How many US Presidential elections had recounts called

[whirlingmerc]

Are there any besides Al Gore or Hillary Clinton who called recounts?
I know in history some candidates didn't call for a recount so as not to be divisive.

 

[Quetzal]

I think you are on to something. I don't think it happens very often. This might help.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_recount

 

[Revoltingest]

I heard on NPR this morning that in 2000 recounts, 3 elections were reversed.
So Hillary's chances of winning (assuming reversing MI, WI, & PA would do it)
are vanishingly small (assuming no skullduggery)....less than 1 in a million.
Smells like a desperate last gasp....which smells a lot like cheese, but with less cheese.

 

[Underhill]

I heard on NPR this morning that in 2000 recounts, 3 elections were reversed.
So Hillary's chances of winning (assuming reversing MI, WI, & PA would do it)
are vanishingly small (assuming no skullduggery)....less than 1 in a million.
Smells like a desperate last gasp....which smells a lot like cheese, but with less cheese.

I think it has more to do with pacifying the masses than it does actually changing the outcome.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think it has more to do with pacifying the masses than it does actually changing the outcome.

Interesting idea....although I don't see how that serves Stein or the Greens.
And would the Dems even want the masses pacified?

 

[jonathan180iq]

The fact that Senate and House races went along the same lines as the Presidential outcomes tells me that the vote was legitimate. People vote along ideological lines, for the most part. So very little will be accomplished.

This recount is rather pointless. But Stein is being a good soldier and perhaps hoping to win over some good graces with the Democrats heading into the future. If we've learned anything about the Green Party, it's that they will stick with one candidate FOREVER....

So this probably serves Stein and her party well going forward.

 

[Revoltingest]

The fact that Senate and House races went along the same lines as the Presidential outcomes tells me that the vote was legitimate. People vote along ideological lines, for the most part. So very little will be accomplished.

This recount is rather pointless. But Stein is being a good soldier and perhaps hoping to win over some good graces with the Democrats heading into the future. If we've learned anything about the Green Party, it's that they will stick with one candidate FOREVER....

So this probably serves Stein and her party well going forward.

The Greens are a threat to the Dems (dividing up the leftie vote).
So being in the good graces of Dems would evaporate during a campaign.
Perhaps Stein is angling for a position in a future Dem administration
by squandering millions of other people's money in a PR campaign?

 

[Underhill]

Interesting idea....although I don't see how that serves Stein or the Greens.
And would the Dems even want the masses pacified?

Valid point. I think the greens are, as jonathan points out, just currying favor with the democrats.

As for the democrats, I think there is a fine line between keeping people motivated and meltdown. Continued protest starts to look like the latter after a while.

 

[Revoltingest]

Valid point. I think the greens are, as jonathan points out, just currying favor with the democrats.

As for the democrats, I think there is a fine line between keeping people motivated and meltdown. Continued protest starts to look like the latter after a while.

If the Dems really wanted the bad reactions to the election to end, recounts seem a poor method.
I'd recommend their speaking out (especially Hilda) with positive goals.....
- Accept the result as a quirk of our system.
- Deal with the new administration.
- Focus upon elections down the road.
- Set a good example.
- Propose reforming the DNC's nomination process.

 

[jonathan180iq]

The Greens are a threat to the Dems (dividing up the leftie vote).
So being in the good graces of Dems would evaporate during a campaign.
Perhaps Stein is angling for a position in a future Dem administration
by squandering millions of other people's money in a PR campaign?

That's possible too. But I think Sanders proved this year that there's a rather prominent portion of the Democratic party that wants something more leftist than what the traditional Democrats can offer. Like with Sanders, they may very well adopt some of Stein's Green positions in hope of bolstering their ranks for the coming elections (especially 2018) altering their platforms and widening their reach among those would-be voters. Sanders changed the official Democratic position in a few areas. I think Stein is just doing as much as she can with what she has. 1-2% of the vote doesn't hold much negotiating power, but it's her name that's heading this recount monster. I think that's worth something to them.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's possible too. But I think Sanders proved this year that there's a rather prominent portion of the Democratic party that wants something more leftist than what the traditional Democrats can offer. Like with Sanders, they may very well adopt some of Stein's Green positions in hope of bolstering their ranks for the coming elections (especially 2018) altering their platforms and widening their reach among those would-be voters. Sanders changed the official Democratic position in a few areas. I think Stein is just doing as much as she can with what she has. 1-2% of the vote doesn't hold much negotiating power, but it's her name that's heading this recount monster. I think that's worth something to them.

It's all beyond me.

