He did lose the popular vote. Bigly. Unfortunately most democrats live in NY and CA. But some states (the ones that mattered due to electoral college) apparently, did shift to him.
So I don't hold my breath waiting for recounts to show something else.

and well enough to win the electoral college. That's what I meant.

I was wondering about why he came to Minnesota just before the election and had that rally at the airport hanger. As a resident of Minnesota, the closeness of the vote tally was quite scary but the farm communities and the Iron Range might have influenced that.

MPR did a story on Trump voters on the Iron Range. Some talked about environmental regulations taking jobs away. Other said they believed him more honest, or that they liked the fact he was rich.

I know at least one US Steel taconite plant is currently in a 2 year and counting lay off. That's tough. Somehow Clinton didn't manage to convince them that Trump would be bad for their jobs, not good. I don't know why his own use of Chinese steel and foreign labor didn't make an impression with them.

The mind boggles.

Because he was vulgar and disgusting, they believed he "told it like it is." No he didn't. This is a failing of our educational system and media. Note, I encountered one of those "progressives" in another thread who insisted that fact checkers had conspired with the Clinton campaign to fix her ratings. So that sort of idiocy is sadly across the board. It is that more than anything else that will be the undoing of our country.

I listened to that story. I think with the Trump humpers, it's all about selective hearing. Plus Hillary's approach to the mining industry and the workers was not helpful so he easily pitted the workers against her. The myth of him as the outsider and an eff you to the establishment helped as well. The fantasy of more factory jobs is ridiculous. The reality is automated jobs. But you can't convince them of that. Also, they don't care about the environment. It's a non-issue in their eyes.

Michigan - More African-American voters than MN, and many thousands of ballots reported with no presidential vote from Detroit;
Wisconsin - 85% voter turnout and other anomalies in the county reports;
Pennsylvania - Anomalous R wins in Luzerne and similar counties.

So if the recounts go forward I'm prepared to be disappointed but I'd say the odds of waking up and finding out that Hillary is going be inaugurated are about 50-50.

In the case of MI, the margin is so narrow that result could be changed. WI is also pretty close, PA less so. She must win all three.

all bets are off and I would not rule out a revote. Don't forget that the designated perp is Russia which will make extraordinary measures acceptable, also that the Supreme Court is likely to be invoked at some point and if Kennedy sides with the recount she wins.

That's never been done in US history. I'm sorry, but this sounds like denial.

I don't know yet what they're planning for PA but if the Russians are declared to have caused the misreporting of three states' electoral votes we're in brand new territory. So stay tuned...

IF the actual machines were tampered with I almost almost positive it is an American internal actor, such as rogue CIA or NSA elements and or a group of RW multi billionaires.

The Russian hackers and trolls were more indirect, employing armies of social media sock puppets, fake news story plants, and also hacking email accounts.

Nevertheless if cheating is found the designated perp will be Russia. There have already been several announcements making that clear.

If I am incorrect I apologise.

I think they meant Russia inflenced them via the actions I listed above. Murky waters we navigate. Horrific for the country on every conceivable level.

In other words expandable to fit the circumstances.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/798647324687929344

What a mess and what vulnerability exposed.

They can't do a revote.

that it wasn't hacked somewhere else. Hackers are not going to target every single state. Its going to depend on their people and equipment access in each different situation. And its going to depend on their strategy, which is going to entail not being too obvious.

In your neighboring state of Wisconsin, everything is run by republicans, but it always goes blue in the presidential. Except this time. I don't believe the votes reported in Wisconsin are accurate. We'll see.

because of things done after the end of voting rights .

and recounts or even audits of the votes cast wont do anything to change that.

I'm fine with them counting but I really don't expect anything to come of it.

the misdeed happened BEFORE the count. A recount will legitimize the hack

So no, it won't legitimize a hack.

Many areas do not use paper ballots. I know this is true in almost all of PA.

And I'm not sure how people think these machines were hacked in PA. These are dinosaur systems with no internet capability or any sort of remote connection. There would literally had to have been a large team travelling the state prior to the election and systematically modifying thousands of individual machines... And doing it all over again afterwards to remove the evidence of their tampering after the vote. Just not remotely plausible.

I actually read an interesting article about how a hack would be possible. Check it out.

If we are going to use voting machines, they should not be capable of an internet connection. I do wish the PA machines had a paper print out / reporting capability though.

programming of voting machines at least of the scanner type with the paper back up. There is no count of the paper backup unless of challenged, of course there is hesitation because Trump was the one talking about rigged elections. I really want to see a recount. I have been a county chair where I review the printed tape, like a grocery store receipt of the paper ballots scanned. It would be very easy for a Snowden to manipulate the machines.

All the County clerks do who over see the election is install the programming from ES&S.

It should be standard operating procedure for each and every election. These events are too important to have them called on election night the way they are.

The country deserves fair and accountable elections.

If most of the voting is early voting. Really, Election Day should be your last chance to vote and not your ONLY chance to vote.

Hopefully we will see more early voting in the future.

Those votes don't count when the election is called before counting is complete.

We can wait a day or even two if necessary so results can be compiled and verified.

after the election is called. They don't just stop counting votes when networks make a call.

But the concept of Election Day seems unnecessary in this day and age.

I voted several days early. There was no line, I even had to update my information, and I was still done in half an hour. My votes printed out on a piece of paper (like a cash register receipt) where I could see it, but not touch it.

I think we need to get away from waiting for Election Day to vote, that should be the deadline so maybe 10% of voters vote on that day. It makes sense to use that day to declare the winner, but not if everyone should wait until then.

an audit finds anything more, all the better.

just recounts. And not necessarily hand recounts, which in PA would be impossible anyway.

way too obvious.

No one is permitted to question the ridiculous "We can overturn the vote!!!" campaign.

And no, audits are not necessarily part of recounts.

Yes, I'm obvious about the fact that I think it's laughable that this election can be overturned.

the anomalies that have been found.

Once again, I'll ask you, though it won't serve your purposes to answer I'm sure: what does it hurt you if the anomalies are investigated and the vote is audited?

And yes, audits are part of recounts.

Waaaaay too obvious.

Could you please link to any post where I've tried to keep people from discussing it?

I'm happy to answer, although I've done so previously (repeatedly) - it doesn't hurt me at all for the anomalies to be investigated; I believe it to be a waste of time and money, but as it's neither my time nor my money, have at it. But claiming that the election was stolen does provide an excuse for not looking at the real reasons we lost.

Since you've claimed it a couple of times now, I'm assuming you have a link that showing that recounts include audits? Thanks in advance.

seem to feel the need to argue against their discussing it. Over and over and over and over and over.

If you actually were not concerned and thought, as you say, "have at it," your behavior would be very different.

If you would like to have sources that show that recounts include audits, I suggest you look for them. They are not that hard to find. I'm not here to help you with your education.

where have I ever argued against anyone discussing it?

Nope, I'm not going to look for sources that back up something you're claiming. If you're going to make the claim, you should be able to back it up.

do whatever you like with that.

Again, when I see you in the next thread telling someone how stupid they are for wanting the anomalies in the election looked into, I will again point out that you are being way too obvious.

OK, I'll bite - why am I here?

telling me what it is.

Did they have some indication that the fix was in? Maybe there was some plausible deniability e.g. Manafort (remember him?) meets with Bannon and says I can't tell you why but you need to focus on these states stat because it's "looking rallygood for you" there

The way you steal elections is by altering the outcome in a close race just enough to swing the victory to your candidate. That very slight nudge does not show up anywhere you would notice. In fact, done right there would be no evidence to find and no chance of detection.

since they have no paper trail.