As a point of note, he was also a Liberal during his political career

---

Swim. Overbike. Walk.

I'd be happy if they were required to show a valid ID.

Fantastic idea!

Heck, half of the Millennial generation would not be allowed to vote. Have you heard some of the protesting snowflakes interviewed?

Oh yea, like what?

Here is what is on Jill Stein's web site regarding a recount:

"After a divisive and painful presidential race, reported hacks into voter and party databases and individual email accounts are causing many American to wonder if our election results are reliable. These concerns need to be investigated before the 2016 presidential election is certified. We deserve elections we can trust." - Dr. Jill Stein.

Here is what Trump said:
"In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally"

Surely you can see the difference between those two statements.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

People on the Internet who lack critical thinking skills? ;-) That's enough to keep a guy occupied.

BTW, that isn't directed at your comment.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

Ben Affleck?

Surely you can see the difference between those two statements.

Not really. Explain it to me.

I note that Trump's statement, though apparently baseless, appears off the cuff, and no action whatsoever has been taken based on it. It's talk. Empty puffery.

Stein's statement is apparently equally baseless, except she's raising millions of dollars for recounts.

And you're ignoring the left's rank hypocrisy on the matter. Again, when Trump suggested the vote could be rigged, he was a crazy man who was literally threatening the very foundation of our country. It was utterly beyond the pale for him to suggest that an election could be rigged, because the very suggestion undermines our democracy.

Now we have Stein suggesting- apparently without any basis at all- the same thing, and not a peep from anyone who was so outraged when Trump said it.

And besides, we have long heard from everyone on the left that there is no voter fraud, and it's impossible to rig the machines, and so on and so forth. You guys should forward that memo to Stein.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I just knew you were a yuge trump supporter.

I knew it!

Racist! Homophobic Hitler!

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

 
Bullshit...then she should be doing recounts in every state. Not the ones that Hillary lost, but was supposed to win. Lets recount in states that Hillary barely won. And I also want Jill to verify my vote too!

Okay, think of it this way. If you or I were to get on Slowtwitch and claim that the election was rigged and there was massive voter fraud WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE would there be any reason for nationwide uproar on either the left or right based on our claim? I'm guessing that you'll agree that the answer is no. That nation wide nobody dives a damn what we think on the topic.

How about if President Barack Obama said the same thing. There would be outrage and it would be justified.

On that scale Trump is a lot closer to President Obama and Stein is frankly a lot closer to you and I.

Not to mention the fact that Stein did not claim that there was massive voter fraud. She noted irregularities and raised money for a recount.

Seriously what has your panties in such a twist about a recount that we all know won't make a difference and that is going to be paid for by the entity requesting it? Sure, she's wasting money, but people gave it to her so it's hers to waste.

Please explain to me in simple terms why you think it's okay for the president elect of the United States to claim with no evidence that there was massive voter fraud in the election that he won.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

Seriously what has your panties in such a twist about a recount that we all know won't make a difference and that is going to be paid for by the entity requesting it? Sure, she's wasting money, but people gave it to her so it's hers to waste.

I'm thinking I've explained my problem with it pretty clearly already. I don't know why you're not hearing me. I don't have any particular problem with the amount of money she's raising/spending on it. I don't even have a problem with requesting a recount. What I have a problem with is the hypocrisy of those many on the left who were outraged at the suggestion that the electoral process isn't ironclad, and who now have no problem with her suggesting that the process is suspect.



Please explain to me in simple terms why you think it's okay for the president elect of the United States to claim with no evidence that there was massive voter fraud in the election that he won.

As soon as you explain to me in simple terms why it's not OK for him to do that. And while you're at it, let me know what evidence Stein is acting on.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

At times he was a liberal
Check it out.

Again, when Trump suggested the vote could be rigged, he was a crazy man who was literally threatening the very foundation of our country. It was utterly beyond the pale for him to suggest that an election could be rigged, because the very suggestion undermines our democracy


So why is such a crazy, irresponsible man the 45th President of the United States?

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

It's her money. She can spend it how she wants. Why do you care if she wants to waste her money?

Maybe Trump should pony up some of his billions and pay for a recount to find some of those millions of illegal votes in California? If he wanted to pay for it I would have no objection. Why should I. Either he won't find any irregularities which would be fine. Or he will find irregularities which is also fine because if there are issues we want to fix them.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

I'm still trying to figure out the point of Jill Stein's recount efforts.

Despite following the election pretty closely, I had never seen a picture of Jill Stein until they started giving her airtime for challenging the election. Maybe she just wanted people to put a face to a name.

I also think if she hadn't run in some of the closely fought States, Clinton might have won. Maybe she feels she is indirectly responsible for Trump and can't live with that idea.

Other than that, I'm also at a loss to figure out her intent.

It's not her money, really. It's money she solicited for the purpose of conducting the recount effort

I think what she's doing is deplorable. I don't think she believes that she's really addressing fraud. I think she is just trying to build donor databases for her party, get name recognition, etc. I do view her effort as different than Mr. Trump's because he has been casting aspersions on the electoral process since the campaign, and generally only when it suits his purpose of claiming the system is rigged against him. However, I don't really view her effort as any better than his.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

"rigged", "unfair", etc. != error in counting. Stein's remarks are WAY less inflammatory than Trumps.

Surely you've read her remarks on the subject. They are vague and a bit hand wavy. But she has the legal right to request and pay for that vote.

Frankly, the hyper partisans on both sides are hypocrites.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

I don't disagree with anything you said there.

Fine point though, it IS her money now and was raised for that specific purpose. I mentioned that earlier to point out that she isn't doing this AND requesting that those states foot the bill. At least the whole bill, I'm not sure if she is paying the whole thing or a portion.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

One of the important distinctions is that Stein is requesting and paying for a recount and will abide by the results. Trump's "rigged" and "I won the popular vote" comments are baseless accusations presented as fact, without evidence, and without any attempt to gain further evidence. As such, they remain as unverified, and quite possibly fabricated "facts" for millions of people. This type of "false reality" is actually much worse than the recount. I think that a narrow post-election audit of results should be done in many elections as a preemptive technique to counter the sort of corrosive "this election is rigged" narrative. Audits may already be done, but those results are certainly not as loudly announced as the accusations.

That's a fair, if charitable, interpretation.

What about the faithless electors?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

As a long-time opponent of the Electoral College in it's "winner-take-all" incarnation.... I don't really care. I also didn't really care about some person in WA who was going to vote against Hillary. The "protest" electoral voter has been around for a while. The idea that a large set of organized faithless electors could throw some future election is a real problem, and just another reason to revamp the way that we elect the president. Pretty consistent.