I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

ETA But Trump's claims he won the popular vote are also likely bullcrap. .

I'll defend SEC here. This was clearly a typo.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

People are free to waste their money as they wish, but the hypocrisy from those who decried Trump's comments on the election being rigged is sad and embarrassing.

Throwing hypocrisy flags in politics?

What's that old quote from HST about "passing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500"?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

While I would be quite confident in most elections making the assertion that by far most fraudulent votes are Dem votes, Trump in particular brings out the crazies. (No need to rehash the felons whose illegal votes likely elected Al Franken).

Most election fraud is in the counting not the voting. And it is done by the people in charge. In Massachusetts, it will be mostly Dems. In Texas, mostly Republicans. I'm betting that Wisconsin, under Scott Walker, is more likely to be R, but it will obviously be much closer.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

I agree it's all detrimental, but I'm not sure Hillary's team can stay out if it's happening anyway.

I don't see it as detrimental. People have a right to do it, and it'll add a patina of credibility to a very dysfunctional election cycle.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall when HRC's folks talk to JS's. "Hi. Yeah, we'll cooperate. Oh, and thanks for playing Nader this time around. Highly appreciated."

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

On target, except not really dealing with the extent to which advocates for austerity were breaking from economic analysis to advance pre-existing political objectives. And to the extent that it asserts that Trumpism is "new."

This is the same old 20th century unrest that gave rise to the modern social welfare state as a means to stave it off.

I think Churchill said taxing yourself to prosperity is like standing in a bucket and attempting to lift yourself. I see no reason this saying shouldn't be expanded to include austerity.

Once you have a crisis, you have a choice. Spend to restart the engines, or allow the thing to go full apocalypse and hope creative destruction works as well in reality, on a massive scale, as it does in theory. We decided to bail out asset holders and hope trickle down economics somehow delivered - the one economic theory we'd already proved Does Not Work.

That's the GOP's fault. They forced Obama to run out a quick and half-assed stimulus where we should have had a real one, with serious infrastructure spending.

Huh. I just agreed with you that the GOP is the problem on austerity. I have to go now -- shoot a pig out of the sky for dinner.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

People are free to waste their money as they wish, but the hypocrisy from those who decried Trump's comments on the election being rigged is sad and embarrassing.

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

And hilariously, a recount at this point, especailly a hand recount as I have been led to believe she is requesting, could result in Wisconsin's electoral votes not counting at all. And now the Hillary campaign is joining in, because voter fraud only is a thing when Democrats lose (especially after the Obama admin said there was no evidence of hacking or Russian influence).

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

So he doesn't think it adds an aura of credibility? As long as Spacefuck is asking why not join in? I wish he hadn't won but he did and all this noise is detrimental, ultimately.

This argument about the recount being detrimental is pure bullshit. And Less' comparison to Trump's constant flow of bullshit with regard to voter fraud is (typically) ridiculous.

I think a recount will prove fruitless. But asking for one under our current system doesn't undermine the political process. Implying that the whole system is rigged (in advance of the actual vote) if you don't win, does. Implying that even though you won, millions of votes of fraudulent votes kept you from winning the popular vote does. If a recount is performed it will either confirm the initial outcome or there will be serious evidence that we have a huge issue that needs to be addressed. In neither case does it amount to undermining our democracy or the faith in the voting process.

If Trump lost and had asked for a recount through the processes in each state in which he thought he got screwed, I would think it would be similarly fruitless. (I also don't think he'd do that. He would just yell and scream and tweet about fraud.) But one thing is clear, at least to me. Less would be pointing out the hypocrisy in the opposite direction when someone from the left posted an article about what a waste of time a recount would be. SEC would say "Voter fraud only is a thing when Democrats lose." And Hank would probably ask what the harm is in recounting the ballots.

TM

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I don't see it as detrimental. People have a right to do it, and it'll add a patina of credibility to a very dysfunctional election cycle.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall when HRC's folks talk to JS's. "Hi. Yeah, we'll cooperate. Oh, and thanks for playing Nader this time around. Highly appreciated."

Of course Hillary can't stay out.

Here's what happens in a recount.

