I like it...if for no other reason than to prove how many illegal votes were counted in CA.
What’s the deadline?
I love it. Trump should ask for donations to do CO, MN, VA, and NH too.
Hillary won NH by less than 3,000 votes.
She won MN by a larger margin, but still comparable to WI and PA.
If Trump were to file requests for recounts in those two states and force Hillary to defend those, it would end this nonsense.
However, I don't know if that will be possible at this time.
I would like to see that happen. There is circumstantial evidence that the vote is irregular in CA—statistically, for one state to have results that are so disparate from any other state raises the issue that something happened to skew the vote.
Recounts are typically done only in really close races. Maybe this is the wrong tactic—they should be done when the race is unaccountably wide and the results are so far skewed. There has been a suspicion of massive vote fraud in CA going on for decades—how about getting to the bottom of it once and for all?
Recount CA.
Exactly what I’ve been thinking.
The available electoral vote recount theory is just so much noise. It takes 270 electoral votes to be elected President. If neither candidate gets to 270 then the House of Representatives elects the President and the Senate elects the VP. In that case we would have Trump-Pence as the winner.
A simple majority of the electoral votes cast is simply not suffient to win the Presidency.
For Hillary to become President she would need the electoral votes of WI, PA and MI.
Not going to happen.
Like it. How can this happen?
YUP
Flipping brilliant
Ditto that. The illegals voting in CA is half of the votes Hillary won by popular vote. Demanding a recount in CA would stop this nonsense. If the point is to prolong this recount process so that the states electoral votes won’t be counted for Trump, then CA would be a checkmate.
I just don’t know if Trump would want to get involved in the game.
Great idea. They’d find a million or more illegal alien votes, encouraged by O’Muslim saying they should vote.
Good idea.
I say do it.
Especially since CA uses the “honor system” to verify voter eligibility; no voter ID required, same day registration, etc.
California today is by far the most corrupt state in the history of this country. They are so far gone, they actually brag about their corruption. They want illegal voting and promote it, they actually believe that promoting illegal voting is a higher moral standard...because it keeps their corrupt asses in power.
Honestly, the federal government needs to come in and forcibly remove the California state government and take over the state. It is too far gone to ever be restored as a functioning state within the federal system. An entirely new, restructured state system needs to be created after the millions of illegal anti-American, pro-Aztlan invaders are forcibly repatriated to their countries of origin.
And to make it worse, Harry Reid is now creating the same corrupt system in Clark County, Nevada.
CA’s voting system is so corrupt; it should not even be counted at all for any national elections. If they are okay with a corrupt system internally that’s fine but when it affects us all; it’s most definitely not fine.
Didn’t clinton wait until the deadline to file so that trump wouldn’t have chance to counter file in states?
A recount, or a proper vetting of the votes. If 30-40$ of California’s votes are known to be illegal, then California’s electoral votes should be thrown out.
The case, Republican National Committee vs. Democratic National Committee, dealt with a consent decree issued in 1982 that prevents the RNC from engaging in some voter fraud prevention efforts without prior court consent. It specifically said the RNC could not engage in ballot security efforts (later defined in 1987 as “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud,” according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit opinion), especially in areas where racial or ethnic makeup could be considered a reason for the activities.
In deciding the case, which stems from a 2008 lawsuit brought by the DNC, the district court clarified ballot security efforts as “any program aimed at combating voter fraud by preventing potential voters from registering to vote or casting a ballot,” and upheld the consent decree while adding a Dec. 1, 2017, expiration date.