 

[Underhill]

If the Dems really wanted the bad reactions to the election to end, recounts seem a poor method.
I'd recommend their speaking out (especially Hilda) with positive goals.....
- Accept the result as a quirk of our system.
- Deal with the new administration.
- Focus upon elections down the road.
- Set a good example.
- Propose reforming the DNC's nomination process.

Right, except the DNC's process isn't seen as the problem by most who actually understand how this election worked.

Keep in mind, this 'quirk' has cost the democrats the white house twice in the last 2 decades. This is not so much a quirk as it is an engineered win by republicans. And before you try to make it about the campaign, I am not talking about that. I am talking about the moves republicans have been making in swing states... redistricting, moving or eliminating polling places, targeted voter ID laws.... It isn't illegal, but there is little question it is unethical.

 

[esmith]

If the Dems really wanted the bad reactions to the election to end, recounts seem a poor method.
I'd recommend their speaking out (especially Hilda) with positive goals.....
- Accept the result as a quirk of our system.
- Deal with the new administration.
- Focus upon elections down the road.
- Set a good example.
- Propose reforming the DNC's nomination process.

What....a sensible idea you got to be kidding me.

 

[Revoltingest]

Right, except the DNC's process isn't seen as the problem by most who actually understand how this election worked.

Bernie supporters might vigorously disagree.
The poor voter turnout for Hilda suggests dissatisfaction with the chosen
candidate, & this possibly being a major cause of the party's loss.

Keep in mind, this 'quirk' has cost the democrats the white house twice in the last 2 decades. This is not so much a quirk as it is an engineered win by republicans. And before you try to make it about the campaign, I am not talking about that. I am talking about the moves republicans have been making in swing states... redistricting, moving or eliminating polling places, targeted voter ID laws.... It isn't illegal, but there is little question it is unethical.

Both sides try to "engineer" a win.
The Pubs have simply been better (by luck &/or skill) at winning the right kind of vote.
Dems want no voter ID laws because this benefits them (allowing illegals to vote),
and they've been more successful than the Pubs in this battle. One cannot blame
one side for gaming the system when both of them do it. In particular, I remember
Gore trying to prevent overseas military types from having their votes counted.
How would redistricting affect the presidential race?

 

[Revoltingest]

What....a sensible idea you got to be kidding me.

I'm not kidding, but my suggestions do show how poorly I understand politicing.

 

[esmith]

I'm not kidding, but my suggestions do show how poorly I understand politicing.

You and me both

 

[Underhill]

Bernie supporters might vigorously disagree.
The poor voter turnout for Hilda suggests dissatisfaction with the chosen
candidate, & this possibly being a major cause of the party's loss.

And I don't disagree with them. But then that isn't what the recount or these protest are about.

Both sides try to "engineer" a win.
The Pubs have simply been better (by luck &/or skill) at winning the right kind of vote.
Dems want no voter ID laws because this benefits them (allowing illegals to vote),
and they've been more successful than the Pubs in this battle. One cannot blame
one side for gaming the system when both of them do it. In particular, I remember
Gore trying to prevent overseas military types from having their votes counted.
How would redistricting affect the presidential race?

Yeah, I knew that was coming.

Redistricting makes a huge difference winning local elections. Controlling local and state governments allows them to pass ID laws and other underhanded measures to eliminate the vote.

And I have yet to see any evidence of illegals voting. You would think, with the tens of thousands of RNC volunteers monitoring polls in democratic strongholds, we would see it all over the place. We just haven't.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yeah, I knew that was coming.

I do work hard to be predictable.

Redistricting makes a huge difference winning local elections. Controlling local and state governments allows them to pass ID laws and other underhanded measures to eliminate the vote.

Evidence that Hilda's voters were impeded?

And I have yet to see any evidence of illegals voting. You would think, with the tens of thousands of RNC volunteers monitoring polls in democratic strongholds, we would see it all over the place. We just haven't.

How would RNC volunteers check to see who is legal & who isn't?

 

[Underhill]

I do work hard to be predictable.

Evidence that Hilda's voters were impeded?

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...=topNews&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Social

http://www.salon.com/2016/11/07/nor...oting-suppression-efforts-in-a-press-release/

How would RNC volunteers check to see who is legal & who isn't?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/29/politics/poll-watchers-monitors/

They can request poll workers check voter eligibility.

 

[metis]

Are there any besides Al Gore or Hillary Clinton who called recounts?
I know in history some candidates didn't call for a recount so as not to be divisive.

If you truly were concerned about not being "divisive", then you should not have vote for Trump.