Posted on 11/25/2016 5:48:32 PM PST by drewh
The Green Party's 2016 Presidential candidate Jill Stein is announcing her intention to seek a "recount of votes in the battleground states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania." The campaign's press release, posted in full below, cites "a multi-partisan effort to check the accuracy of the machine-counted vote tallies in these states in order to ensure the integrity of our elections."
The announcement follows on word that leaked out yesterday at New York magazine that top electronic voting experts and election integrity advocates have been encouraging the Hillary Clinton campaign to file for similar hand-counts and forensic analyses of electronic voting and tabulation systems in the same states. The BRAD BLOG has independently confirmed that those efforts have been under way and are still being considered at the top level of the Clinton campaign.
We discussed just some of those efforts, and a number of reasons for them, on yesterday's BradCast program. University of Michigan computer science professor Alex Halderman, who has cracked many electronic voting systems in recent years, offers additional reasons to check the results and the systems in WI, MI and PA now right here.
Dr. Jill Stein, the 2016 Green Party Presidential candidate, on her announcement earlier today that her campaign plans to file for hand-counted paper ballot "recounts" and forensic audits of the Presidential election results in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. [Audio link to show and full interview posted below.]
"We have to move really fast in order to basically verify the vote and be confident our votes were actually counted," she tells me, citing the many concerns brought to her by computer scientists and voting systems and election integrity experts, all questioning whether paper ballots were counted accurately by error-prone and easily-hacked computer tabulators in WI and MI, and whether touch-screen systems were manipulated in some fashion in PA.
Across those three states alone, as we have been reporting, just 50,000 votes flipped from Trump to Clinton --- out of more than 13 million ballots cast in those states, where a number of anomalous results have been found --- could change who becomes the next President of the United States.
There is plenty of reason to question whether the results as reported are accurate. And not only because of the surprising results. As I note again on today's show, University of Michigan computer science and voting systems expert J. Alex Halderman, one of those urging the candidates to call for a hand-count, has cracked many electronic voting systems in recent years. He offered still more reasons to examine both the reported results and the systems used in WI, MI and PA earlier today.
Stein, explaining that some $2 million must be raised to meet the deadline to file in WI by Friday (and another $4 million or so for the other two states next week), tells me that it's an "outrage we have to go to extraordinary lengths to verify the vote," adding she is doing so, due to her "interests as a citizen, as a person in America, that the vote be valid." (The campaign has set up a fund raising page for the effort right here.)
"Why would anyone be against counting the votes?," she asks. "It’s long been demonstrated that our system of voting, relying on these machines, has virtually no security. They’re hack friendly [and] tamper friendly."
"People have felt such anguish during this election," Stein notes. "This is a joint effort, and there are many election advocates who are involved. A lot of the grassroots election integrity experts. If ever there was a time to stand up and demand an accountable and secure vote, this is the time to do it. If we don't do it now, when exactly, what would be the cause to do it?" She also details the attempt by the scientists and advocates to encourage the Clinton campaign to take up the effort as well. (I can confirm that effort happened and that the campaign was still considering doing so as of earlier today.) She says she welcomes other campaigns, such as the Libertarian Party and independent candidates with standing, to join the effort as well.
"It feels really good to be standing up right now," she tells me. "It’s time for us to take control of our democracy to start with. To give ourselves a gift on this Thanksgiving." We discuss all of that and the many concerns about the reported results, take a few calls afterward, and actually find a bit more to be thankful for on today's program Download MP3
You are right. “The most common way to get a vote recount in Pennsylvania is through an order by the Secretary of State, which is mandatory by law in statewide races decided by less than half a percentage point.” That can’t happen in this case.
Seriously??? Really? That is awesome news!
Now here is something they might be up to. Thanks!
A blind man, a twisted wench like Stein and the all dead inside Soros can see in a heartbeat that hillary clinton is SO unpopular that all those voting illegal aliens and Soros' fiction counting machines and all those dead Democrats voting into infinity could not overcome how horrid clinton really is as a candidate.
Besides, if Stein really wanted clinton to win, she should not have run. Johnson took more more Trump votes, but Stein's (asterisk also ran) might have been the straw that broke the camel's back for the Evil One.
She probably should have talked with the Clinton Crime Family. Hillary may have had enough humiliation for one election.
What will she and Soros do when the boys in Wisconsin say, "That isn't the way we recount in this state. Thanks for the $3,000,000 (Or whatever the price tag says)."
Holy crap did you survive? Honduras is one of the most violent countries in the world.
If PA used touch-screens, what can you recount?
Recount old Mexicans. They voted en masse in California, New Mexico, and Nevada.
Of course Clinton is behind this....I am not only joking when I say think of all the favors she owes..the bill has come due and she is freaking out I am sure.
Has anyone looked at how the
US House of Representatives
might vote if it comes to that?
each state gets one vote.
please discuss
Which means it goes to the House of Representatives to decide.
All you can do is check the 7,000 machines that they reported correctly.
Are these the same machines that were giving a Clinton vote when people selected Trump?
in some ways sounds good, I like the security and integrity you described, but USofA is a republic so we don’t have just a popular vote election. We have states inside the country and not wanting to let the big states rule the rest, we have our multi step process to elect leader.
My apologies - your link had the answer. Great article!
Sounds like they’re beating a dead horse in PA.
Have the Attorney General and the IRS start examining the sources of Bill and Hillary's income and start investigating Soros with the aim of removing his citizenship and shipping him back to where ever came from.
how many votes is she hoping to pick up in order to win?
if she doesn’t think she can win... then she’s trying to help hillary.
she doesn’t have the standing to protest for such a thing
The point is integrity of elections, not changing from electoral college. Worlds largest democracy, India, has 1200 million people, and even there you need a government issue photo ID card to vote. Their government system is parliamentary based similar to Great Britain.
I speak with a foreign accent, yet when I registered to vote in Illinois and then in Washington state, I was not asked to produce my naturalization certificate to prove citizenship! They simply took my word! No wonder millions of illegal immigrants can vote.
Fellow MMer here. Have not heard about fraud allegations. Wassup wit dat?
WTF does “multi-partisan” mean? Sounds like a made-up Liberal word.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.