Calls grow for recount of U.S. vote amid concerns about Russian

>>87627
noooo

if we recount and hillary won we'll never hear the end of rigged this and I would have been the greatest president ever that

my only hope now is trump will get his comeuppance from fucking up the job so bad

If Russia did rig the US election and there was indisputable evidence, wouldn't that mean actual war? Civil or otherwise?

>>87650
If the election gets overturned, there will be war with Russia. For Russia to have rigged the election would be a perfect casus belli, so (if the election is overturned) I imagine we'll hear all about how they did. The story may even be true.

>>87650
No. Even NATO knows it stands no chance against all the tactical nukes Russia can launch in a large scale conflict. Russia's strength has never been in their navies or air force, this is why instead of fielding multiple carrier groups like the US they simply will launch hundreds of tactical nukes should WW3 finally kick off. All those carrier groups would be wiped from the Earth, there wouldn't even be scrap left.

>>87651
>a perfect casus belli

just because you have the perfect excuse doesn't mean you have to throw a punch

but I think legit evidence would throw the US into a civil war with no front lines honestly.

>>87653
hundreds of nukes destroying their enemies, as well as:
> the land itself due to radiation and fallout
>their international reputation, resulting in any number of trade embargos if not declarations of war
>their own economy as a result of the above
>their own country, after the nuclear retaliatory strikes from just about everyone, mainly the US.

>>87627
It's been a few weeks after Trump landslided Hillary into oblivion and now they're claiming the electoral college is undemocratic, the Russians hacked the polls, etc. Nevermind hundreds if not thousands of polling stations were caught scheming for the HRC

>>87680
This is what I was wondering. What if it turns out he won popular vote too? Ha.

>>87680
>Trump landslided Hillary into oblivion
A little revisionist history there. Trump won. Nixon vs. McGovern was a landslide. Johnson vs. Goldwater was a landslide. Trump's victory was not a landslide.

>>87627
Who cares if Russians rigged the elections, siding with the Russians is far more beneficial to Americans.
The bond we're making could be unbreakable.

>>87709
Ivan, you've had too much to drink, come back when you're more sober and subtle.

>>87710
TFW just a democratic socialist who was hoping a strong leader like Puttin and Trump to come to power.
Now we're making an alliance with the Russians, feels good man.

>>87711
You can just say you're a commie who enjoys slurping up the shit of whatever loud strongman comes along, it's much less weasely.

>>87709
>siding with the Russians is far more beneficial to Americans
no thanks vatnik

Allahu Akbar!
The U.S. must take Monroe Doctrine now.
The U.S. must withdraw American Forces from all Foreign Countries now.
Stop America's doing its all wars now!

I love American99% and the U.S.

China, Germany and Japan must loosen Germany's, Japan's and China's monetary policies now!
China, Germany and Japan must stimulate Germany's, Japan's and China's domestic demands now!
Japan and Germany must issue a lot of construction bond now!
Japan and Germany must reduce Germany's, Japan's and China's taxes now!
The U.S. must tighten its monetary policy now!
As a result, Dollar value will rise!
The U.S. will have trade surplus!

Japan, Germany and China are evil empires.
Islamists' true enemies are Japan, Germany, China, FRB, top1%, Wall Street, American Military Industry and DOD!
Japan is the country which has been promoting Globalization!!!
Allahu Akbar!

>>87719
Fuck the hell off, you've been posting this for several months now.

>>87711
That can't be good. Now two of the most corrupt large nations will be able to do literally whatever they want without fear of military intervention.

>>87721
>2 of the most corrupt large nations
What do Britain and Germany have to do with this?

>pollsters SUCK at determining the outcomes of elections
>'secret' trump supporter LANDSLIDE

>oh wait...

