Recount consequences

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Dagless, Nov 28, 2016.

  1. Dagless macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    #1
    Quick disclaimer: non-American centrist floating-voter interested in what might happen with full republican government but disgusted by his behaviour. This is a genuine curiosity cuz I know nothing of the US legal system

    Realistically, and hypothetically, what would happen if it turned out Hillary won after a vote investigation? Would Trump still become president? What's the law behind it?

    I bring this up because there's a lot of bluster from him on social media right now that goes against what he said recently. "Millions committed voter fraud" but doesn't want to look into it, unlike previous statements to the contrary. And I wonder is he doing this because there might be something illegal going on, and if so what are the consequences? If fraud has been committed would the republican party still remain in power but with Pence as leader?
     
  2. satcomer macrumors 603

    satcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Finger Lakes Region
    #2
    The recount is just a waste of money! Besides it will problem go straight to the Supreme Court!
     
  3. steve23094 macrumors 68000

    steve23094

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    #3
    Quick disclaimer: You're not even close to being centrist, you're far on the liberal left. Source: Every post you make (including this passive aggressive one taking a pot shot at Trump whilst trying to disguise it as a question).

    Electoral fraud happens in a lot of countries, but it's rarely on a scale that affects the outcome. That's probably what will happen, there is an investigation, some fraud occurred but not enough to swing things, result stands.
     
  4. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #4
    If they manage to overcome 10,000+ votes in a recount, we'll know there was fraud. Perpetrated by the Democrats in order to steal the election.
     
  5. mudslag macrumors regular

    mudslag

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #5


    Fraud can happen on either side, to ignore that is to truly be living in ignorance. But I got a feeling you're ok with that.
     
  6. decafjava macrumors 68020

    decafjava

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Location:
    Geneva
    #6
    Probably right about the bold, wrong so wrong about the small letters. The OP is only "leftist" in the US - he's not American as he said.
     
  7. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #7
    There is no way somebody can fraudulently obtain a 10,000 vote margin in an American election (70,000 in the case of PA), especially when U.S. authorities, numerous states, and the president himself have confidence in the results.

    No recount has ever overcome 10,000 (or more) votes. If the recount manages to do that, I'd be more suspicious of it than the original count.
     
  8. Anonymous Freak macrumors 601

    Anonymous Freak

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Location:
    Cascadia
    #8
    The results of "a recount," and the legal processes behind it, vary from state to state. In most states, if a recount is warranted (either an automatic one due to the results being within some small percent; or a recount requested by a candidate,) then that state's official results are put on hold until the recount is complete.

    Because the US uses the Electoral College to determine president, and the Electoral College doesn't officially meet to vote until mid December, and their result doesn't even get officially accepted by Congress until early January, a recount can take up until early January and still have the ability to impact the election. (See Florida in 2000.)

    It would take the switch in the result of at least three of the "tossup, barely went for Trump" states for it to impact the election, though. (At minimum Pennsylvania and Michigan PLUS either Wisconsin or the "district-only Elector" from Nebraska's 2nd district or Maine's 2nd district*)

    It is extremely doubtful that recounts in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin will all switch their electoral votes to Clinton. Recounts very rarely actually change the results.

    In 2000, when Florida was extremely close, and a flip of Florida would have changed the electoral college result, the recount went on for weeks before a legal challenge stopped it. However, independent reviews after the election by multiple news agencies found that while George W. Bush's margin of victory in Florida would have decreased, even the "most generous" recount method, one that would have benefited Al Gore the most, still would not have been enough to have changed the result in Gore's favor.

    tldr; to answer your original question, if the recounts in the three states were to swap their electoral college votes, and that were to grant Hillary Clinton a majority in the electoral college, then Hillary Clinton would become the president-elect, and be sworn in on January 20; with her vice-presidential running mate Tim Kaine becoming vice president.

    * In nearly every state, the candidate that gains the most votes statewide wins all of that state's Electors. Maine and Nebraska use a "split vote" method, where the candidate with the most votes statewide wins two of that state's electors, while the results within each congressional district determine one elector each. To date, Maine this year and Nebraska 2008 are the only times either state has had a split vote.
     
  9. mudslag macrumors regular

    mudslag

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #9


    Im not saying there is, I highly doubt that anything will turn up. Just don't be ignorant enough to think that only one side is capable of fraud. What ever one side can do, the other can as well, which means what ever the fraud is capable of happening, neither side is magically immune from being able to pull it off.
     
  10. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #10
    Assuming Congress does not object to the EC votes from any state, which they can do (and have done so in the past). This election has been so crazy I wouldn't discount that possibility entirely.
     
  11. Dagless thread starter macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    #11
    Big thanks those helping with this topic. I had no idea it was a state by state thing, I figured it would be a country-wide event but I guess not!
    Like I said it's entirely theoretical on the basis of "what if Russia did do XYZ" and the numbers were extreme enough to call into doubt who won the election. I mean, did Hillary officially drop out of the race when she lost? How does it work?

