« prev   random   next »
1   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2016 Nov 11, 10:20am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

300k Is nothing considering they created 3 million votes out of aliens.

New rules new citizens have to wait 4 years to vote then we wont have this problem.

Good news is California and Oregon and Washington want to break away. That would be great and the end of liberalso in America.

Get lost mother fuckers

2   HonkpilledMaster   ignore (5)   2016 Nov 11, 10:57am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

NYT, WaPo, Bloomerberg Leonid guy, all the Establishment Elite Mouthpieces.

400,000 out of 125M votes is not substantial, esp. when the winner won a majority vote in the majority of states.

4   FNWGMOBDVZXDNW   ignore (2)   2016 Nov 11, 12:37pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The article suggests she will be up by 1.5 pts or so once the votes are counted. We'll have to see how it turns out. In any case, a win is a win. Trump won the electoral college and Clinton looks very certain to have won the popular vote, which counts for... not much.

5   AllTruth   ignore (1)   2016 Nov 11, 12:40pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        


MSM Cut & Paste!"

No Original Thought Or Addition To!"

"MSM Headline Hit & Run!"


6   curious2   ignore (0)   2016 Nov 11, 12:48pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

It is too soon to rely on popular vote counts, because votes are still being counted. As of last night, California had "at least" 4 million votes to count, and planned to continue counting until at least Monday. People are relying on polls, which have proven unreliable this year. Once the actual counts are certified, we will have confirmed numbers on which to base interpretations and other opinions.

7   joshuatrio   ignore (0)   2016 Nov 11, 1:47pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Tenpoundbass says

300k Is nothing considering they created 3 million votes out of aliens.


8   anonymous   ignore (null)   2016 Nov 11, 1:55pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Why is California so slow to count their votes?

I remember the dem primary in California took them a month to count.

It's a large state, sure. Also the tech world capital , and supposedly the model of all that is great with liberalism.

9   curious2   ignore (0)   2016 Nov 11, 2:16pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

errc says

Why is California so slow to count their votes?

"California law says that any ballot postmarked by election day can still be counted if it arrives as many as three business days late. State officials have extended this year's deadline to Monday, because that third day, Nov. 11, is a federal holiday.

More than 1 million of the pending ballots — almost one of every four — remain to be sorted and counted in Los Angeles County. Three-fourths of the ballots statewide were cast absentee, with the rest being provisional ballots cast on election day by voters whose registration information could not be quickly verified."

errc says


Alas, for identitarian reasons, "liberalism" has come to include letting people vote absentee for convenience or capricious personal preference, even if they have no significant reason. Supposedly, it increases turnout and encourages people to vote. Really, it creates opportunities for vote buying and selling, and other mischief. At least around here, City Hall is open extra hours every day for a month to allow early voting, so a person would need to be "absent" for a really long time not to have an opportunity to vote. I would suggest rather a system where people have to register individually for each absentee ballot, with documentation as to why they can't vote in person.

10   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2016 Nov 11, 2:55pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

If CA still has 4 million votes to count, doesn't that mean that theoretically, Trump could still win in CA?

about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions