Hillary Clinton is now 1.5 MILLION ahead of Donald Trump in the popular vote count

[Stormdash]

Clinton never came out in support of the recount.

You can't blame Clinton for what the campaign around her is doing, that's guilt by association.
Or if you do blame her for it, then accept that Trump is a complete and total racist, because there are racists that surround and support him.

Don't tell me, tell NBC. If you think you can split hairs between her campaign as an organization and her personally, forget it; never in life. It's not "guilt by association", it's respondeat superior; this Elias spoke for the campaign and was never overridden. The Clinton campaign gave its imprimatur to Stein's campaign, so they now own its implications, including the most obvious face value one -- to dispute the legitimacy of the election's outcome.

[Noxx79]

Don't tell me, tell NBC. If you think you can split hairs between her campaign as an organization and her personally, forget it; never in life. It's not "guilt by association", it's respondeat superior; this Elias spoke for the campaign and was never overridden. The Clinton campaign gave its imprimatur to Stein's campaign, so they now own its implications, including the most obvious face value one -- to dispute the legitimacy of the election's outcome.

As has Trump, he is disputing the legitimacy of the election's outcome.

[Stormdash]

As has Trump, he is disputing the legitimacy of the election's outcome.

Actually, he was pretty much arguing he won in spite of conditions against him, he seemed pretty clear that the outcome itself was ultimately legitimate. But it's also neither here nor there, since it was the Stein recount/Clinton endorsement that opened the door to the subject. Not a peep from Trump on the subject until some last minute clownery intended to delegitimize him.

[Noxx79]

Actually, he was pretty much arguing he won in spite of conditions against him, not that the outcome itself was not ultimately legitimate. But it's also neither here nor there, since it was the Stein recount/Clinton endorsement that opened the door to the subject. Not a peep from Trump on the subject until some last minute clownery intended to delegitimize him.

He lost the popular vote, he is disputing that. It doesn't matter why he says it. Clinton wasn't going to ask for recounts, until Stein got involved - again, Clinton team is only observing as they have a right to, Stein has the drivers seat on this - so, she and her team isn't responsible as well?

[NYC17]

Actually, he was pretty much arguing he won in spite of conditions against him, he seemed pretty clear that the outcome itself was ultimately legitimate. But it's also neither here nor there, since it was the Stein recount/Clinton endorsement that opened the door to the subject. Not a peep from Trump on the subject until some last minute clownery intended to delegitimize him.

And that peep was him making an ass out of himself...again. So the timing of it seems to be utterly fucking irrelevant.

[Stormdash]

He lost the popular vote, he is disputing that. It doesn't matter why he says it. Clinton wasn't going to ask for recounts, until Stein got involved - again, Clinton team is only observing as they have a right to, Stein has the drivers seat on this - so, she and her team isn't responsible as well?

Since the national popular vote isn't a relevant measure of the outcome of the election, it's also disingenuous to call arguing over it a challenge to the legitimacy of the election. Like arguing over whether a play in baseball was a hit or an error when it has no effect on the score either way.

[Noxx79]

Since the national popular vote isn't a relevant measure of the outcome of the election, it's also disingenuous to call arguing over it a challenge to the legitimacy of the election. Like arguing over whether a play in baseball was a hit or an error when it has no effect on the score either way.

Oh, yeah, it's not a big deal for the president to claim, with no evidence, that there were MILLIONS of illegal votes.

Sure.

[Tijuana]

He lost the popular vote, he is disputing that. It doesn't matter why he says it. Clinton wasn't going to ask for recounts, until Stein got involved - again, Clinton team is only observing as they have a right to, Stein has the drivers seat on this - so, she and her team isn't responsible as well?

Come on. Those initial multi-million dollar donations to this cause likely came from Hillary supporters. Hillary is behind this 100%.

[Stormdash]

Oh, yeah, it's not a big deal for the president to claim, with no evidence, that there were MILLIONS of illegal votes.

Sure.

Didn't say it wasn't a big deal, stop moving the goalposts. Was saying it doesn't dispute the "legitimacy of the election" since a) the popular vote is not relevant to the outcome and b) he isn't suggest the outcome itself was changed by it.

[Noxx79]

Didn't say it wasn't a big deal, stop moving the goalposts. Was saying it doesn't dispute the "legitimacy of the election" since a) the popular vote is not relevant to the outcome and b) he isn't suggest the outcome itself was changed by it.

Calling millions of votes cast illegally is not disputing the legitimacy of the election? And he is disputing that the outcome was changed. He says he would have won the popular vote. That is an outcome, and an important one, as it means that without popular vote, he doesn't have the support of even a majority of americans.

- - - Updated - - -

Come on. Those initial multi-million dollar donations to this cause likely came from Hillary supporters. Hillary is behind this 100%.

