How the hell do you "recount" electronic ballots?

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: SignalMal

2 states should not get to decide who is president.
And that is what would happen with a popular vote.

There is a popular vote in each state.
And each state has a % of electoral votes proportionate to their state.

That is not hard to understand.

You can see the truth. Since California cannot seize control of the USA, now they are talking about making their own nation.

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: dashen

I would argue that any election not decided purely by who got the most votes in total, is probably a stolen election, so in America, that would seem to be the only type of election you have.

Without the electoral college, Democrats would've held the presidency for the last 23 years plus the next 4.

23 years?---Since the Clinton 1993 'Motor Voter' Act...allowing Illegals to vote with a Driver's License.
What an amazing coincidence.

The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA), popularly known as The Motor Voter Act, is a legislation that required state governments to allow registration when a qualifying voter applied for or renewed their drivers license or applied for social services. This legislation forced state governments to make the voter registration process easier by providing uniform registration services through drivers’ license registration centers, disability centers, schools, libraries, and mail-in registration.

definitions.uslegal.com...

a reply to: JimNasium

Moin, as we say in Northern Germany

Wow, I just remembered that my first car was indeed a VW, never have driven one since then. Nowadays, its Japans finest - which is at the shop right now.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Bone75

Wow! You do not have much faith in the Republican Party if that is genuinely what you think!

Does my signature sound like Republican ideology to you?

a reply to: dashen

In order to show that there was fraud in an election, one has to start with the machines. If the machines are working as they should, with no fraud involved, then it leads to the question what are they hoping to find?

A random sampling of the machines a percentage of such and the votes, done at random would show one way or the other as to if there is or is not fraud that happened. If there is an irrgularity, then go for a more exacting detail and look at all of the ballots.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: SignalMal

2 states should not get to decide who is president.
And that is what would happen with a popular vote.

They don't. At all. Please quit perpetuating this lie.

a reply to: Bone75

What is it about what I said, that makes you think I was suggesting you were Republican?

I know in our area local news they ran a story about when people voted full Republican ticket it changed their vote for the Presidency to Hillary Clinton. Maybe that's what they're checking on.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

23 years?---Since the Clinton 1993 'Motor Voter' Act...allowing Illegals to vote with a Driver's License.
What an amazing coincidence.

Read your source again. Illegal immigrants aren't qualified voters. Your understanding of the Motor Voter Act is incorrect.

a reply to: TamtammyMacx

That was happening in multiple areas in PA.
Officials confirmed that some machines were flipping votes TO Clinton.
I never heard of any flipping to Trump.
The FBI was called in at least one area.
Some machines were removed from service or recalibrated.

I don't think the Clinton campaign really wants a recount, or this kind of thing will come up.
The machine flipping, as well as illegals voting, likely tipped the popular vote in her favor.
Trump won in SPITE OF fraud (from Dems), not because of it.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Here is the question is there or is there not fraud?

The only way to see if such, would be an independent look at the votes, and the machines, though it would shorten the process if they did a percentage, say 10% of the machines and votes, versus the voters rolls. If there is fraud, the random choosing of machines would show such. The randomness of the nature, where only those doing the audit knowing which machines, would pretty much prevent them from being put back to the original programming, as there would be no real way of knowing what machines would be looked at.

If there are any irregularities, then it would move on to stage 2, being a very close look at all of the machines and ballots, and if necessary having people come in, and recast their ballots, though via paper and counted there on the spot.

It's now Official: TRUMP WINS MICHIGAN by over 10,000 votes
Nationwide total EV: 306 (Trump) to 232 (Clinton)

It’s Official: Trump Wins Michigan In Closest Race State Has Ever Recorded

dailycaller.com...

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Answer...

Look at all votes, all machines, in all places covered by the recount, no exceptions, no place to hide fraud. If all are tampered with or wiped, then the election results in those locations are void, and those regions will have to re-ballot until a valid result is obtained, which passes and is ratified after scrutiny by, independent observers.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Bone75

What is it about what I said, that makes you think I was suggesting you were Republican?

Probably the "admission and a half" part.

originally posted by: dashen
Happy Turkey Day fellow heathens.

My question is how do you "recount" electronic ballots?

Liberals recount electronic ballots by the copy command to create several duplicate votes.

C to copy
V to paste
C to copy
V to paste
C to copy
V to paste etc...

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: dashen

You can't.

They can't recount PA.
The machine votes can not be recounted.
The people making a fuss know this.
Since a recount is not possible, if they get approval for some kind of court order, it will end up requiring a re-vote.
That is what want, because they know a recount is not possible.

If they do get a re-vote in those states, I think the amount of back-peddling Trump has done since winning the election is going to come back to bite him in the ass.

a reply to: dashen

Get rid of the electoral votes and go popular vote. Recounting the popular vote means nothing so long as electoral votes in place. There are only a few states the have laws making the electoral follow the popular.

How to recount electronic votes? I'm not entirely sure, but I thought it has something to do with checking image scans against digital records? Not all machines do this, though, so I'm still not certain.

a reply to: SignalMal
The EC loyalists will keep arguing in circles over this. Even though their reasoning does not make sense. "Ermahgerd, they'll influence the outcomes somehow in a popular vote and make mine worthless!" Yeah right, like Texas or any other red state doesn't sway anyone else still waiting to vote in standard elections now? That brat logic = full of holes.

I know it's hard to consider changing the status quo in the US, but do try. We can ensure that "influencing" wouldn't happen even in an EC vote if we had and enforced the living hell out of what I'd dub a No Hints law for tallies until after the last polls in the last time zone close. Meaning no prelim counts starting at 8pm eastern, nothing until after the last polls in Alaska close.
This would also logically entail mandating stumping in multiple areas of every state instead of select ones to ensure even exposure for the populace to judge from (wow, candidates would actually have to prove their worth and pound demographic pavement! Who'da thunk it?!)

I'd rather every vote completely count through and through on it's own, even if it means R wins by a landslide, or multiple Presidents of them. We are NOT the bastion of total freedom until THAT kind of vote legitimacy happens. You do not have as much freedom as you claim. Supporting stifling it further is antithetical to American ethics everyone wails about, at best (T&Cs decorum prevent me from says what it is at worst)

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: dashen

You can't.

They can't recount PA.
The machine votes can not be recounted.
The people making a fuss know this.
Since a recount is not possible, if they get approval for some kind of court order, it will end up requiring a re-vote.
That is what want, because they know a recount is not possible.

If they do get a re-vote in those states, I think the amount of back-peddling Trump has done since winning the election is going to come back to bite him in the ass.

And all the liberal caterwauling and spite won't matter at all?

a reply to: Bone75

Trump has not back peddled on anything.
The MSM just distorted his message to the point that some people did not understand what he was saying.
Those who pay attention know that he is right on track.

I think the riots are more likely to sway more people to get out and vote for Trump.
The left has shown what we are up against.

But unless they prove wide-spread fraud, which they won't, I doubt there would be a re-vote.