    Thank you. I went into this knowing there would be some ad hominem. As I said in my (unfortunately necessary) disclaimer I've voted for left and right wing parties in my home country but never the extremes of each. I'm not registered with any party. Hopefully that'll be the end of it.
     
  12. Plutonius, Nov 28, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2016

    Plutonius macrumors 603

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    #12
    I wouldn't call it a waste. Jill Stein thought of a great way to make money for the green party.

    I love the disclaimer on the website that they would only guarantee that they would try to get a recall.
    --- Post Merged, Nov 28, 2016 ---
    Trump will not become president until January 20th so nothing is final till then.

    Hillary conceded the race on election night (she didn't drop out). This meant that she would not contest the election results.

    This is ironic since Hillary now supports the recount sponsored by Jill Stein (Hillary would look even worse if she sponsored the recall seeing that she conceded). Also why is the recount only of states Hillary lost and not the ones she barely won :).
     
  13. rjohnstone macrumors 68040

    rjohnstone

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Location:
    PHX, AZ.
    #13
    Recount laws vary by state. There is no federal law covering how states manage their recount process.
    The only thing feds require all states to do is certify their result by December 15th.
    A recount in Pennsylvania is all but impossible to complete before the federal deadline to certify state election results.
    They choose 3 verified voters from each county to submit notarized affidavits that have to be hand delivered to their county clerks office.
    The deadline to request a recount in Penn. is today.
    Trump has a 70,000+ lead over Clinton in Pennsylvania's certified results. There's no way Penn will be reversed and given to Clinton.

    They would have to prove massive hacking or fraud to even come close to flipping it.
     
  14. Plutonius macrumors 603

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    #14
    I doubt the results would be overturned in any of the states that are doing recounts.

    This article shows why the democrats might be pushing recounts. They surmise that they are asking for a recount knowing it would not be done in time. This would prevent Trump from getting the 270 votes he needs and will send it to congress.
     
  15. rjohnstone macrumors 68040

    rjohnstone

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Location:
    PHX, AZ.
    #15
    That's not entirely true.
    If any of those states has already submitted their certified results and the recount isn't completed in time, the certified results will stand.
    Pennsylvania has already certified their results.
    Michigan is certifying their results today.
    I can't find info on Wisconsin yet.
     
  16. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #16
  17. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    #17
    If the democrats cheated - they sucked at it. You could easily say that because Trump one, it's more likely that he cheated - especially since he projected the possibility of voter fraud to begin with.

    And even though this is one case, there could be more. So you should stop pointing fingers at WHO but rather whether or not it happened and what affect, if any it had...on OUR election.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-voting-twice-in-iowa/?utm_term=.e764b67ee1c6
     
  18. rjohnstone macrumors 68040

    rjohnstone

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Location:
    PHX, AZ.
    #18
  19. Huntn, Nov 28, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2016

    Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #19
    So we are all in a position of having to choose and trust what we want to believe. This illustrates how the importance of truth is in how we conduct ourselves as a society or democracy dies, corruption wins.
     
  20. rjohnstone macrumors 68040

    rjohnstone

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Location:
    PHX, AZ.
    #20
    I've been sticking to official state run sites for actual numbers.
    I don't believe any numbers reported by news sites if they aren't listed as "official" by the state's official web site.
     
  21. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #21
    The 'padding' started with the Palmer Report a partisan hack.

     
  22. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #22
    I was unhappy hearing that not all precincts with electronic voting, maintained a paper trail. If you (in general) want institutional vote fraud, along with a good programmer this is the way to achieve that. Without the ability to audit/cross check reults, Democracy could be in deep ****.
     
  23. webbuzz macrumors 65816

    webbuzz

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    #23
    During the press conference one of the Commissioners mentioned fraud, or machine hacking, would be difficult and would require many people.

    A member on another forum that I belong to is an elections official and he said the same. Their machines are programmed via memory card, the memory cards are tested after loaded with software, and the machines are tested after programming.
     
  24. Raid macrumors 68020

    Raid

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Toronto
    #24
    While factually correct (that no recount has over come 10,000 or more votes), I guess you don't remember the whole issue about Florida not going through a complete recount in 2000 that included the over-vote write in issue.

    BTW not having ever voted in a US election (being Canadian) just how confusing are your ballots? In Canada it's a ' make your X' kind of thing
    (Pour exemple bilingue):
    [​IMG]
    Easy peasy.
    I know that there are bills and such on some ballots but the complications should be about who to vote in, not how to vote.
     
  25. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #25
    If you're going to complain about passive aggression, don't use it in your own statements. It's better to be direct than to jam in fine print, and most people will appreciate it. It may not seem like that sometimes, but it's usually an issue of over-generalization, which is (ironically) passive aggressive behavior.
     

Share This Page