06 Dec 20
@no1marauder saidThen he cannot find election fraud that isn't already known. Are you sure about that? Doesn't seem like they would go through that much trouble if he didn't want a recount.
Trump doesn't want recounts.
It's too late to request one in Michigan anyway.
06 Dec 20
@no1marauder saidDid you read it?
Jesus Christ.
The one you cited to in the post I responded to.
@metal-brain saidI have no objection to one recount, according to state law, that is, where the first result is with a certain percentage (both candidates' tallies are within 0.5% or whatever the state law defines), or where there is credible evidence (which would stand up in court) of large scale fraud (as defined by the margin of victory--that is, where one candidate has a lead of 80,000 votes, a recount shall not be triggered by anecdotal evidence of a few hundred cases of allegedly illegal ballots; the magnitude of alleged fraud would have to be on the order of 80,000, and credible). A recount shall not be triggered simply because one candidate doesn't like the first result.
A recount would be required to expose that much election fraud.
If Trump pays for the recount why are you opposed to that? There is no downside.
I am not in favour of three or four recounts. One is sufficient. And there must be a time limit. All recounts must be complete in time for the EC to announce a definitive result on schedule.
06 Dec 20
@moonbus saidThere has not been even one recount in Michigan. I'm not sure why you think he wants multiple recounts if he is paying for them, but what would it matter if he wanted more if he is paying for them? Georgia had multiple recounts, but that is according to state law. It isn't like Trump imposed anything on Georgia to do anything they were not required to.
I have no objection to one recount, according to state law, that is, where the first result is with a certain percentage (both candidates' tallies are within 0.5% or whatever the state law defines), or where there is credible evidence (which would stand up in court) of large scale fraud (as defined by the margin of victory--that is, where one candidate has a lead of 80 ...[text shortened]... limit. All recounts must be complete in time for the EC to announce a definitive result on schedule.
No harm can come from recounts if Trump pays for them. There is already a time limit. Dec 14th is when the electoral delegates are given. You should encourage them, not discourage them.
06 Dec 20
@metal-brain saidThe time limit in Michigan for requesting a recount was November 20th as I already showed you. Trump's campaign did not request one.
There has not been even one recount in Michigan. I'm not sure why you think he wants multiple recounts if he is paying for them, but what would it matter if he wanted more if he is paying for them? Georgia had multiple recounts, but that is according to state law. It isn't like Trump imposed anything on Georgia to do anything they were not required to.
No harm can come ...[text shortened]... Dec 14th is when the electoral delegates are given. You should encourage them, not discourage them.
06 Dec 20
@no1marauder saidDec. 14th is about a week away. Trump doesn't have enough time in my opinion. Biden will be the president elect in 8 days.
The time limit in Michigan for requesting a recount was November 20th as I already showed you. Trump's campaign did not request one.
@metal-brain saidThe differential in MI is well beyond 0.5%, and his legal team has not presented credible evidence of 150,000 illegal votes, hence no recount should be triggered there. Recounts should not be a paid-for service for whomever has the money to buy one.
There has not been even one recount in Michigan. I'm not sure why you think he wants multiple recounts if he is paying for them, but what would it matter if he wanted more if he is paying for them? Georgia had multiple recounts, but that is according to state law. It isn't like Trump imposed anything on Georgia to do anything they were not required to.
No harm can come ...[text shortened]... Dec 14th is when the electoral delegates are given. You should encourage them, not discourage them.
07 Dec 20
@moonbus saidNope. Trump would pay for it.
The differential in MI is well beyond 0.5%, and his legal team has not presented credible evidence of 150,000 illegal votes, hence no recount should be triggered there. Recounts should not be a paid-for service for whomever has the money to buy one.
No harm in that, right?
@sonhouse saidpfftttt, a street urchin saying something negative about Trump is enough for you.
@shavixmir
Except Trump's own niece Mary Trump happens to have a Phd in psychology and has pronounced Trump as at least a narcissist. That is enough evidence for me, she grew up with this creep.
Mary Trump has clear $$$$reason to lie.
07 Dec 20
@metal-brain saidthere is great harm in that. Recounts should be triggered only by objectively determined factors relating to the casting and counting of ballots, not by whether a candidate has money. If any candidate can have a recount simply because he wants one and can pay for it, a candidate with enough rich backers could pay for recounts in all 50 states until he got the results he result he wanted. That’s not democratic, it’s the high road to plutocracy.
Nope. Trump would pay for it.
No harm in that, right?
@metal-brain saidWell, did Trump (or you for that matter) accept the Georgia recount?
Nope. Trump would pay for it.
No harm in that, right?
So what sense does a recount make if the result is not accpted? Another recount: no Change? And then another and another and sudenly the president Claims that until the recounting is completed he should stay in Office 😲
@earl-of-trumps saidThat’s exactly why Trump wants recounts, because he thinks the results will change and vindicate him.
@moonbus - a candidate with enough rich backers could pay for recounts in all 50 states until he got the results he result he wanted.
Who said the results change?
07 Dec 20
@earl-of-trumps saidThe same motivation as her Uncle, that makes sense.
pfftttt, a street urchin saying something negative about Trump is enough for you.
Mary Trump has clear $$$$reason to lie.
@earl-of-trumps saidWhereas the Donald needs no reason to lie. It's just a way of life for him.
pfftttt, a street urchin saying something negative about Trump is enough for you.
Mary Trump has clear $$$$reason to lie.