>Jill Stein gets recount
>Massive pro-Dem fraud uncovered
>Multiple votes per person, dead people voting, illegals voting and Hillary still lost
>Corrected count means Trump won the EC and the popular vote
>Voting rules tightened for future elections, ID mandatory nationwide

This is why the dems aren't calling for a recount

>>87817
look at this damn graph you stupid fuckface

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/wi/wisconsin_trump_vs_clinton-5659.html

>>87818
Oh noooo our sacred cow polling data was wrooooooong. Why did we oversample liberals oh whyyyyyyy

They deliberately targeted the more "believable" states (midwestern, pseudo-southern states) in the hopes that the whole thing would fly under the radar.
>oh yeah, the midwest. He could have swung that with ease. That makes sense!

>>87819
It's never happened before in the entire history of polling. It's suspect to say the least. If it had happened before, I'd say you're right, we're just being paranoid.

>>87819
They were wrong because folks were embarrassed to admit to pollsters that they supported trump because of all the ridiculous stuff he said and did during the campaign.
I'm willing to bet that Trump was a last minute decision for many voters.

>>87824
You're saying polls have never been wrong in the entire history of polling, right?

>>87831
I don't know the entire history of polling. They've not been off this much in the recent history of polling.

>>87627
This recount effort just makes America look indecisive and increasingly divided to superpowers and the world, This is why Obama should be discouraging this effort (among the possibility that there was a pro-dem rigging)

I'm really in disbelieve after all the shit that's been exposed about Clinton, the candidate whos officially backed by the establishment, the candidate pushing the TPP, people are still going to support her and say oh notmypresident , recount, boycott Trump.

These damn leftist blue pilled petite & upper bourgeoisie that refute any grain of truth outside their privileged comfort zone, and instead label anything a fucking conspiracy that doesn't fit into their own arbitrarily constructed self-serving bubble world (meanwhile the world is burning down around them & continue supporting these hypocritical leftists in hopes they wont get lynched when they're the ones supporting policies that allow the west to burn down by refusing to acknowledge truth they believe is fake or a conspiracy, in their own self-interest and agenda).

Fuck them.

>>87849
stop looking at everything through the goggles of the left-vs.-right political spectrum and realize that evidence of a foreign power directly interfering in the outcome of our elections should of course deserve serious investigation.

>>87818
Its almost like you painted everyone who supported a candidate as a ~deplorable~ human being, causing the ~majority~ of his supporters to be ~silent~

>>87852
Before the election dems were telling us the election was impossible to rig, and whoever believed otherwise was an ignorant baby

>>87896
There's a difference between rigging and outside meddling.
I know democrats and liberals are literally the satan to you guys but just for a moment realize there are more important matters than having different ideas.

>>87817
This isn't exactly how the last major recount in bush vs gore went

>>87653
>nukes
Jesus, I wish I could be a stupid as you

>>87898
Gore was an honest politician

>>87643
Yesssss
I'd have preferred the Hill and she lost fair and square BUT the point of a recount isn't that I think she should have won (it's over) but that we need to establish the precedent of actually going back and checking our paper ballot trail. Especially when evoting machines are so laughably insecure, and the companies that provide them are allowed to go "Oh, it's proprietary code, we can't let a 3rd party assess it, that wouldn't be secure :^)"

>>87818
>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/wi/wisconsin_trump_vs_clinton-5659.html
Did someone said Yule-Simpson's Paradox? Never mind...

>>87653
you do understand how nukes work right

>>87824
wat

>>87847
read>>87824
fucking typical millennial

>>87852
No, it shall make people throw all Soros funded machines, return to simple paper ballot scanning. Why it is so hard to automate the scanning process? Why it did not go this way up front?

>>87849
>I'm really in disbelieve after all the shit that's been exposed about Clinton, the candidate whos officially backed by the establishment, the candidate pushing the TPP, people are still going to support her and say oh notmypresident , recount, boycott Trump.
Consider expanding your horizons and learning more about the left. Your post makes you sound like the conservative version of a SJW
>it's 2016 how are we stlil doing this

>>87650
>>87651
>>87653

Russia is just a scapegoat to hide the DNC's embarrassment for Hillary's constant fuck ups.

