policies, exorbitant costs and bankruptcy.
            Bankruptcies, because of heathcare, don’t happen in countries with more socialistic healthcare.
            60% of personal bankruptcies in this country are tipped into bankruptcy, because of medical bills.
            And the effects of bankruptcies, ripple throughout the whole community, like a plague.

            He decided to tackle the biggest issue. But he’d seen what happened with Hillary, and so he had to deal with the entrenched health insurance interests. The status quo was not working. We needed to try something different, and to be more like the systems of our trading partners.

            At present, we have the most expensive system “by far” than any other country. NO OTHER COUNTRIES have emulated our system. You know why! Because it’s NOT efficient. It’s become perverted – trying to account for the fact that poor people get sick too.
            Have you heard of $10 aspirin charges on hospital bills. That’s the current system trying to recoup the cost of the uninsured and poor. We needed to try new things. That’s why the doctor’s association’s, insurance companies, hospitals, and drug makers have ALL bought into the ACA.

            Have you noticed the increase in TV ads for healthcare lately? It’s called competition. Haven’t we always been told that competition drives efficiency up and prices down.

            Ask yourself if it makes sense that any President would risk such scorn and ridicule to tilt at the status quo and such powerful entrenched interests, if there weren’t a major need for him to take that risk.
            Claiming that he’s wrong because he tried, shows that you are the one who is doing the bidding (even unwittingly) of those entrenched interests.

          • CottonBlimp

            Ask yourself if it makes sense that any President would risk such scorn and ridicule to tilt at the status quo and such powerful entrenched interests, if there weren’t a major need for him to take that risk.

            Again, what the hell are you talking about standing up against entrenched interests? Insurance companies helped write the ACA. That’s a verifiable fact.

            There was growing public resentment against insurance companies for the reasons you mentioned, and instead of using that to argue for nationalized health care or a public option, he threw that under the bus to write a bill that placates public resentment while preserving the entrenched power of the insurance industry.

            Because of the power ACA granted the insurance industry, they were able to fuck with it, raising everyone’s premiums right before the election, which played a part in helping to elect anti ACA Republicans to Congress to undo what little good the ACA accomplished.

          • sandollar_man

            The President does NOT write legislation. He worked with Congress to “craft” a bill that would eventually pass. Along the way, for a whole year, there was lots of talk and pressure to go with a single payer system. I remember all of the liberal websites were arguing for single payer. The republicans didn’t want to solve the problem, cuz ‘status quo’ and ‘entrenched interests’ are their bywords. The final bill didn’t get very many Republican votes but it got enough to pass.
            All of the layers of extraneous profit ( insurance companies), and Republican unwillingness to help poor people, contributed to a half measure in the ACA. But it was a step in the right direction.

            My guess is that the Republicans will do absolutely nothing to resolve the problem of having a healthcare system that is TWICE as expensive as the next country on the list.

    • billbear1961

      If there’s a war with Iran, they will close down the Strait of Hormuz, cutting off the flow of Persian Gulf oil which is necessary to fuel the world economy.

      It would mean instant worldwide CRISIS.

      • Jamie_Johnson

        It would mean instant worldwide CRISIS.

        Which Trump will promptly blame on Obama.

      • sandollar_man

        Iran used to be called Persia. It’s their gulf. Remember when Saddam lit those gulf water oil wells on fire. We couldn’t even prevent a small strip of land from becoming a seething firestorm.

    • JCF

      I don’t think Drumpf’s boss Putin will permit him a war w/ his ally Iran.

      Well, unless it amuses Putin to see the U.S. and Iran fight that is…

  • Stephen Elliot Phillips

    There was hacking in some spots. Voter supression in others. There was energizement of white supremecists in areas and the same for fundo christians in others. There were empty promises of industrial comeback jobs in still more areas.
    All of these tactics above may have overlapped in certain states to some degree.
    However, the outcome was just enuf votes in the right electoral states to give the emperor his crown.
    You cant play a fair game with a lying cheating opponent.
    Frankly i dont think we will ever figure out how it rolled.

