Posted on 11/28/2016 2:09:26 PM PST by Maceman
Voting machines nor any IT related equipment for voting is not networked to the Web.
“The thing is that Stein is not going to court, but 100 voters in PA. They can claim their vote was changed by hackers and in that way got standing.”
But we can’t get standing for the thousand or millions of illegals who voted?
One of their claims is that the Secretary of State website was hacked and the names of registered voters were used to order absentee ballots.
How it was determined which of those voters had not already obtained absentee ballots or instead voted on election day was not described by Stein’s shills.
They are not hoping to upend the vote in PA. They are hoping to tie things up long enough that PA’s Electors are not certified in time and, along with the same thing in Wisconsiin and Michigan, would leave Trump with a minority vote in the EC without, however, giving Mrs Bill a win because she would still not have 270. Then they can send it to the House for Trump to be elected there and then they can rant for 4 years about Trump being president even though Mrs Bill had majorities of the popular vote and the EC vote- “selected, not elected” as it were.
Bad idea. A state as large as CA could take a lot of time, legal delays, etc. CA has a Dem gov and Dem legislature. They would then do whatever it took NOT to certify (yes, even for Cankles) in order to tie up the electoral college.The electoral college votes on Dec 19. Irrespective of whether CA is ready or not. CA could not “tie up the Electoral College.” Therefore, it is worse than useless to Hillary for CA to fail to cast its EV on that date.
CA has, therefore, no incentive other than to dismiss any dilatory tactics out of hand. Trouble is, that would set a pro-Trump precedent in WI/MI/PA. Exactly the reason why Trump should at least feint in that direction, as a way of ridiculing Ms. Stein’s calls for recounts which are irrelevant to Ms. Stein’s (nonexistent) electoral chances.
I agree a feint is wise.
yes, nice. maybe they should do it.
Not really a founding father or Constitutional issue. Nebraska and Maine split their EVs by district. It’s up to each state to determine how they assign their EVs.
It would be interesting to see someone analyze how many EVs Trump would get if they were all divvied up by district. It might be impossible to do as the votes seem to be counted and reported by counties, not by districts.
One about EVs vs. popular vote is that your state doesn’t get rewarded for having higher turnout. If only one guy showed up to vote in Florida vs. 100% of registered voters in Pennsylvania, FL still sends more EVs to the candidate.
My late father used to say: “The only good Commie is a d&*d commie”.
Now I understand that what he meant was that as long as they are breathing, they will never stop trying to steal our freedom.
He's had a team of lawyers on it from the start - there's not much meat to bite into until the other side formulates it's arguments. His crew is on the job even if it isn't making the news right now.
Site below allows you to look at 2012 date by Congressional District. Per the site 2016 data will be available soon.
http://www.270towin.com/alternative-electoral-college-allocation-methods/
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.