Jill Stein- Grifter, Idiot, or Attention Seeking Diva?

tina-fey-go-home

I’ll take all three:

Jill Stein, having spent the entire election telling us all that Hillary Clinton was a mass murderer who would be worse than Trump has apparently had a change of heart, or wants more attention, or just wants to raise a ton of money she won’t refund when the states won’t or don’t do the recount.

If you want to know why no one takes the green party seriously despite aligning with them on many issues (or more accurately, them aligning with us on many issues since they haven’t done jack shit), this is why.

In related news, I am also raising money for a recount. Just click on the paypal link above and I will make sure I send it right away to my fucking bloodsucking plumber and electrician the appropriate states.

120 replies
  1. 1
    Eric NNY says:

    Title = yes

  2. 2
    khead says:

    Yes

    Edit – Too late. Heh.

  3. 3
    Dadadadadadada says:

    Maybe she thinks a recount will reveal that Stein won all three states? She’d be crazy to think that, but we know she is crazy, so…

  4. 4
    Steve in the ATL says:

    (d) all of the above

  5. 5
    chopper says:

    HAH HAH HAH

    oh cole, you’re the best.

  6. 6
    Schlemazel says:

    if one wanted to gauge stupidity would it be stupider to not know what a Trump win would mean until it happened then to think it was possible to undo the damage by raising money for a fools errand?

  7. 7
    Eric NNY says:

    @khead: seriously the first ever time I was the first to comment due to lurker status. I am now slinking away quietly…..

  8. 8
    mike in dc says:

    Juck Fill Stein.

  9. 9
    Lizzy L says:

    The word “chutzpah” sticks its head in the door, looks around, and tiptoes away.

  10. 10
    Mary G says:

    Good FSM, $149 will buy an allegedly 24K gold mini Trump hat for a Christmas ornament.

    President-elect @realDonaldTrump's campaign website is now selling a 24-karat gold Christmas ornament. https://t.co/nt03tQhqF6— Fox News (@FoxNews) November 24, 2016

  11. 11
    InternetDragons says:

    I don’t think this is meant to be a scam.

    We are in nightmare territory with this election, and I am willing to consider making at least temporary alliances/partnerships with groups like the Greens that I wouldn’t normally have much to do with if they get involved with any actions that might be helpful in resisting the sheer awfulness of a Trump presidency.

    I’d certainly be wary of Jill Stein – I think she’s an idiot. But I also think there’s at least a reasonable chance that the Green Party is trying to do the right thing here. I know it’s fun to ridicule them, but maybe get some more info first? I’ll probably get flamed for saying this, though =P

    There’s a post on Kos from someone who wrote them asking exactly what would be done with the money: http://www.dailykos.com/storie.....ney-raised

  12. 12
    eemom says:

    @InternetDragons:

    This, absolutely.

    Cole, for fuck’s sake, please take this issue seriously. It really is a CHANCE, however slim. You have a platform here that reaches millions. USE IT FOR GOOD, for fuck’s sake.

  13. 13
    Schlemazel says:

    @Lizzy L:
    tiptoeing because it heard The Beverly Snowbilly call it ‘cha-PUTZ’

  14. 14
    Lizzy L says:

    @InternetDragons: Not flaming you, because you could be right. (Magic Eight Ball says, Too soon to tell.) The thing, what if the recount happens, and it shows clearly that T. is the winner, as indeed, he may be. How is that good?

  15. 15
    Suzanne says:

    I’m not going to get mad. I’m going to be happy that Jill Stein is pulling her head out of her ass and is doing something helpful and sensible for what may be the first time.

  16. 16
    Tyro says:

    From twitter:

    “Jill Stein is the friend who ruins your wedding but really shows up for you during the divorce.”

  17. 17
    tobie says:

    I don’t know what Jill Stein’s motives are, but right now she’s the only one making a push for an audit.

  18. 18
    Jeffro says:

    I’m good with a recount, let me know how it goes, Jill.

