It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The stupid Jill Stein recount and what it means.

page: 2
37
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Trump did say the system is rigged right? well let's find out....you have problem with that?




posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:46 AM
link   
I do agree that it's a waste of time. But tell the truth, if the election results had been reversed can you honestly tell me that Donald wouldn't be demanding recounts everywhere?



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

First of all, I agree with you about your analysis of this situation, up to a point. I agree that the recount will serve to establish that there is a problem with your voting system, if it comes back as being different upon recount, than it was first time around.

But I do not believe, and I really do not think any reasonable person with any critical thinking skills would believe, that a failure to locate a discrepancy in just three areas would indicate that the system is perfect or even workable. It clearly is not. For a start, the primaries... these are unnecessary in the extreme. The idea that a party should have only one potential candidate, ridiculous. The fact that the debates pander to the most stupid, and therefore have to be carried out between two people, rather than the entire pool of potential presidential material, is frankly outrageous.

The election should not have a primary phase. It should be a case of everyone can run, the parties have no say in who is put forward as a candidate for the presidency, and the voter should be free, in every state, to write in whomever they should so wish besides that as well.

Not only would you get a properly representative result, but it would eliminate the ease with which people are polarised against one another, and therefore controlled, as BOTH the leading candidates during the last election benefited from hugely. Let me ask you something. If the Republican Party had three candidates, and the democrat party had three candidates, and the socialists had four and the Greens had ten, and so on.... what would be the harm?

One winner would still be picked, but there would not be nearly the same sort of gamesmanship (which ought not be a factor in the fate of nations).

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

See, THAT is an issue. Has Pizzagate caused a downturn in sales of, or interest in Italian inspired bread stuffs?

More at eleven.



edit on 26-11-2016 by TrueBrit because: grammatical error corrected.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: CulturalResilience

The repercussions of throwing the presidency to Clinton are almost to fearful to contemplate. Even if the recount goes to Clinton the outcome may well be a hot civil war and the liberals will lose.

And that's bad? Something to be afraid of?

That's precisely why I want Hillary to be president. I came to the conclusion long ago that these vermin will never be defeated peacefully.

So let's have it out and get it over with already.

Unfortunate? Yes. War always is. Necessary? I think so.

Am I allowed to say that?




You may be right that a internal conflict is what it will take. I have relatives and friends in the US and yes I would fear for their safety and would consider it bad if they were harmed or worse during civil strife. I do not need anyone to refresh my memory regarding conflict.
edit on 26-11-2016 by CulturalResilience because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

You're 100% right; in effect, this is a test by fire on our election system.

Thinking back to Bush-Gore in 2000 though, and the after-effects of that fiasco, even if nothing comes of the recounts and Trump assumes office in a peaceful and orderly transition of power, at the very least Trump is now denied his "voter mandate." If it goes to court, it's going all the way to the Supreme Court, and no matter who wins, we will hear that our president was "selected" not "elected" for another four years...



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Somebody is lining her pocket to put her name on. Does not matter in the end. Just a waste of time and resources.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Just to indicate the folly of a Hillary presidency through this, I will man-spread until the recounts are complete.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Some pretty interesting folks signing up to 'volunteer' to do the recount:
www.jill2016.com...



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

No conflict of interest at all!




posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: IAMTAT

No conflict of interest at all!



I believe I saw that Dick Bimbo also signed up there last night....many many times.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:57 AM
link   
Anybody noticed how the "costs" are skyrocketing?

She initiallty asked for 2 mill..

Now she is up to needing 7mill.

By next week she will be claiming they need 10 mill.

Do you really think all that money is coming from ordinary donors.... or are big chunks of cash coming from somewhere else?


The fact that they keep changing the amount of money they claim they need is very very suspicious.
edit on R572016-11-26T08:57:57-06:00k5711Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
Anybody noticed how the "costs" are skyrocketing?

She initiallty asked for 2 mill..

Now she is up to needing 7mill.

By next week she will be claiming they need 10 mill.

Do you really think all that money is coming from ordinary donors.... or are big chunks of cash coming from somewhere else?


The fact that they keep changing the amount of money they claim they need is very very suspicious.


It's been noted that large donations of 160K show up like clockwork @ regular intervals. Soros money continues to pour in.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

She's just trying to get the 5 percent required in order to get federal funds for future campaigns. And to line her pocket.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: thegeneraldisarray
She's just trying to get the 5 percent required in order to get federal funds for future campaigns. And to line her pocket.


Jesus could not miracle her ass to 5%, it will never happen.




edit on 26-11-2016 by AugustusMasonicus because: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:04 AM
link   
They know they lost. They simply didn't cheat enough. When 1-2% added in should have tipped the scales, it didn't matter when Clinton lost by 12% (or even 4%).

What this latest fiasco of Steins is, is the Left's attempt to delegitimize the Trump Presidency.

Riots against Trump - check
Constantly broadcasting the popular vote (LA county) - check
Not providing Trump the full Electoral vote count - check
Require recounts in multiple states - check

Make it all look like a tighter/closer race than it was, and add icing to the cake by making it appear as though the win wasn't official. Typical of the politics we play in America.

Democracy is GREAT (if my side wins).



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:09 AM
link   
a reply to: 200Plus

I expect them to ONLY ask for recounts in big states in which the Dems DIDN'T bother cheating.

Let's recount some states Hillary actually won. Fair is Fair.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Hi DBCowboy,

The recount will open up opportunities for voter fraud, specifically tampering in favor of Hillary.

The re-count isn't necessary, as the Clintons will order enough un-pledged electors to change their minds and vote for Hillary on Dec 22nd, to trigger a win for her. The Clintons have very effective ways to deal with anyone who fails to do as they're told.

Electors, who defy their constituents, might enjoy a healthy life to follow (unless they talk, or unless they might talk).

Keywords for the leftist search engines: Blackmail, Extortion, Intimidation, Bribery, Corruption



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
This is just my opinion.

Right now we are in the midst of a political issue concerning the votes cast in 3 states. Hillary lackey, Jill Stein is pushing for a recount.

What does that mean?


If the counts come back the same, then she will have wasted millions on a political gamble. Trump will remain president.

If the count comes back different? Then evil-queen-bitch Hillary will become the evil ruler/dictator of the US.

But really, if the count comes back different, then that means that there are flaws within our voting system. It would indicate voter fraud on a massive scale. It would demand reform, voter ID, more laws, controls over the process.

It would indicate that our system is flawed and that the people in charge of the system, corrupt or at the very least, inept.

So if the bootlicker Stein wants to do a recount, we should all welcome it.

It'll either prove our system works, or it'll prove that it doesn't.
Um, what if her goal is all of this? And before you call her a boot kicker, she's been calling out Clinton, trump, and both major parties go being sell outs, war mongers, wall st shills, etc.
edit on 26-11-2016 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Yeah, she's a real paragon of integrity.




posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: CulturalResilience

This is my concern. A man was showing me his 4 newly purchased ARs. He had witnessed the protests on TV and was preparing to defend his own. Thankfully the people I know will stick to defense of their property only.



new topics




 
37
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join