US Secretary of State finally exposed with hard evidence as a warlord (which many knew anyway)??? "It must be the Russians after our freedom! They are trying to ruin the election because they are friends with Trump and want to destroy the country."

>>88058
Stop deflecting to Hillary; this is bigger than any election. You can love Russia, that's fine. I personally like the idea of rapprochement with Russia, in so far as our other obligations (NATO) remain in tact.

But one party explicitly encouraged external actors to subvert our electoral process as an implied favor, and subsequently concrete evidence made its presence of exactly that happening. That constitutes plenty of reason to investigate whether one of the core tenets of our democracy (an educated electorate) may have been intentionally compromised (by means of taking advantage of the architecture of the social media), if not by the letter of the law then in its spirit.

>>88066
your argument is a false equivalency.

lets postulate for arguments sake the evil russkies are that good and just pulled it all off.....its just about an offsetting penalty due to all the voter fraud the establishment/illuminati/soros/demokeks were pulling off....then there is the dead people voting and then lastly the illegal aliens voting....do you really think the russians were able to get that much done?

I don't. The thing no one wants to believe is that with both brexit then the US presidential election is whites woke up for a short time and said ENOUGH bullshit!

the stupid ass negroes , secular humanists, muslims & globalist should know their place....

>>88090
Your argument is completely irrelevant.

It's good practice to go back and check to make sure the things you count on working, are working. Maintenance.

This is maintenance for the electoral system, and needs to be instituted. It should be done after every election, no matter who wins. Why is this hard to understand?

>>88090
I don't think it'll change the outcome of the election, but in the comment I responded to, I thought you were referencing the the fake news stories from Russian sources that permeated social media.

If you are talking about Russians hacking polls, the Clinton campaign has made no suggestion of that. The reason for joining the recount are numerical anomalies in results that are worth correcting for for their own sake.

>Stein claims votes in certain counties were hacked by Russia
>the machines had no internet access

>>88097
I'm... what? Are you seriously suggesting that [insert foreign actor]'s espionage budget couldn't accommodate a plane ticket?

>>87627
>Calls grow for recount of U.S. vote amid concerns about Trump winning

So much for 'if you challenge the results you're against democracy'

>>88104

There's an important difference between "it's rigged, but I'll accept it if I win", before the election has taken place and without any evidence, and "after checking the results, it looks like there were some eccentricities in the numbers. We better manually count ballots to check if glitches affected outcomes."

This issue is so exemplary of the false equivalence consistently drawn between Hillary and Trump. It is not the same thing, not in intention nor in practice. Trump eggs his supporters on to refuse to accept democracy. Hillary concedes the election and asks for a recount when her supporters raise money to investigate what's probably a glitch in voting machines.

>>88100
But there's not a chance that a large number of the 11 million illegals voted for Clinton though...

>>88097
>>88100

You don't need to hack them on election day, you need to alter the code either at the factory or in storage to register the votes differently. Alternatively, you adjust the way the final count is tallied when all the machines are gathered for the count. None of this requires internet access.

This is also of course highly unlikely, because it requires too much work to be worth it (due to the decentralized nature you'd have to have agents on the ground in multiple states to sway an election) when you can just spread news stories about how everything is rigged and Clinton will literally start WWIII and get the same result: decreased confidence in the electoral system and fewer Clinton voters.

>>88288

You need to be registered to vote, which requires an SSN, something that illegals don't have. Sure you can try and use someone else's ID to vote, but that is also easy as shit to detect. In fact we have more false positives (people voting by mail and then dying, people who have the same name as a dead guy, etc) than real in-person voter fraud because those systems WILL catch any suspicious activity.

Again this is highly unlikely because it requires an absurd amount of illegal work when you have literally millions of untapped Democratic voters you could be getting legally (compare 2008 and 2012's turnout to 2016, that's a lot of totally legal votes that didn't turn out).

>>88288
I'm happy to do a recount anywhere you want fam. The more the merrier. I think we should establish the precedent of doing it everywhere, indefinitely.