    I’m also good with calling my Senators & Rep every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday to tell them NO changes to Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare (unless they are for expanding these programs).

    I’m good with various ways of alerting the Electoral College voters that they’re the last brake on this mess before we essentially shred the entire safety net for most of America. Perhaps they’ll see the light…

  19. 19
    Suzanne says:

    Fuck, I find myself agreeing with someone I typically consider detestable. This has been a really weird year. I need a drink or a hug or both.

  20. 20
    Hkedi [Kang T. Q.] says:

    Eh, I’m for it. Whatever you might think about the Greens, it helps the Democratic party. It throws a nice monkey-wrench in “Donald Trump has a mandate” BS, and the Republicans can’t even complain that the Democrats are being sore losers.

  21. 21
    Jeffro says:

    Btw nickel bet folks: Stein is just doing this to a) make herself look good (in case there are any lingering hard feelings), b) raise funds for herself and the Greens, and c) make it look like something was actually being done to avoid this Titanic-meets-iceberg moment we’re about to have when the Electoral College votes. It doesn’t cost her anything, and it splits the left in this country even further (if not all that passionately) – “do we support this? Gee I dunno…she was sorta right and sorta wrong…she cost us the election…no, Hillz did…no, Hillz was fine, it was low millennial turnout…” and so on, and so on.

    All I know is she was photographed seated at a dinner table in Moscow with Vladimir Putin and Gen. Flynn (among other Trumpistas) last year, and they sure looked like they were having a good time. And I distinctly remember her running against Hillz (not Hillz AND Orangemandias, not “both sides suck”, even) all campaign long – no last minute “this ain’t working, we have to save the republic!” surge of integrity like we saw with Bill Weld.

  22. 22
    Nashville fan says:

    This ain’t about Jill Stein – this is about ‘Merica – I donated .

    Recount the damn votes.

  23. 23
    ms_canadada says:

    I’ll take, “Grifter, Idiot, & Attention Seeking Diva” for $100.00, Alex.

  24. 24
    ms_canadada says:

    @Mary G: ‘Made in China.’

  25. 25
    InternetDragons says:

    Further clarification from the Green Party response to the person asking what they would do with the money:

    “Our effort to recount votes in those states is not intended to help Hillary Clinton. These recounts are part of an election integrity movement to attempt to shine a light on just how untrustworthy the U.S. election system is.”

    Folks, this IS consistent with Green Party activism they’ve done in the past regarding election integrity.

  26. 26
    PsiFighter37 says:

    Fuck Jill Stein. Does she even realize how much more foolish this makes her look?

    She can haul her crusty white ass back to Lexington and shut the fuck up, kindly.

  27. 27
    Lizzy L says:

    @InternetDragons:

    Folks, this IS consistent with Green Party activism in the past regarding election integrity.

    Sure it is. It’s purely coincidental that it ends up supporting and strengthening the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s win.

    Forgive my cynicism.

  28. 28
    PsiFighter37 says:

    Apparently Trump spoke about his business with Erdogan as well. That makes it 3 countries (India, Turkey, and Argentina) where he has concerned himself with his business over any actual policy matters.

    He’s going to hawk his shit, Pence & Co. will burn it all to the ground, Bannon will stoke the flames, and the media will do nothing about any of it.

  29. 29
    SWMBO says:

    @Mary G: Read the comments on this product. They are great!

  30. 30
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Mary G: All Holidays Matter!!!

  31. 31
    amk says:

    now tell us how you reeelly feel, cole.

  32. 32
    tobie says:

    @PsiFighter37: Make it 4 countries with the UK. He objected to the wind farms off the coast of Scotland.

  33. 33
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @InternetDragons: “Consistent” in that, as usual, it’s all for show and accomplishes nothing? Because the statement you quoted is pretty much an admission that it’s going into their pockets and staying there.

  34. 34
    Peale says:

    @PsiFighter37: yep. On the plus side, if you want to keep NATO together and were worried that the imperialist would demand tribute to, say, keep our commitment to South Korea, it has become much cheaper for those countries. All you have to do is give trump a building permit and we’re best friends. Our entire system of foreign alliances will be based on countries that golf.