    • leastyebejudged

      Recounting is how we verify the votes, it’s not complicated.

      • Stephen Elliot Phillips

        But that just counts the hacked or unhacked votes. Doesnt explain the flip floppers who were swayed by comey or the russians or bannon.

      • OhNo,Sweetie

        yes, the actual votes yet there was so much more involved. The sheer number of people kicked off the registers, the direct hacking into at least four voter registration databases, the FBI, Russia…its a mess.

  • RaygunsGoZap

    Well it was a hack-riddled election – Stein, Johnson, Trump….

  • Queequeg

    I contributed. Even if nothing comes of it we can show Trump that we don’t think his presidency is legitimate. Without Putin, Assange and Comey he would not have won the electoral college. I applaud Jill Stein for doing this.

    • sandollar_man

      You may be correct.
      But Hillary underestimated the impact of all the negative talk about NAFTA.

      She should have taken Trumps attempt to pin NAFTA on her hubby, and spun Trump around on his duplicitous butt – with historical facts.
      1) When NAFTA passed in the Senate:
      More than 50% of the Republicans voted YES to it. 79%
      The majority of the Dems voted NO to it.
      2) When NAFTA passed in the House:
      More than 50% of the Republicans voted YES to it. 75%
      The majority of the Dems voted NO to it.

      It was a Republican majority in both the House and Senate that voted for that bill in order to put it on Bill Clinton’s desk.
      Donald wanted to blame BIll because Bill didn’t act to thwart that Republican majority bill.

      Hillary could have done a major switcheroo on Donald, and highlighted his duplicitous need to blame the one who didn’t act to undermine that Republican NAFTA bill.
      She could have highlighted how duplicitous he was to blame someone who acted like a member of his own party.
      But she blew that chance. Over and over again she blew it.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement

      And holy crap, look at this CAFTA vote count.
      When she had the chance in Congress – she voted against CAFTA.
      In the Senate >>
      Only 23% of Dems voted for it
      95% of Repubs voted for it
      In the House>>
      Only 8% of Dems voted for it
      88% of Repubs voted for it

      The CAFTA vote was so lopsided, that it could rightfully be label as a Republican “endeavor”.
      It was a Republican controlled Congress that passed it. GWB signed it.
      http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/01/politics/senate-rollcall-vote-on-cafta.html
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/27/AR2005072701195.html

      • Queequeg

        You’re correct. There were many arguments that Hillary could have made during the campaign, but she failed to do so effectively.

  • I can just imagine the next video from the Kremlin by Jill complaining about “hacked American elections” unlike the stellar fair elections they have in Russia that are put on by her lauded Vladimir Putin. Maybe the Russians can throw in a gorgeous Siberian Sable as a thank-you gift this time. After all, Green Party candiates need to wear natural furs! https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8b5be3d39be16e5f2a143a1c13dd6faa4e6eb66d8a6a44e45f9065e80b3fa177.jpg

  • Jean-Marc in Canada

    And you did your part to make it so, Jill.

  • JCF

    “It Looks Like This Was A Hack-Riddled Election”

    Jill, your pal Putin could have told you that!

    Do.Not.Trust.Her! >:-/

  • Whicker Park

    Hey, yah THINK??!!??

  • fuow

    One thing I only recently learned (if everybody else already knows it, disregard this):
    If the recount isn’t completed (and Dr. Stein is asking it be done by hand) by December 13, Wisconsin can’t send electors to the college.
    OK, the Congress (which is rethug) can change the rules, of course, but still – the last recount in Wisconsin took nearly a month.
    This may be an aspect of the Green party’s reasoning.
    Anybody know if this might apply or something similar is known about the other two states?

    Personally, I’m totally OK with this. I’ve had it up to here with rethugs and blue-dawgs telling me that ‘rules are rules’. Fine, then let’s play exactly by the rules.

  • Pearlrwilson

    Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj67d:
    On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
    !mj67d:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash66DigitalGlobalGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj67d:….,….