Most probably not.
Only one thing I've seen that I would like an explanation for. One county in Wisconsin had a number of precincts with more votes for President than voters. Now corrected and all the extras were for Trump (in part why Wisconsin tightened by a few thousand). And a recount will probably not expose anyway, you probably would need a forensic audit.
I think there are enough legitimate things to work on like voter suppression (writ large, like lack of of polling places, not just direct disenfranchisement, indirect Russian meddling, and the horrific political media). But none of those can change this result.
Not to say that the lack of standards and audits in our election process is in fact criminal.
Part of 2 worded poorly. Meant if there had been mischief, not clear that a mere recount would find it.
Wishful thinking. Turnout for the D candidate dropped by 15% across all the states of the upper midwest, regardless of whether they were close or not. WI, MI and MN all dropped by the same amount as ND, SD, IN, IA, OH, WV, MT, WY, and MO. PA and FL were different in that D turnout didn't drop, but R turnout increased to wipe out the D margin.
Electronic voting machines are still security nightmares though, and paper ballots by mail still rock.
I think it's very unlikely to change the election outcome, but it's worth doing anyway. First, because those states really were extremely close and a long shot is still a shot; second, because we'll never know for sure that the election want bogus if we don't at least sample the paper trail to see if things appear normal; and third, because it'll probably drive Trump insane, and IMHO it's worth every penny for that alone.
All of that said, I would like to see at least an explanation for the precincts I mention in 2. Probably some local screw up, but it is hard to come up with a completely innocent explanation for 1000 excess votes for one candidate in a smallish jurisdiction. And if its just a stupid innocent foobar would be nice to just know its nature (this one was clear because it bumped the total prez over the total vote,, is it something that would have been caught if it had not?)
Once again, almost certainly not going to swing the whole thing, but a chance Michigan and Wisconsin switch, as these types of errors in Wisconsin reduced HRC by 191 and DT by 4,969, chopping nearly 20% off his lead. And Michigan is closer. But not going to get over the hump in Pennsylvania.
And these small things have mattered as in 2000. A reminder from that election in Florida: Almost everything was counted and it was clearly going to be very, very close. Suddenly one mid-Florida county went up 8,000 votes ( I witnessed this on TV). This was when GWB's cousin at Fox news called it for Florida and other networks followed. The "error" was quickly reversed and the rest you all know.
And zero doubt in my mind that if the 2000 counts had been reversed that GWB would still have won.
And I think that asymmetry of willingness to bend and lie is tearing at people like us. They have McRory we have self-admonitions.
And it was a theme of this whole fucking campaign not just the voting and counting. And probably of the next 4 years. (Why would it differ from the last 20.)
And my hatred and antipathy towards the political media is scaring even me right now.
2: What are you thinking of when you say "indirect Russian meddling," JP?
Fake news. Wikileaks. Probing hacks of election systems. Moslty the former.
Yes. And all of it with a massive assist from our feckless, awful political press.
I don't disagree with JP at all.
There is the issue, though, of folks who let themselves be swayed by this shit. And guess how many of the 4 million people who were going to get a raise next week because of the change in the overtime rules, and now are not, because it's been put on hold and Trump's DOL will reverse on it, voted for Trump? More than enough to change the result, I bet.
The other day someone quoted someone on the 'elect a businessman who'll straighten everything out' motivation. You can't blame the Democrats, or Clinton individually, or even the mainstream media if anyone actually thinks this phrase could ever conceivably apply to Donald Trump.
(I've heard an actual adult human being suggest that Obama can't intervene on the side of DAPL protesters lest he or his family be murdered by interests aligned with the energy industry. Against ignorance like this the Gods themselves struggle in vain.)
16.2 Someone should do a study and find out how much money people at various income levels lost because of that and then advertise the hell out of it for the mid-terms and beyond.
18: unfortunately, that would require a viable opposition party.
I share JPs fiery rage at the media. And short of my recent NYTimes cancellation with a long letter of explanation, there's absolutely nothing I can do about the fact that our media threw the election and doesn't really care.
A recount would confirm the hacking and fudging was successful.
The other day someone quoted someone on the 'elect a businessman who'll straighten everything out' motivation. You can't blame the Democrats, or Clinton individually, or even the mainstream media if anyone actually thinks this phrase could ever conceivably apply to Donald Trump.
Along these lines, I was thinking darkly about how, IMO, the business class sandbagged their 'recovery' in ways that would impact hiring and wages, citing uncertainty. "Oh, Wall Street hates uncertainty!" lamented everybody. "Interest rates could go up an eight of a point at any one of these predictably schedule quarterly announcements! Wait, Trump is going to bring back coal? LEZZDOIT."