  35. 35
    Anne Laurie says:

    Eh, I wouldn’t mind seeing a recount done. But you’re right about Stein — this isn’t a real petition for redress, it’s more fumble-fingered showboating by the Useful Idiot. Some proportion of her fellow “purists” will make a big noise, any money collected will seep away, and if the publicity ever rises above the social-media sphere it’ll be used to dismiss all calls for a recount as just more Democrat sore-loserism harharhar!

    Give Stein this iota of credit, she had to go straight to the Cry Resistance! mode because her fellow grifter Sen. Sanders has already covered the Surrender to the Conquerer! role. So she can play New-Millenium Ralph Nader, and he can be Joe Lieberman Reborn.

    I’m about ready to move from hating 2016 to hating 2017 already.

  36. 36
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Anne Laurie: I just figured that, like most all petition drives, it’s a way to collect the names of suckers like-minded people.

  37. 37
    eemom says:

    Oh for fuck’s sake, pt. 3. Look people, it doesn’t matter why she’s doing it. The point is that not only is she trying to do it, SHE is in a unique position to actually MAKE IT HAPPEN, seeing as how she was a candidate.

    And exactly WHAT the fuck do we have to lose if it confirms Trump’s victory, please?

  38. 38
    Lizzy L says:

    @FlipYrWhig: So you think the recount is bullshit and the petition drive is just a way to identify the marks. Works for me.

  39. 39
    Anne Laurie says:

    @InternetDragons:

    Folks, this IS consistent with Green Party activism they’ve done in the past regarding election integrity.

    Yup. And Donald Trump’s presidential “plans” are consistent with Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy goals. But the ugly truth is that Stein is enabling Steve Bannon’s propaganda machine, just as Trump is enabling a foreign power whose goals do not necessarily align with ours.

    When I was growing up, something like one in five house fires were caused by small children playing with matches. Doesn’t mean the kids meant to do any harm, but that didn’t make the damage they caused less of an injury..

  40. 40
    eemom says:

    @Suzanne:

    Fuck you, you little shit. You’re just as detestable when you agree with me as when you don’t. #knowhoelseloveddogs?

  41. 41
    Feebog says:

    This is a fool’s errand. Yes, Michigan and Wisconsin are within a few thousand votes, so there might be an outside chance that some huge error in the count would change the outcome. Say one in a million. Twice. But Pennsylvania is over 100K. And you would need all three to flip in order to change the outcome. The fact is that the polls, for whatever reasons were wrong. Time to move on and get ready for the 2018 mid-terms.

  42. 42
    Suzanne says:

    @eemom: I meant Jill Stein. But you know, rock on with that narcissism.

  43. 43
    Nashville fan says:

    Hell – no matter what happens – I already got my $29 worth having something other than the 4th Reich to think about . . .

  44. 44
    eemom says:

    Will someone please answer my question of what we have to lose??

    I can’t BELIEVE you people.

  45. 45
    eemom says:

    @Suzanne:

    Whatever. To put it mildly, you are the least of anybody’s worries.

  46. 46
    Suzanne says:

    @eemom: Looking forward to your apology. #sothankful #notallaboutyou #bwahaha

  47. 47
    Wag says:

    Jill Stein is Shimmer.

  48. 48
    Wag says:

    @efgoldman:

    Which is probably better than misunderestimating Cole’s influence by an order of magnitude or two.

  49. 49
    amk says:

    @eemom: barnum lives on.

  50. 50

    @efgoldman: it’s the 22,799th most-visited site in America.

  51. 51
    JordanRules says:

    I have no problem with this. YMMV

  52. 52
    eemom says:

    I thought the number of viewers was in the millions, though I could be wrong. Anyway I’m sure it is orders of magnitude larger than the tiny select elite group of commenters.

    Lurkers, help me out here. Aren’t there millions of you?