>>88115
>spot the lefty

>>87852
Tell that to /pol/

>>88378
>>Illegals don't steal SSNs
lol you're a funny guy.

>>88404

Alright, you'd need millions of SSNs for this whole "millions of illegals voting" thing. Assuming they're all acting independently, that means all of them have the wherewithal to steal an SSN without being detected. Assuming they're acting in a coordinated fashion, you'd need to a) coordinate millions of illegals (not a small task) and b) steal millions of SSNs undetected. If we have that big of a security hole in the SSN procedure, illegals voting is the least of our problems.

>>87627
It's true, many electronic voting machines are vulnerable. However, they're not vulnerable from fucking Russia. You have to show up at the machine with a flash drive. And a recount doesn't do shit. It just counts the hacked number again if there are no paper ballots.

>>87824
You don't know what you're talking about. The margin of error was basically the same as it was 12 years ago. The last two elections it was a little closer than that. This one was a little less close. It's fucking normal.

>>88408
You do not need a SSN to vote if you have a driver's license.

>>88417
Thank you.
What they need to do (assuming nothing dodgy happens during the recount ie they don't lie), is actually inspect the software on the machines OR do a literal revote on all the machines and see if they get the same numbers.

>>87818
Looks a lot like this one:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

and how did that work out?

>>88420

>driver's license.

Which is for voting, not voting registration. In-person ID is irrelevant if you aren't registered, and registration checks if you're a US citizen (hence SSN). Do you think you can just waltz in and say "yes I am citizen" and they just let you vote? To pull that off, you need to know the name and address of the voter plus have a legit ID (and they have ID scanners now in some poling places, was a pretty neat new feature when I voted this year). This whole in-person fake voter strategy falls apart the moment you receive two votes from one person.

>but what if the other guy doesn't vote?

Well how are you going to know they aren't going to vote? You'd need a pretty sure bet they aren't going to vote, which would require access to voter records (and even that isn't 100%). Oh did I mention you need to organize millions of people to pull off sufficient numbers to actually sway the election, of which all of them need to be sworn to absolute secrecy? This means you also need to repeat the fake ID process millions of times without fault across 50 different states. And if your operation is that sophisticated, you could probably find a way better legal way to increase your voter turnout instead of taking guesses at who isn't going to vote, producing fake IDs for those people, and then hope they don't check their own record to see they voted in an election they didn't vote in (several million times over). Oh and if your operation is that sophisticated to pull it off anyway, HOW DID YOU LOSE?

>>88440
http://projectveritas.com/2016/10/11/hidden-camera-nyc-democratic-election-commissioner-they-bus-people-around-to-vote/

>>88468
http://www.snopes.com/2016/10/18/project-veritas-election-videos/

>Project Veritas' October 2016 election-related sting videos (embedded above) reveal tidbits of selectively and (likely deceptively edited) footage
absent of any context in which to evaluate them. Unless his organization releases the footage in full, undertaking a fair assessment of their veracity is all but impossible.

related:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/11/29/world/europe/ap-eu-germany-cyberattacks.html

>BERLIN — Germany's foreign intelligence chief is warning of cyberattacks aimed at political destabilization as the country prepares for an election next year, and says evidence suggests Russian involvement in hacking during the U.S. campaign.

>Bruno Kahl, who leads the Federal Intelligence Service, told Tuesday's edition of the daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung that his agency knows of "cyberattacks that have no other point than causing political insecurity." He said that "Europe is in the focus of this attempted disruption, and Germany in particular."

>U.S. authorities have concluded Russia was responsible for hacking Democratic National Committee emails, which Russia denies. Kahl said he has "indications it comes from those quarters."

>He said it's technically difficult to assign blame to any "state actor" — but that "some things speak for it being at least tolerated or wished for on the part of the state."

>"The perpetrators have an interest in delegitimizing the democratic process as such — whomever that later helps," Kahl was quoted as saying. "I have the impression that the outcome of the American election isn't causing mourning in Russia so far."