I just signed up to observe if we have a recount here in Michigan--not because I expect it will make any difference in the results, but because we should be looking at paper ballots regularly anyway.
J. Alex Halder4man ( U of M) had an excellent blog post a couple of days ago:
https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-was-hacked-look-at-the-ballots-c61a6113b0ba#.8y0nq6gkv
He points out that aside from potential recounts, 1. no state is planning to check the paper ballots in any way that would reveal if computer results are accurate. 2. Half of the states do not require any manual examination of paper ballots & 3. Of the half that that do, most just perform superficial spot checks.
Beyond that, I'll be damned before I donate to Jill Stein but Louisiana's runoff Senate election isn't until December 10, so I just gave Foster Campbell some money.
https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/fostercampellforsenatedonate
Regarding the possibility of a recount in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, I believe the deadline to file a petition to do so in WI is today. So. Anyway it doesn't seem like it will change the outcome.
I ... don't even want to get started about Jill Stein.
As far as trying desperately to keep Trump out of the White House, challenging his business ties, his compromised ethical obligations, seems a better shot. Still unlikely to have the desired results, but at least (some) Republicans are concerned.
I'll be damned before I donate to Jill Stein but Louisiana's runoff Senate election isn't until December 10, so I just gave Foster Campbell some money.
Yes, 3 things liberals can do instead.
Meanwhile, what does one think of the interstate compact to alter the way electoral college votes are counted? I admit I haven't delved into it deeply -- and it's a longer-term solution to various ills -- but it seems to merit examination.
26 A couple of friends in our legislature have both introduced bills. Putting every precinct in the country into play without a comprehensive reform of how elections are conducted and results verified is a recipe for disaster.
I'm not much for hopeless causes, but it really seems to me that persuading Trump to return to the Clintonism of his 40s and 50s would be a much easier task than trying to get 40 Trumpsters rabid enough to have become electors to go for Clinton.
persuading Trump to return to the Clintonism of his 40s and 50s would be a much easier task
His nominees thus far don't bode well in that regard.
I'd be happy to proved wrong, of course, but I guess I don't quite trust any initiative that is spearheaded by Jill Stein.
And why should citizens have to make donations to a losing, and frankly quite kooky, candidate, in order to see a recount? And also: what's wrong with a paper ballot?
And also: whatever JP Stormcrow has said in this thread sounds about right to me. Wish it were otherwise, of course, but so too, no doubt, does JP.
It feels like the press reaction has swung a little too far to the "stupid liberals wasting their money unlike those of us who are savvy about the real world." It's idiotic that the money to do it has to be funneled through a narcissistic third party grifter, but I've seen enough arguments that it's worthwhile even if it doesn't affect the outcome that I think it should happen. The fact that the political press is now mocking it reinforces that belief.
I'm having Bed Of Nails-induced insomnia. I can't stop despairing.
Also my ipad is now recently become incredibly slow and crashes frequently. It's not even that old. I'm going to have to update things beyond what it was built to handle, and it will completely self-destruct, and net neutrality will end, and we'll have to replace our expensive gadgets every year just to load the same dumb shit that we just want to read.
Trump will win reelection based on a bed of lies about how great everything turned out.
The idea that Russia got trump elected will be relegated to fruity contrails territory.
Trump will make a gazillion dollars off this presidency and unravel every precedent that has been in place and no one will care.
No one will ever care about all these things that are tormenting me. Aargh.
Black people are actually being killed by white supremacists and it's not entering the mainstream consciousness.
All the climate change scenarios will now be blown out of the water.
When the pendulum inevitably swings back again, none of the Trump supporters will connect any fucking dots whatsoever.
I've been angry-shopping and acquired some really great clothes, though. So there's that.
Public education will be dismantled. Flint will never get clean water. We will have no idea how many other cities have contaminated water.
All our institutions will become grift-mills. "More grift for the mill," we'll all quip with a shrug.
The system itself will produce more voters susceptible to conmen like Trump.
Ie anything good - Ivanka whispering about paid maternity leave or whatever - the corrupt, ineffective grift-version will be implemented and it will get tainted as "oh well, tried that, didn't work!"
This very comment thread is loading slowly for me. It's the Russians.
My jokes will get less funny. Our clothes will fit us less well.
Something awful will happen to our neighbors' deteriorating pets while my kids are watching.
And they will just shrug and acquire more pets to criminally neglect.
We still won't have a paper trail in 16 more years. No one will notice. Occasionally the MSM will despair that there's no good way to prevent hacking, but they'll do it in that infuriating c'est la vie media shrug.
