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

Wisconsin Padded Trump's Numbers

page: 2
81
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 03:20 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Oh come on, Trump was the only candidate that actually believed the sh1it that came out of his mouth. That's why he destroyed the 16 other RNC nominees. And that's also why he destroyed Hellary.

Let's not forget Bernie, he got screwed and the DNC just bent over and took it like good little snowflakes.
edit on 29-11-2016 by Wide-Eyes because: (no reason given)


I have to agree with you about the cure being worse than the disease though.
edit on 29-11-2016 by Wide-Eyes because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 04:15 AM
link   
Imagine the outcry from the left if Trump were to call for a 'election integrity' check in California or New York.

People should look back at what they said before the election.
Specifically, check a thread about voter ID laws. The left was vehement about the the fact that voter fraud doesn't exist.
Remember the outcry about Donald Trump when he did not pledge to accept the election results?
Why.... he was a threat to the very fabric of our democracy because if that.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 05:54 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy




he was a threat to the very fabric of our democracy because if that.


That's just the left projecting again. They do that a lot. I mean, if you look at their widespread use of the term nazi when leftists label their opposition, and then look closely at the tactics and ideology leftists hold dear.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 06:14 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian


Nobody ever says, "Also, pretty much everything you post is pro-Trump" as though doing so proves some point about a poster. Have you considered that folks might want to prepare for a four year uptick in anti-Trump threads unless the GOP ends up impeaching and removing him from office? (Which seems like a definite possibility.)


Posting facts about Trump always seems to "trigger" his supporters. Since ATS always favors opposition to the government, they might want to consider not checking in until Trump is out of office.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 07:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Kettu

Yes,have you been watching media lasat year or so,been outed a million times,yet you believe them?,lost my attention for sure



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Sounds like he's being framed.

"not saying there are drugs in the house but look behind the dictionary on the shelf, officer"




posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 08:05 AM
link   
So Democrats. Is there voter fraud or isn't there?

You can't have it both ways. Either we need a state ID voter system because of fraud, which is what Republicans been saying for years... Or like Democrats say it isn't needed because there is no evidence of fraud. Oh wait, now there is.

Typical.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Kettu

Yet, your claim carries with it much less substance and meat now that you've been shown that it was ONE county and a few precincts within that county.

Your whole argument is based on that it seems like a conspiracy happening in three counties. Now that it's just three precincts, do you still contend that it's some massive conspiracy that should indicate massive election fraud across the whole of the state, or even the whole of the nation?

Look, every single time that a recount will happen, the total will be different--there is no perfect method to this, and there never will be. But does it even concern you that Hillary's numbers didn't change one bit, only Trump's...or is that okay and doesn't seem odd at all?



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Is there voter fraud or isn't there?


Th recount is not about checking for voter fraud. The hand recount is meant to ensure that 1) electronic voting devices are accurately tallying and that 2) the electronic results themselves are being accurately recorded by those who conduct voting.

If those three precinct errors were caught at the county level, that is what the county team is supposed to do, find and correct errors. No problem. It seems a concern might be, besides electronic errors, the possibility that other counties perhaps did not find/overlooked precinct "errors".


In other words, Wisconsin essentially had Clinton’s vote total correct all along, but is now acknowledging that nearly five thousand of the supposed votes for Trump simply never existed. Where did these votes come from? Who originally padded his numbers and how? If this was indeed due to an organized effort to pad Trump’s voting totals in various precincts across the state, the recount should fully expose



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: Kettu

Hillary conceded.

Obama criticized the recount.

Trump is almost complete with his transition.

The election is O V E R.


If electoral fraud is real; then the election is never over until the correct result is determined.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Kettu




It doesn't matter that he still won. What matters is that it possibly shows a pattern of something bigger.

But no support for voter id still?