I'd like to see some proof, but I can just as well say they came from the Trump supporters to a) make Hillary look bad and B) erase any doubts of illegitimacy as they knew Trump was going to inevitably bring it up.

[Tijuana]

Calling millions of votes cast illegally is not disputing the legitimacy of the election? And he is disputing that the outcome was changed. He says he would have won the popular vote. That is an outcome, and an important one, as it means that without popular vote, he doesn't have the support of even a majority of americans.

- - - Updated - - -



I'd like to see some proof, but I can just as well say they came from the Trump supporters to a) make Hillary look bad and B) erase any doubts of illegitimacy as they knew Trump was going to inevitably bring it up.

I have less than zero proof, I must confess. I just find it odd that Stein magically raises more money for this than she did for her whole campaign. Something doesn't smell right there...

[Noxx79]

I have less than zero proof, I must confess. I just find it odd that Stein magically raises more money for this than she did for her whole campaign. Something doesn't smell right there...

It's that massive pile of BS you just shat out. (Smiley means kidding)

[Kujako]

Come on. Those initial multi-million dollar donations to this cause likely came from Hillary supporters. Hillary is behind this 100%.

Pace yourself man, it's not even lunch time and you've already claimed GOP.com is a fake opinion site, Republicans have nothing to do with Conservatives and now anything a Hillary supporter does Hillary is behind?

[Stormdash]

Calling millions of votes cast illegally is not disputing the legitimacy of the election? And he is disputing that the outcome was changed. He says he would have won the popular vote. That is an outcome, and an important one, as it means that without popular vote, he doesn't have the support of even a majority of americans.

The nationwide popular vote isn't material to the outcome of the election, ergo, saying it was this or that doesn't question the outcome of the election. Cannot, by definition, be a challenge to the outcome of the election. Anymore than disagreeing about the yardage stats in a football game challenges the score.

[Angrie]

Calling millions of votes cast illegally is not disputing the legitimacy of the election? And he is disputing that the outcome was changed. He says he would have won the popular vote. That is an outcome, and an important one, as it means that without popular vote, he doesn't have the support of even a majority of americans.

Your argument would be a good one if the majority of eligible Americans voted... they didn't.

[Tijuana]

Pace yourself man, it's not even lunch time and you've already claimed GOP.com is a fake opinion site, Republicans have nothing to do with Conservatives and now anything a Hillary supporter does Hillary is behind?

I already told you I'm done being trolled. You can quote me in every thread but I'm never going to engage your accusations.

[cubby]

I have less than zero proof, I must confess. I just find it odd that Stein magically raises more money for this than she did for her whole campaign. Something doesn't smell right there...

Because people want the recount and they don't care who is behind it - everyone knows it's for Hillary, even if Stein is leading the charge.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm seeing articles that some EC Reps are planning on going faithless on Dec 19. At first, I was blown away, because I didn't think anyone actually would do it - I figured Conneway had personally called each and every Trump EC Rep and threatened their life if they went faithless. But now I see it's actually Hillary EC Votes (if I can phrase it that way) that are planning on going faithless. They claim they want to have an alternate to Trump and make a political point and hopefully get enough votes away from Trump to force a House of Reps vote.

Holy fucking idiots batman.

It doesn't matter how many Hillary votes go faithless - in order for it to be forced to the House it has to be Trump EC votes that do it. How can they not understand this simple point?

[Matchles]

I have less than zero proof, I must confess. I just find it odd that Stein magically raises more money for this than she did for her whole campaign. Something doesn't smell right there...

Well it wasn't off the back of multi-million dollar donations. The most you can donate is $2700. It is a donation to a political party, the same rules apply. So regardless of where the donations are coming from, a whole lot of people want the recount done.

Anecdotally speaking, as someone involved in politics, who also seems to be on every Democratic Party mailing list under the sun. I can tell you I haven't received anything from the Clinton campaign asking for donations to the recount effort.

[Noxx79]

Your argument would be a good one if the majority of eligible Americans voted... they didn't.

Actually they did:

http://www.electproject.org/2016g

[Tijuana]

Because people want the recount and they don't care who is behind it - everyone knows it's for Hillary, even if Stein is leading the charge.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm seeing articles that some EC Reps are planning on going faithless on Dec 19. At first, I was blown away, because I didn't think anyone actually would do it - I figured Conneway had personally called each and every Trump EC Rep and threatened their life if they went faithless. But now I see it's actually Hillary EC Votes (if I can phrase it that way) that are planning on going faithless. They claim they want to have an alternate to Trump and make a political point and hopefully get enough votes away from Trump to force a House of Reps vote.

Holy fucking idiots batman.

It doesn't matter how many Hillary votes go faithless - in order for it to be forced to the House it has to be Trump EC votes that do it. How can they not understand this simple point?

None of this is real. It's just a political game to gin up sentiments like "Not my president", and de-legitimize Trumps term.