When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

Yeah. The same.

Meanwhile, Hillary and trump are hated enough that the libertarian candidate is getting MSM mileage.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/09/opinions/why-running-for-president-johnson/index.html

It's an adequate refutation of "the sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

Give me data, not vague accusations and hand wringing. There were "irregularities." How widespread? How severe? Do they appear coordinated, or are they the kind of irregularities one gets when you have a bunch of amateurs running a big operation?

Johnson is getting MSM mileage because he's kooky, charismatic, and is willing to be outrageous. (He's definitely learned from Trump's success on that front.)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/4/21/1518460/-Election-Fraud-Proven-at-Audit-by-Chicago-BOE-flipped-precinct-by-18pts-from-Bernie-to-Hillary

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/16/clinton-does-best-where-voting-machines-flunk-hacking-tests-hillary-clinton-vs-bernie-sanders-election-fraud-allegations/

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/36386-focus-why-cant-the-nation-a-the-left-deal-with-election-theft

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/19/politics/new-york-primary-voter-problem-polls-sanders-de-blasio/

"In a statement out Wednesday, Schneiderman said, "I am deeply troubled by the volume and consistency of voting irregularities, both in public reports and direct complaints to my office's voter hotline."
________________________________

Don't try to pretend you don't know. It's as fake as your candidate.

Hahahahahahahahaha

The post keeps going on about "hand tally vs machine count" but there is no evidence given that the hand tally (not an actual vote count, mind you, just a jotted tally) is more accurate than the machine count.




This is a correlation turned on its head to imply causation. Could there be other reasons why Clinton voters correlate to poorer precincts that can't buy newer machines? Anyone? Let's not always see the same hands....

Also, the article itself admits that correlation is not causation and just speaks to the point that we need to do more to ensure the integrity of the voting process. I actually agree with that point.




I agree that security around electronic voting is a joke. I will not argue that we need better controls to make sure there is no vote tampering.





This is just a re-run of the same Sanders complaints about the Democratic primary excluding voters registered as independents. Maybe he should have understood the process a little better, and gotten his folks out registering those independents as Democrats a little sooner.




As usual, this does not add up to fraud, vote tampering, or a massive "establishment conspiracy."

You want fair elections? Go get your hands dirty and volunteer at a voting precinct. I see these 70 year-old ladies running all of the ones here in Austin; I'm really not surprised that they're not up to date on network and computer security practices....

And it's always good to point out.... TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND polling places in the US.

The news would freak out if 5 of them shows any real sort of tampering, but 5 polling places equal 0.0025% of polling places.

Non issue.

Well, it would be more fair to note how many polling places were monitored, and what proportion of those had irregularities, and then extrapolate to the universe of polling places.

Sorry to be the same "usual suspect" but can I raise my hand?

My answer is, the poorer neighborhoods are usually minority neighborhoods. Those neighborhoods can't afford to top of line voting machines. (duh) All the demographic polling throughout the democrat primary season showed minorities favored Hillary over Bernie Sanders. It would have been way more suspicious had it gone the other way and Sanders won those neighborhoods.

If anything I am worried about the general in these neighborhoods and other problems listed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5ugmNoanx8&sns=em

People who were there.

Precincts don't buy voting machines. In the US, elections are run by state, county, and/or municipal agencies. Precincts are merely administrative units, with no budgets or spending authority.

Duh

In that case (I obviously didn't know that) in the poor neighborhoods which are minority neighborhoods, which did favor Hillary, if anyone was cheated between Hillary and Sanders in those neighborhoods, it would have been Hillary voters.

Why are the poorer neighborhoods stuck with outdated machines if they are not the ones footing the bill? Do the states just leave them shafted?

Right. We had a friend, an attorney who over time went into politics and became secretary of state for California, and the first thing she did was develop new voting machines - if I remember, from scratch re design requirements/voters needs, for all of California. Members of both parties hailed her for doing that. She started out a Republican but became a Democrat some fair bit of time before running for office, but my point is that, across the board, people were glad she did it.

Don't feel too bad; obviously DrewDad didn't either.


I don't think that's true, at least not around here. In Chicago, pretty much everyone gets the exact same equipment - rich neighborhood, poor neighborhood, doesn't matter. There may be some poor counties that have bad equipment, but that's because the county is poor, not because the precinct is poor.

.

Actually it was from a link Lash talking of not so good machines.

According to most polling, Clinton did better with older Americans, Hispanics and blacks. I am pretty sure in Leon county Florida, there is probably a good deal more older Americans than young college age Americans. It was not surprising she did well with that group either.

In any event, it is a disgrace about the state of the machines, a good deal of them need to be updated. Should be national rather than by state by state, county by county...

QuickFacts
Leon County, Florida

I wonder who's supporters are more likely to HACK a voting machine....

Those older Hillary supporters with their flip phones and electronic wheelchairs or the legions of college kids who support Sanders??

You do love to hone a grudge, don't you?

I bow to your pedantry, and acknowledge that "election jurisdiction" is the correct terminology.

I was reading an article about proven vote irregularities. It seems that from 2000 to 2015 there were 34 proven vote irregularities. That should have kept Obama from winning the presidency. Right?

I suppose I might, if I actually gave a damn about you. But I don't see that happening any time soon. Or ever.