>Traces left on the internet suggest that those responsible wanted to demonstrate what they can do, "and not just in the U.S. elections," he said.

>Germany's election is expected next September, and votes in the Netherlands and France are scheduled earlier in the year
...
>"It is right to address this kind of thing openly," he said. "A kind of pressure is being exerted on public discourse and democracy that is not acceptable."

>His comments follow a large internet outage that affected almost a million customers of German telecoms giant Deutsche Telekom starting Sunday.
...

>>88472
>snopes
>didn't get caught numerous times stretching the truth or outright lying to support Clinton's Campaign

>(likely deceptively edited)
Like this, for example. No proof, no evidence, no actual research or study, just a smugly dismissive sentence. Presented as an "objective" judgement.

Snopes is the biggest perpetrator of "poisoning the well" and gullible idiots flock to it for truth like Israelite's to the manna machine.

>>88473
>and says evidence suggests Russian involvement in hacking during the U.S. campaign.
I'd sure love to see what this evidence is beyond a "hunch" because so far that's the only "evidence" that's ever been shared by anyone.

The times changing not in your favor is not evidence of a conspiracy against you.

>>88486
>I'd sure love to see what this evidence is beyond a "hunch" because so far that's the only "evidence" that's ever been shared by anyone.

>The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07/joint-statement-department-homeland-security-and-office-director-national

>>88550
literally no definitive proof

>>88468

Oh sweet jesus your argument is the fucking bus conspiracy. Fucking hell I'm tired of arguing why the bus conspiracy is fucking retarded. Just read my post that you quoted for part of the reasons the bus conspiracy requires more work (and risk) than it's worth.

The short version of my argument on that video: he's accusing OTHERS of doing this, not admitting guilt on his own part. As such, this is not evidence of wrongdoing unless he can provide evidence that his series of theoretical scenarios are taking place. In addition, bus services to the polls exist, but for legal voters who lack transportation (typically older voters or voters without drivers licenses) so this entire conspiracy exists to de-legitimize those services and promote something that the poll watching vigilantes can actually look for (since most fraud is impossible for the "stand outside the polls" unofficial watcher to detect). Even further, a bus conspiracy in NYC is completely bullshit because the city is 90% democratic voters, the Democrats could do literally nothing and still win the entire state based on normal NYC votes alone. You'd be padding the vote illegally for literally zero gain and absurd risk.

>>88486

Regardless of who is fact checking them, Project Veritas has a pattern of editing videos to make things worse than they really are, stretching what was said or the truth to well past the breaking point. Whenever the full video is released or other angles are revealed it always turns out they were lying about some aspect of their video to twist statements to maximize damage.

>>87643
I'd rather deal with that then with his presidency.

>>88550
>Consistent with the methods
WHAT FUCKING METHODS?!
>and motivations
I think if you draw up a list of "Who would want to fuck with the DNC/current US presidential election", you'll quickly find that there are a heap of names besides Russia, like literally anyone within the government who got shafted or fucked over recently, and most fucking countries.

It says nothing and proves nothing.

>>88607
The DoHS is the one party that would have the information and resources to generate that conclusion. If you have a conflicting source, you should produce it.
Unless you're a "can't know nuthin" conservative.

>>88550
That's not evidence. Arguments to authority will not suffice.

Repeat this until you understand it:
>The times changing not in your favor is not evidence of a conspiracy against you.
>The times changing not in your favor is not evidence of a conspiracy against you.
>The times changing not in your favor is not evidence of a conspiracy against you.
>The times changing not in your favor is not evidence of a conspiracy against you.
>The times changing not in your favor is not evidence of a conspiracy against you.

>>88612
>The DoHS is the one party that would have the information and resources to generate that conclusion. If you have a conflicting source, you should produce it.
Burden of proof is on them to produce the evidence that lead them to this conclusion. They don't get a pass because "muh government".

