In most states, you just fill out some paperwork and post a bond for the cost. I don't think they even have the option of refusing.

The problem being that there's no point in doing that if you don't think the outcome's going to change. Then the only reason to do it is to continue to fight the last battle and create division. Perhaps if HRC had future nationwide electoral ambitions it would make sense, but she'd be the one that would have to at least nominally authorize the requests, and it's hard to pose as a healer and divider at the same time.

This motivation was one of the problems with Gore's recount in 2000. He picked only jurisdictions where he thought he could pick up votes. That's fine, state by state, but inside a state for state-level positions it's a bit iffy. (And, no, there is no state-level election for president. States elect state representatives called electors.)

Note that in some states there's an automatic recount if the margin of victory is sufficiently thin.


There's some research--since it's an important topic--into the kinds of people that make mistakes in voting, the kinds of mistakes made in counting ballots, and their distribution. Most of it is damning for the (D) side of things, but not all. Lets just say that the pattern of voting problems we find are a combination of relying on past to predict the future, budget problems, and predictable trends from the research.

In Florida because their state law called for an automatic recount when the margin was as close as it was. The popular vote isn't relevant as to why there was a recount.

I hope there is an investigation into voter machine issues in the US and definitely some cleaning up to prevent another mess but I'm not hopeful any of that would get done much less a contested election.

Do you realize that only the candidate can demand a recount and that a separate demand must be made in each state where the recount is demanded? I guarantee that Hillary Clinton and her campaign know the rules for recounts, even if DUers don't.

So, the person you need to talk to is Hillary Clinton. She'd be the one to demand a recount and pay for the cost of it. Friday's the deadline in Wisconsin, by the way. So, you'd better get on the horn to her soon.

and we can demand an audit of the count + injunction for EC until done https://twitter.com/leahmcelrath/status/801135415088578560

but the only people with standing to actually request and get one would be one of the candidates on the ballot.

As for demanding an injunction on the EC? Yeah, not gonna happen.

only a candidate can do that


2. In 2000, there was only one state recounted that I'm aware of - Florida

3. Extrapolating Gore's popular vote out to reach Clinton's isn't a valid method for determining whether or not there should be a recount. Most of her votes now are coming from a state she already won (CA), so these additional votes would have no impact on the electoral vote count.