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: desert

"ensure that 1) electronic voting devices are accurately tallying and that 2) the electronic results themselves are being accurately recorded by those who conduct voting. "

That's absolute nonsense.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Well, you and I will disagree. I don't believe that 1) electronic voting is always accurate and 2) the voting system can never be tampered with.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

If it wasn't Trump it would have been Hillary which is far more terrifying. Was it orchestrated for Trump to win? Probably but the elite obviously enjoy the game. I think for the time being we just need to play along.

We know the end game and they know that we know. The major question is, who's gonna make the first move?



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: desert

Why is your flag upside down? You should have done that years ago.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes



You should have done that years ago.


I never have burnt a flag and don't intend to, but there have been times I have hung it upside down. Starting again in the 1980s was another time.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Kettu

As someone who voted for Trump, I am all for the recount. I am an American first before I am a fan of any one candidate, and I want the process to be fair.

But a couple of things.

Forst, why stop at these three states. Odd that a third party would only want to look at states the Hillary narrowly lost, not ones that she narrowly won. If Stein is truly interested in fairness, then she should be pushing for recounts in all states right? There have been just as many accusations about places like Claifornia, New York, Virginia, having fraud, so why no push for recounts there?

Secondly, I think that many people do just want on honest system on both sides of the aisle. But there are many on the left that are being unbelievably hypocritical about this whole thing. Donald saying he would keep his options open after the election to contest it was met with people clamoring he destroyed democracy, but now these same people support these recounts.

These same people that are so concerned about the integrity of elections now that their candidate lost alos fight hardest against things like voter id laws to help eliminate fraud.

And where were these people last election? Did they demand justice when members of the Black Panthers stood outside of polling places and harrassed people? Did they demand and investigation when Democratic members were on tape admitting they bus people to polling stations to rig the vote? Did they shout about in 2012 when Obama got 100% of votes in some precincts? Did they get outraged on election day when conservative watchdogs that had everyright to be at polling places in areas like Philadelphia were forced to leave? How about when Ron Paul was winning states in the primaries in 2012 but was fraudeulently cheated (for example small precincts voted overwhelmingly for him)?

All was quite from these people. In fact, to even suggest any wrong doing was considered un democratic.

But now all of the sudden that their person lost, now its all of the sudden a big deal.

So I will keep my integrity by saying go forth with the recount. Check all of these allegations of fraud. Thats ok with me.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Agree with much of what you wrote. However, the recount has nothing to do with voter registration fraud, voter intimidation, voter suppression, or voter caging. Even if the recounts show no election vote manipulation, it does nothing about the other areas of an election; those areas still need to be addressed.

It may be that this year is different because one candidate proclaimed the system is "rigged". No better time to begin at least the work of checking on accuracy of vote counting than this election, since not every state cares to do that, and there were many close races, ideal for recounts. Sure, every state should be held accountable for the accuracy of cast votes, but, as you've brought up a couple instances, they don't.

Investigative reporter, Greg Palast, has been reporting on election stealing for over 10 years.

Voter caging alone has been going on for decades, but the current recounts won't do anything for that.



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: jjkenobi

Wisconsin has a voter ID law. The courts couldn't overturn it it time for the election. I had to show my picture ID when I voted, and my name was compared to what was in the registered voter log before I was issued a ballot.

What I can't figure out is, why Wisconsin is in the crosshairs? We can only add 10 measly electoral college votes to a candidates total. Why isn't the focus on a state like Texas or California? There are some counties in Wisconsin that are traditionally red counties, just as there are some that are solid blue. What I saw of the voting results map just didn't seem "off" to me.


edit on 11/29/2016 by Cheddarhead because: typo



posted on Nov, 29 2016 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Nice spin off thread, you should start that thread and talk about religion there.jab and move, jab and move son-

originally posted by: six67seven

originally posted by: Kettu
a reply to: StolidPanda

People on here have clung to things with far, far less substance and meat.


Yes they have, people from both sides.

One thing people have clung to with "far, far less substance and meat" is their religion.

edit on 29-11-2016 by apydomis because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
81
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join