"Microaggressions" and "safe spaces" seem impossibly quaint. Talking about amplifying women's voices in meetings! What a subtle thing to care about!
We'll do more things I hate at Xfit and fewer things I like. I'll eat too much sugar. Science will reveal that I should have haf an intense skin care regimen all these years in order to look my best. I won't look my best.
My kids will squabble incessantly forever.
Safe bike lanes will never become a reality.
Sick people will lose their meager overpriced insurance. No one will report on it.
I will be too despairing and timid to fight effectively.
Happy Thanksgiving Heebie! How was your turkey?!
My parent's generation will accumulate medical problems at an increasing rate and all these people I love will die.
I affirm, from this sample of one, that your joke quality is stable, possibly improving.
Maybe my humor had been getting soft and complacent under the star of Obama and this will help me hone it back into shape. Or I won't realize that I'm quoting twitter and I'll be exposed as a serial plagiarist who was never funny.
People will chuckle at my despair and then lose interest when I try to make a joke. I'll obsess counterproductively about that and become a bore.
Black Friday sale prices will somehow make me feel worse about everything as I speculate about whose back J Crew's bottom line will be balanced on.
My ceiling fan makes my eyes unpleasantly dry.
My cat chews my watch clasp at night and manages to take it off and walk off with it.
The DAPL situation is getting scary and seems to be relegated to shrill liberal territory and Trump is profiting off it, and nothing will happen.
Obama won't appoint Garland in an emergency recess appointment out of a sense of fairness and meeting the Republicans halfway.
Maybe if your children squabble more you can use their tears to moisten your eyes?
My plants all eventually develop white fuzzy mold and I swear I don't overwater them, and I'm worried they catch it from each other and I'll need to throw out all my plants and start over.
71: or the turkey. I'll have to choose.
That cat thing is fucked up though. You should get rid of that beast while you still can.
74: I cope by waking up at the first nibble and obsessing about the future.
Soon Texas won't have any water for plants, so the mold thing will solve itself.
We'll have incredibly insightful analyses of the handbasket we're all crammed in, the one that's on fire.
Calling it chick lit enforces the patriarchy. Feel bad about yourself.
It was called "Crosstalk" and it stayed readable enough to enjoy it. Now I've started the magician one.
The delicate balance of Texas politeness and civility will start to unravel and I'll be subject to rightwing rants and leftwing ineffective responses and racist violence underlying it all.
I'll miss Shop Local Saturday and buy all my gifts at big box stores.
I'm told disputes can be resolved with captive-bolt pistols in your part of the world.
We got him a pikachu plushie and an Ash costume, and some knock off red converse off Amazon. It's all incredibly adorable, and the shoes turned out to have Japanese writing for the logo. It's so perfect.
I think there's something deeply sweet about how Pokemon taps boys' desire to find things adorable. (Girls too, of course, but that's less novel.)
It's like we forgot everything Johnny Cash ever taught us.
The kids will wake up in fifteen minutes.
I'll never bother to look up what ressentiment really means.
Pokey just climbed into bed with us, so that's nice.
If you mean the Grossman Magicians you'll soon have many new people to hate in addition to Trump and everyone else.
95: Also, in what I refuse to believe is a coincidence, Florence Henderson.
Interrupting heebie's attempt at a modern Book of Lamentations (much of which resonated with me), for this on the post topic:
Clinton's campaign counsel out with a carefully-worded statement on the recount--Listening and Responding to Calls for an Audit and Recount. Key statement after reviewing what they had done to date:
Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides>They add this which should of course set everyone's expectation: We do so fully aware that the number of votes separating Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the closest of these states -- Michigan -- well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount.
Did learn this which I did not know: Wisconsin and Pennsylvania conduct post-election audits using a sampling of precincts. Michigan and many other states still do not.
99: Oh, NOW they decide to go to Wisconsin.
Has anyone else ever seen the Florence Henderson cameo in "Shakes the Clown"? I have to admit that's the first thing that popped into my head when I heard that she died.
"There's just one problem, and it might come as a surprise even to many security experts: NO state is planning to actually check the paper in a way that would reliably detect that the computer-based outcome was wrong."
https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-was-hacked-look-at-the-ballots-c61a6113b0ba#.x5owln9y9
Heebie, words cannot express just how much I appreciate your (almost) single-handed night-long lament. Also JP Stormcrow. Mossy Character, parsimon and anyone else.
