There’s a suggestion being posted elsewhere that Obama has some sense of the magnitude of Democrat fraud that occurs in every election. The sooner Hillary conceded, the less likely that messy recounts would expose wholesale Dem cheating.
You totally nailed it.
Sure makes perfect sense.
Makes perfect sense to me. This way 0vomit can still pretend that he was fairly elected. If the fraud in 2008 and 2016 came to light, the only “accomplishment” of his entire life (getting elected) would be taken away.
But there were recounts in the three “blue line” states, not by Dems but by the 3rd party candidate, Jill Stein. It was claimed that Stein had the backing of the Clinton camp. IIRC, Trump gained a few votes in each case.
I think you got right to the truth of the matter.
years ago I heard an interview of ex president jimmy Carter. in the interview he described his run for governor he talked about how bad his opponent in the primary was for representing the democrats in there bid for the governorship.
the over all theme was voter fraud. the message I got from him was that voter fraud was rampant in Georgia during the sixties and seventies for the democrat party and he was just better at it then his opponent. the last think any democrat wants is a look at how honest the elections are in any state they controle