no?

And if you wanted to have multiple vendors build the hardware there should have been a spec to build them all to and true modern security and verification in all the hardware and software.

There is so much evidence pointing to a stolen election; one being the incredible discrepancies
between the polling and the supposed results on election day, another being inconsistencies with the exit polling done by more than one organization, another being the betting markets and then predictions by Moody's analytics.

"We use computer voting machines with paper audit records. The numbers have to tie out between what the machine says and what's written on the paper ballot tape. "

We've have been yelling about this since the Diebold shit storm. Somehow they can get us all info we want right off our ATM machines, but these criminals can't do the exact same thing for voting. Something is stinky in the USA.

The Change.org petition:

"Demand An Audit Of The 2016 Presidential Election"
has more than 124,000 signatures so far
http://www.change.org/p/demand-an-audit-of-the-2016-presidential-election

Gladly and patriotically.

K&R

No evidence on vote fraud. And electors aren't switching sides, and even if a few did, it would end up in the House where they'd elect Trump anyways.

No evidence of vote fraud, and if 38 electors decide to go the faithless route, Congress will simply toss their votes, take it to the House, and elect Trump.

And we don't have to say a tearful goodbye to our favorite celebrities?

(CNN) Hillary Clinton's campaign is being urged by a number of top computer scientists to call for a recount of vote totals in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, according to a source with knowledge of the request.

The computer scientists believe they have found evidence that vote totals in the three states could have been manipulated or hacked and presented their findings to top Clinton aides on a call last Thursday.

The scientists, among them J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, told the Clinton campaign they believe there is a questionable trend of Clinton performing worse in counties that relied on electronic voting machines compared to paper ballots and optical scanners, according to the source.


http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/22/politics/hillary-clinton-challenge-results/

And their analysis of Wisconsin implied she could have been "robbed" of 30k votes (just enough to win). I'm pretty sure their analysis is a best case scenario plus a few hundred percent just to be sure.

There are a lot of anomalies that many are finding suspicious. If it turns out Mr T didn't pay for quite enough fraud to cover his butt then we get a Democratic administration and that's worth fighting for.

Side A wins, Side B screams election fraud and claims the electors will flip. I remember it happening in 2000, all the way up to now.

Once the deadline has passed the articles will start talking about faithless electors.

They may not be amateurs, they might be (I have no proof either way and I doubt you do either). But if their entire case is built on "maybe" this is going no where. And "maybe something is maybe wrong" is the most I read.

was the predominant one until this article came out (which the computer scientist himself now publicly says misrepresented what he said and used bogus numbers to boot).

The EC won't come true either - faithless elector votes will simply be rejected by Congress and not counted, the election will go the House and the outcome will be the same - Trump sworn in on Jan 20th.

Once the deadlines pass to challenge results, we're going to see all the hopes and dreams that 25 or so of them will flip (impossible). But like you say, even if they did flip, the democratic electors will not be all on board to vote for someone besides Hillary. Then it'll go right to congress which will put Trump right back into power.

Why are you weighing in on every thread about this and arguing against checking into these anomalies? How does an audit hurt you?

After all, we know darn well that HRC would never tolerate even a whisper of election fraud-- we know she stands up for what's right and good for our country-- why should this be any different?? So much is at stake.

For the WI recount (I think I have the state right) due by Friday!

It's still going up!

Are the 3 states she is wanting to recount, should they go Hillary's way, would that overturn the ECV?

anyone have authoritative info?

Right now it stands at Clinton 232 to Trump 290 with Michigan still not certified for 16 votes. If MI goes for Clinton, she'd have 248 to his 290.

Wisconsin has 10 votes, Pennsylvania has 20. If those two flipped after a recount for Clinton she'd have 278 to his 260.