>Unless you're a "can't know nuthin" conservative.
Depends, are you a "the government is always right so always listen and do what it says" liberal?

Remember when skepticism of the government and questioning authority was a virtue? No?
Then you must have gone to public school.

>>88637

>The times changing not in your favor is not evidence of a conspiracy against you.

Nice deflection. How does this change the fact that the US government made public that conclusive evidence has been found that Russian state resources were behind the hacking into HRC's private email servers?

>Burden of proof is on them to produce the evidence that lead them to this conclusion.

It's almost like the Department of Homeland Security might not be at liberty to indulge the details.

>Remember when skepticism of the government and questioning authority was a virtue? No?

Questioning is the process of arriving at evidence. The fact that something can be questioned by itself says nothing. Certainly everyone and everything can be questioned; that doesn't indicate that a layperson's knowledge and understanding is as reliable as anyone's.
Expert opinion is evidence. Primary sources are evidence. If you have contrary evidence beyond reasonable doubt, for distrusting the evidence, then present it.

>>88644
>That the US government made public that conclusive evidence has been found that Russian state resources were behind the hacking into HRC's private email servers?
Seriously, are you fucking disabled? The evidence you're referring to IS A STATEMENT WITH NO FURTHER DETAILS TO BACK UP THE STATEMENT.
If the government said "Oranges are grown on Mars", would you accept it as truth? Because that's literally what's happening now, we're talking about a statement blindly saying that something is fact with nothing to back it up.
>DoHS can't release details
Not asking for a breakdown on a packet by packet level, just ANYTHING more tangible than "the Russian's did it because we say they did."

>>88648
Cool it with the caps. The fact that the Russians are behind the hacks is completely consistent with all recent historic precedent, not to mention Trump's public friendship and business interests in Russia, and also when Trump asked the Russians to intervene on his behalf by hacking Hillary's emails.
The DHS's public statement alone is strong evidence, and there's no reason to suggest a different culprit.
It seems much of the pro-Trump crowd will refuse to concede even basic facts, to what end?

>>87680
In what world was it a landslide? If Hillary had gotten 100,000 votes in total among 3 states, she would have won by the same margin. She also won the popular vote by 2 million and it keeps going up. THAT is a landslide in the popular vote.

Nice attempt at revisionism, /pol/tard.

>>88550
so the russians hacked dnc emails.... but theyre still dnc emails so the content on it is still relevant. it doesnt matter where the evidence of corruption comes from once you have it ignoring it is stupid.

>>88658
You're right; the electorate apparently felt that was fair game and perhaps it was hillary that is to blame for using a private server. And nothing Trump did was disqualifying. Interesting story though, and to me a bit worrying.

>>88649
I'll cool it with the caps if you stop saying that a vague announcement of "it was the Russian's" is omnipotent proof. Somewhere above is one of my posts explaining that, yes, i can 100% believe that it could have been Russia, because that's within the realm of possibility, there are tangible explanations as to why they would do something like that. All I'm asking here is more proof, fucking anything, that they were involved.

>>88650
>looses the entire rust belt
>it wasn't a landslide, we didn't loose california!!!11!

i can't wait to see the map in 2020 when every state gets rigid voter ID laws

>>88660
Anyone pedaling "Russian involvement" with the us election is a dnc shill or msm headline reader at best. It's fake news don't waste your time.

>>88700
>
You're right, the US has no reason to take infosec seriously.

>Good goyim

>>87983
>I'd have preferred the Hill
Kill yourself.

>>87852
stop looking at everything through the goggles of 'muh hacks' for a second and realize that no one forced the democrats to be huge pieces of corrupt shit, and that you should be thanking whoever hacked them for exposing that

>>88711
Not saying the data dump was bad, but having vulnerable infrastructure cannot be seen as a good thing. These are two separate things.

>>88705
They took it so seriously that it was ruled out as a possibility only days after the election. Sorry, hilldawg.

>>88721
>it was ruled out as a possibility only days after the election.
[citation needed]