A couple of people check tallies from machines that don't preserve a record of individual votes and re-add them. Nothing changes unless there was a problem adding in the first place. There are a surprising number of problems adding.

A bunch of people check machines that have preserved paper ballots, and particularly look at the ballots that didn't get counted because the machine had trouble reading them. They also may try to disqualify ballots that were counted but have stray marks or other irregularities.

A bunch of people check paper ballots that were hand counted, which often includes a lot of absentees. Here's where the most action is. Lots of chances to disqualify ballots, and a few to defend ballots that have been counted.

If you don't participate, the people who do participate have a field day disqualifying your ballots.

And you may say, who cares, if it doesn't affect the outcome. But the level of vote will affect things like delegate allocations for the state in the next national convention, so the state party at the least had damn well better show up, though for standing purposes they may want to do it in the candidate's name.

Yeah, Stein has always been a crackpot and remains a crackpot.

[SEC_Chick]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I'll defend SEC here. This was clearly a typo.

I noticed it, but forgot to go back and edit. I misspoke. It is most definitely bullcrap.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

...[T]alking about abolishing the electoral college or hoping the electoral college will make hil prez are all pathetic misdirection.

I agree with you here. Neither of these things has any chance of happening. And the fact that people actually want electors to flip and place Hillary in office is absolutely insane. I've asked numerous people if that's where we want to go from here on out--to a place where the only fight worth having is putting the "right" people in place as electors so that they can ignore the actual fucking outcome. No answer.

I think that the electoral college needs fixing, though. As it stands, smaller states get disproportionate representation. I think the second fix in this article is best (i.e., apportion electors in each state by congressional districts instead of a winner-take-all system). Sadly, I also think there is no way this ever gets changed.

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/12/02/r...te-523585.html

TM

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I don't see it as detrimental. People have a right to do it, and it'll add a patina of credibility to a very dysfunctional election cycle.

I don't see how. Honestly, the side that likes Trump will see any movement away from his win as illegitimate and the side that like Hillary or Stein will see anything that doesn't swing things to Hillary as the same.

The end result is less trust in the system and stronger pushes for vote suppression.

Which is why Team Hillary wasn't pushing this (Along with it being super unlikely to change anything)

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

I don't see how. Honestly, the side that likes Trump will see any movement away from his win as illegitimate and the side that like Hillary or Stein will see anything that doesn't swing things to Hillary as the same.

Rational people will understand that small shifts one way or the other would be a result of a closer look at the actual ballots. Irrational people will think that any shift is evidence of voter fraud. Those people are already fucking convinced of voter fraud because they want what they want.

If there is a huge shift in either direction, shouldn't we know this and why?

Originally Posted by Adder

The end result is less trust in the system and stronger pushes for vote suppression.

We are already here. Voter suppression is going to explode over the next four years. Republicans will pack the courts with assholes who will uphold voter suppression laws. The DOJ will not investigate anything. Voter fraud is, effectively, now truth. Holding a recount will not affect this significantly in either direction.

TM

[Adder]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

We are already here. Voter suppression is going to explode over the next four years. Republicans will pack the courts with assholes who will uphold voter suppression laws. The DOJ will not investigate anything. Voter fraud is, effectively, now truth. Holding a recount will not affect this significantly in either direction.

That may be true.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

No I don't think it reasonable. People who are anti Trump need to develop a plan of action. Something to increase the odds of D senators being elected in 2018, something to help fight fucking with immigrants, etc. AND educating third party voters what they did here. Recounts or talking about abolishing the electoral college or hoping the electoral college will make hil prez are all pathetic misdirection.

Totally agree, but we shouldn't be looking to Hillary's campaign for that. First step, I think, is to fix the DNC.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Huh. I just agreed with you that the GOP is the problem on austerity. I have to go now -- shoot a pig out of the sky for dinner.

And Obama is only going to look better and better.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Voter suppression is going to explode over the next four years. Republicans will pack the courts with assholes who will uphold voter suppression laws. The DOJ will not investigate anything.

Sessions is going to hire GOP hacks who will enlist DOJ in suppressing voting and prosecuting "fraud".