Michigan is apparently now preparing for a HAND recount:
http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/25/michigan-preparing-potential-hand-recount-48m-presidential-votes/94429196/
Stein still has not raised enough to cover Michigan, but if Hillary were to request a recount, the costs would be much lower, since the margin for her loss is less than 0.5% ($25 per precinct vs $125 per precinct).
Even if it doesn't change the outcome, ground-truthing the data is always informative.
I do wonder whether any otherwise Democratic voters are regretting their failure to vote. As we know, many Dems are pointing the finger (of blame) at one another: at a lower black turnout than expected, at a horrible turnout by millenials of 19% (!), and most frequently at the Democratic Party for having somehow "failed to listen". I've tended to think not that the party failed to listen, but that the voters did so. But that's controversial.
I haven't seen anything about this -- about non-voter regret -- but with the Thanksgiving holiday, I haven't been reading very widely.
Thank you, heebie. That list captures my worries better than anything else I've seen since the election. Except for the part about the cat.
Oh, I have a question about all these entreaties to lobby our Senators and/or Congress people about, say, Trump's Cabinet appointees or any upcoming legislation: is there any juice in that at all if you're in a solidly Democratic state to begin with?
I'd intended to ask this question in Ogged's post a while ago relating advice for contacting your representatives, but I must have been otherwise occupied. I ask it now.
105: Congressional Dems have a tendency to waver and try to find ways to compromise, so hearing from their constituents helps stiffen their resolve to loudly oppose things.
Ok, fair enough. My own state is so screamingly blue that I don't doubt it will do whatever Chuck Schumer says. I'll have to look on a case by case basis on which things Schumer supports that might should be opposed. This gets complicated. But okay.
It's really mostly people like Schumer himself who need to be pressured, but it certainly doesn't hurt to let your own reps know how you feel.
mostly people like Schumer himself who need to be pressured
Agreed. I'm not up to date on his latest position on the infrastructure bill, but there's room for dissent there at the very least.
He's definitely showing some spine about Medicare, so that's encouraging.
I'm more concerned about Obamacare than Medicare, to be honest. Being against the privatization/voucherization of Medicare is easy.
So I guess I have my answer: I can start screaming to my Democratic legislators against any attempt to roll back Obamacare. Ha.
Where "ha" means that far fewer people are dedicated to preserving Obamacare than they are to preserving Medicare. While I understand the pragmatic and realpolitik reasons for this, I resent it.
By the way, this is interesting on someone behind fake news stories.
I gather this was on NPR's All Things Considered a few days ago, but I missed it.
Where "ha" means that far fewer people are dedicated to preserving Obamacare than they are to preserving Medicare. While I understand the pragmatic and realpolitik reasons for this, I resent it.
Well, part of it is that the Republicans know this too, so they're trying to roll dismantling Medicare into "repealing Obamacare." Which should make the politics of opposing the whole thing easier, if we can get people to realize that's what's going on. (Which is admittedly a big "if.")
But 111.2 is definitely right, and you're well positioned to do it as someone who's benefited personally and directly from Obamacare.
Right. I should perhaps make this (Obamacare) my focus. It is of course a multilayered thing. I don't know what anyone can do about the Republicans ditching the subsidies and Medicaid expansion via a budget reconciliation bill.
And everyone should be very concerned about the budget reconciliation bill Paul Ryan's going to push for come January/February. Obamacare won't be its only casualty.
Er, as teo says, Ryan wants to roll Medicare revisions, among other things, into it.
teo's 114: they're trying to roll dismantling Medicare into "repealing Obamacare."
Point of clarification: "repealing Obamacare" requires actually passing a repeal law which would require a supermajority. That's more difficult, and is a second stage of their process. The first stage doesn't require a supermajority -- is the reconciliation bill requiring only a majority vote -- and they can rearrange Medicare through that already without actually technically "repealing" Obamacare.
Hope the distinction is clear enough.
They could get rid of the filibuster with a simple majority, and solve the whole thing right away. All you people who've been agitating for that are on board, right?
I don't know who those people are.
Anyway, the only way to stop them from passing a wide-ranging reconciliation bill is to peel off Republicans from voting for it. Possibly Ryan overshoots and includes provisions in it which give some of them pause.
By the way, this is interesting on someone behind fake news stories.
Russia's increasingly sophisticated propaganda machinery -- including thousands of botnets, teams of paid human "trolls," and networks of websites and social-media accounts -- echoed and amplified right-wing sites across the Internet as they portrayed Clinton as a criminal hiding potentially fatal health problems and preparing to hand control of the nation to a shadowy cabal of global financiers. The effort also sought to heighten the appearance of international tensions and promote fear of looming hostilities with nuclear-armed Russia.
