I voted...post up

[jackalo626]

Let 'em go. I know it'll never happen, but.....Let 'em go.

I'll be the first to send them a farewell.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

[Dustin]

Well, California’s progressives are trying to get some steam for their secession initiative, which they hope can be on the state ballot by 2018. On Monday, the vice president of Yes California filed the official papers with the state’s attorney general’s office. Now, they have to gather 500,000 signatures from registered voters. The measure seeks to strip the language from the state’s constitution indicating that the Golden State is an “inseparable part” of the United States. Oh, and they plan to petition the United Nations because they’re not confident that a Republican Congress will agree with them, according to The Sacramento Bee. The publication also reported that this campaign is grounded in that California and the United States are too much at odds with regards to social change, that they pay their fair share in federal taxes, only to get lackluster returns on infrastructure, education, and other social investments, and being that they’re the sixth largest economy by itself—they can do better alone:

Make Secession Great Again: California Progressives Want To Hold A Vote On Separation By 2018
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/ ... 8-n2249809

One can only hope.

[Jakob]

Well... bye

[WLJ]

They finally called Michigan for Trump

[guncrank1]

Well... bye

Uhmmm CA succession from the Republic would be the world's first crying fit revolution.

[WLJ]

In related election news as far as the sates go
Complete control (both legislative chambers and the governorship)
Dem 4 (Including a super majority in CA)
Rep 33
The remaining 13 are split

CA has gone a deeper blue while rest of the states have for the most part gone blue and light blue/red

[WLJ]

Jill Stein has called for recounts in MI, WI, & PA and suddenly the money needed to do so appeared out seemingly nowhere. Where did this money come from? Plus why only recounts being called for in states where Clinton lost narrowly and not where Trump lost narrowly? (Those are rhetorical questions BTW)
Me thinks they want to try to pull another Al Franken where they keep recounting until they "find" enough "forgotten" and "lost" ballots to swing it their way.

Clinton to participate in Wisconsin recount
http://www.courier-journal.com/story/ne ... /94473712/

[Dave1965]

She conceded anyway

F her

[WLJ]

She conceded anyway

F her

[WLJ]

Food for thought

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 ... ounts.html

The Democrats’ real strategy in launching recounts
By Richard Baehr

The recount in Wisconsin, and the coming ones in Michigan and Pennsylvania will not change the outcomes in any of the states. No recount ever changes thousands of votes. I do not think that is the purpose.

The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters. If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232. No one hits 270.

Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump, and Senate selects Pence. This would be first time Pthis happened since 1824, but in that case, John Quincy Adams won in the House, though he had fewer electoral college votes than Andrew Jackson.

If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it? The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.

[Jakob]

Food for thought

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 ... ounts.html

The Democrats’ real strategy in launching recounts
By Richard Baehr

The recount in Wisconsin, and the coming ones in Michigan and Pennsylvania will not change the outcomes in any of the states. No recount ever changes thousands of votes. I do not think that is the purpose.

The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters. If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232. No one hits 270.

Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump, and Senate selects Pence. This would be first time Pthis happened since 1824, but in that case, John Quincy Adams won in the House, though he had fewer electoral college votes than Andrew Jackson.

If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it? The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.

Seems likely, but to what avail? To me, it seems like Democrats wasting a bunch of money in a temper tantrum.

[rustynuts]

Food for thought

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 ... ounts.html

The Democrats’ real strategy in launching recounts
By Richard Baehr

The recount in Wisconsin, and the coming ones in Michigan and Pennsylvania will not change the outcomes in any of the states. No recount ever changes thousands of votes. I do not think that is the purpose.

The recounts, if done by hand, which can be demanded, may take longer than the last day for completing the official counts in a state and directing Electoral College voters. If all 3 states miss the deadline, Trump is at 260, Hillary at 232. No one hits 270.

Then this goes to Congress, where the House voting 1 vote per state elects Trump, and Senate selects Pence. This would be first time Pthis happened since 1824, but in that case, John Quincy Adams won in the House, though he had fewer electoral college votes than Andrew Jackson.

If this goes to the US House and Senate, and the result is the same as result from the Electoral College without the recounts, why do it? The answer is to make Trump seem even more illegitimate, that he did not win the popular vote (he lost by over 2.1 million), he did not win the Electoral College (did not reach 270), and was elected by being inserted into the presidency by members of his own party in Congress.

Seems likely, but to what avail? To me, it seems like Democrats wasting a bunch of money in a temper tantrum.