Has anyone else ever seen the Florence Henderson cameo in "Shakes the Clown"?
"The Citizen Kane of alcoholic clown movies"? One of my favorite bits, along with the part in which the clowns attack the mimes.
Heebie, how was your day? Your late-night (to-early-morning!) lamentations were much appreciated (and funny as hell, btw).
Re: the entreaties to call your Senator, lobby your Congressperson and so on:
One of my fears (just one of many!) is that liberals/progressives/Democrats are going to disengage from politics and withdraw from the (political) public sphere, because it all seems so hopeless just now: just a series of uphill battles that we're almost certainly going to lose. For now, it seems clear that we should (and must) oppose just about everything that Trump and the GOP House intend to do. But it's very difficult to sustain an oppositional energy over the long term, and there's just so damn much to oppose (not one or two issues, but basically everything).
I wonder if liberals are going to have to behave more like the 1960s movement conservatives of Perlman's Nixonland? Understand that this is a longer game that we are playing, and plan and organize accordingly?
Yes, you do. Don't think you will though.
123: the day was good! I stayed busy with relatives, Pokey opened his presents, the weather was pretty. Lamentations relegated to the backburner for more immediate, practical actions.
Lamentations relegated to the backburner for more immediate, practical actions.
Great. That's how the terrorists win.
123: For now, it seems clear that we should (and must) oppose just about everything that Trump and the GOP House intend to do.
I tend to agree, but there is an active debate about it, at least where Congressional action is concerned. Jon Chait, among others, is arguing persuasively that wholesale resistance, aka obstruction, is advisable. (I assume people have seen this.)
Most persuasive to me is the simple observation that when a President's agenda seems to fail -- can't pass Congressional blockade -- the public tends to blame the party in power, pure and simple. I've seen here and there contrary claims that if Democrats become the obstructionist party, they'll pay for it. Ya. Right. Like the Republicans did. On the other hand, Dems would need media outlets to blame the Republicans -- or at least, both sides -- for failure, as Republicans have done. I don't know if we have the media on board to do that.
At any rate, what may be best for the Democratic party's future is not necessarily what's best for the country. Alas. I'll give Chuck Schumer et al. the benefit of the doubt in assuming that they wish to cooperate with Republicans, where possible, for the good of the country. I'm not sure how to argue against that.
127: Save it for 3 am, buster.
Whatever the merits of the recount, it seems to have successfully baited Trump into tweeting unhinged accusations undermining the legitimacy of the election he just won. So, there's that.
That only cost $2M, what a bargain. I wonder how much it would cost to bait him into something totally crazy, like whipping out his dick on national TV, prior to the EC vote.
I'm not sure, but asking for the FEC to confirm his glove size might work.
130: It was gratifying to hear the news reader on NPR this morning mention the tweets and then simply say that there's no evidence whatsoever to back them up. I think that the media is undergoing a self-examination right now that will lead to a lot more news stories of the form "Trump said X, which is totally untrue." I certainly hope so.
It's great that NPR does that, but if the networks don't also do it, I don't think it will reach anybody who doesn't already know Trump is a lying shit.
I'm not about to watch network news to find out, but somebody should.
134: I also heard something along those lines on CNN, so there's that. Anecdata!
That seems more likely to reach a Trump voter than NPR.
Though Trump voters look down upon CNN almost as much as they look down on Megyn Kelly.
I look down on CNN, but it's very difficult not to watch it at least sometimes.
My dad watches PBS Newshour so I was able to confirm over the holiday that David Brooks has made the spineless-shift to Trumpism that I expected he would after Trump won.
It's not a bad show, but it will take me a while to get used to no Gwen Ifill.
I guess MacNeil and Lehrer are still alive. Maybe they could bring one of them back?
Those guys are both still alive? Somehow I had it in my mind that Lehrer had shot MacNeil dead during a cocaine-infused after-party on night three of the '96 Republican Convention. Maybe that was just a rumor?
Wikipedia says they are alive but that Ron Glass is not.
OT: Be careful, Columbus, Ohio people.
> Wikipedia says they are alive but that Ron Glass is not.
Well, opinions differ, I guess. Some people are saying Lehrer shot MacNeil, some people say that it never happened. The truth is probably somewhere in between.
Not that I'm surprised to have it reconfirmed that David Brooks is worthless, but wow, David Brooks is worthless.
Seriously. I was pleasantly shocked when Brooks said on NPR during the RNC convention that, were he Tony Perkins, he would urge evangelicals to stay home rather than vote for Trump. It was nice imagining even the most shilliest GOP apologist could be unsettled by the fascism on display.