My thoughts as well. 99% of the population are too preoccupied, ignorant or brain dead to make that association anyway.

[ssracer]

To the democrats they already see him as illegitimate and to the rest of the country this will make no difference.

[WLJ]

Actual results mean nothing, it all about how you feels.

[WLJ]

WI has rejected doing the recount by hand and PA told Stein she missed their deadline so she's throwing lawyers at them and suing. I'm believing that American Thinker article more and more.

[Dave1965]

All a bunch of waste for nothing...don't people have anything better to do? Liberals should be out serving food in food kitchens and such and making things better for their fellow man that they care so much about. I always ask liberal friends when the last time they did anything like that was......the answer is always the same.....silence.

[WLJ]

I'll just leave this here

https://www.change.org/p/electoral-coll ... _electoral

Electoral College: Make Hillary Clinton President on December 19
Daniel Brezenoff NC

On December 19, the Electors of the Electoral College will cast their ballots. If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win. However, in 14 of the states in Trump's column, they can vote for Hillary Clinton without any legal penalty if they choose.

We are calling on the 149 Electors in those states to ignore their states' votes and cast their ballots for Secretary Clinton. Why?

Mr. Trump is unfit to serve. His scapegoating of so many Americans, and his impulsivity, bullying, lying, admitted history of sexual assault, and utter lack of experience make him a danger to the Republic.

Secretary Clinton WON THE POPULAR VOTE and should be President.

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

But the Electoral College can actually give the White House to either candidate. So why not use this most undemocratic of our institutions to ensure a democratic result?

SHE WON THE POPULAR VOTE.

There is no reason Trump should be President.

"It's the 'People's Will'"

No. She won the popular vote.

"Our system of government under our Constitution says he wins"

No. Our Constitution says the Electors choose.

"Too many states prohibit 'Faithless Electors'"

24 states bind electors. If electors vote against their party, they usually pay a fine. And people get mad. But they can vote however they want and there is no legal means to stop them in most states.



PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE!

[ssracer]

Dec 19th is my birthday. Maybe I should ask for more ammo

[WLJ]

Wisconsin Judge Refuses To Mandate Hand Recount, Says Clinton/Stein Request Lacked Evidence To Justify It
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/ ... t-n2253140

[rustynuts]

Boo-yah! Bitch!

[ssracer]

IMG_5351.JPG (176.35 KiB) Viewed 1285 times

[Toddstang]

Bingo!

[jackalo626]

I'll just leave this here

https://www.change.org/p/electoral-coll ... _electoral

Electoral College: Make Hillary Clinton President on December 19
Daniel Brezenoff NC

On December 19, the Electors of the Electoral College will cast their ballots. If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win. However, in 14 of the states in Trump's column, they can vote for Hillary Clinton without any legal penalty if they choose.

We are calling on the 149 Electors in those states to ignore their states' votes and cast their ballots for Secretary Clinton. Why?

Mr. Trump is unfit to serve. His scapegoating of so many Americans, and his impulsivity, bullying, lying, admitted history of sexual assault, and utter lack of experience make him a danger to the Republic.

Secretary Clinton WON THE POPULAR VOTE and should be President.

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

But the Electoral College can actually give the White House to either candidate. So why not use this most undemocratic of our institutions to ensure a democratic result?

SHE WON THE POPULAR VOTE.

There is no reason Trump should be President.

"It's the 'People's Will'"

No. She won the popular vote.

"Our system of government under our Constitution says he wins"

No. Our Constitution says the Electors choose.

"Too many states prohibit 'Faithless Electors'"

24 states bind electors. If electors vote against their party, they usually pay a fine. And people get mad. But they can vote however they want and there is no legal means to stop them in most states.



PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE!

"Sexual assault" lmfao! They elected their beloved Clinton and made jokes about his endless cases and it was hysterical to them. They were proud of him even and called him the "first black president" which to anyone with a Brin was the most racist thing you could say but the are left and black so it doesn't count when they do it. Fuck all of them. Fuck their stupid Anti-American ideas and I need to raise enough money to boat these motherfuckers out of America's borders. I will be having a fund raiser soon and I need you guys to reach deep down and let's send them on a dream vacation to one of their paradises they think we should be like. Jack for president 2020.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

[WLJ]

Jill Stein Nixes Statewide Recount Effort In Pennsylvania
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/ ... a-n2254608

[PDM]

So she spent all the donations on Black Friday