  53. 53
    eemom says:

    @amk:

    That does not answer my question.

  54. 54
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @eemom:

    Aren’t there millions of you?

    I am vast, I contain multitudes.

  55. 55
    InternetDragons says:

    @Anne Laurie:

    Uh, what? I’m well aware of what an idiot Stein is, the damage she caused during the election, what Bannon really stands for, and Trump’s role as a Putin puppet.

    I guess I could post a similar lecture about other horrific aspects of Trump and company. Not sure what the point of doing that would be, though.

    Personally, I’m not invested in whether or not a recount happens. I’d like to see more investigation of Russia’s cultivation of Trump and a congressional investigation of Russia’s hacking and election interference, or investigation of some of the batshit crazy statements our soon-to-be National Security Adviser makes (posted alongside his alt-right icon…), or any number of other things. But I’m not holding my breath.

    My post here was simply because I felt Cole was being a bit knee-jerky about the Green’s call for a recount. If we’re going to effectively resist Trump’s insanity, we’re going to have to make some alliances with people we may not agree with or even like. That’s a reality whenever you do political organizing. And while I don’t respect Stein (or the Greens, these days), I also don’t categorize her as the enemy.

    Trashing Stein here over calling for a vote count is a likely a moot point by now, anyway. Looks like the Greens will easily make that $2.5 million goal tonight. And not a few of those contributions came from people who dislike Stein as much as any of us here do. But they donated anyway. That’s a testament to how badly people want to do something, and how strongly people feel about preserving the integrity of our elections. Regardless of who wins.

  56. 56

    @InternetDragons:

    My post here was simply because I felt Cole was being a bit knee-jerky about the Green’s call for a recount. If we’re going to effectively resist Trump’s insanity, we’re going to have to make some alliances with people we may not agree with or even like. That’s a reality whenever you do political organizing. And while I don’t respect Stein (or the Greens, these days), I also don’t categorize her as the enemy.

    There’s only like twelve of those people though.

  57. 57
    RaflW says:

    I think we should have random audits of a statistically valid sample of precincts in every state. We do this in Minnesota, and have since 2004.

    It would make the nightmare scenario that I posited a few weeks before the election (but my google fu can’t find the comment now) harder to pull off. I speculated that the way the election could be stolen was to tweak the count in a subset of precincts in a couple swing-y states with GOP S.O.S.s. Those states would be happy to have squeaked for T.

    I of course have no idea if this has happened. But random audits — which would require paper ballots or paper receipts of the votes being retained — would go a looooong way to putting worries by folks like me to rest.

    The small nonprofit I used to be E.D. of had a fair election/voter turnout working group. I personally often thought they were overly worried types, though the questions they raised about paperless touch screens always seemed very important to me. Not all the people raising concerns were at all liberal, too.

    I think they rubbed off on me over my 6.5 years in the org. I don’t think the likelihood of Russians actually stealing the election for T is very high, but that polling models were off and exit polls suck. But higher confidence in elections wouldn’t really be a loss if the audits came back basically clean, IMO.

    Stein I want to steer clear of. She adds a tinfoil hat-ness to things. But traditional Dems seem to be saying “We have confidence!” in a way that seems predicated on how things used to be, not how they are. The other side plays very, very hard ball. We should be sure they at least stay on this side of outright hacking.

    And we should not let go of all the bullshit they’ve done to disenfranchise and/or just make it harder for ppl to vote. That is a very bad sign for democracy.

    OK, gotta wind down and get to bed. G’nigh y’all!

  58. 58
    Hob says:

    I’m all in favor of Jill Stein using her status as a candidate (assuming such status is actually relevant in this case) to call for recounts.

    I’m not in favor of giving her millions of dollars to do so, unless it’s very clear what the money is for. Their statement claims that Wisconsin has a $1.1 million filing fee that would be due by Nov. 25, and as far as I can tell, that is bullshit: $1.1 million is an estimate of what the total cost might end up being, not the fee that they would need to pay to simply request the recount. Am I wrong? Because if they can’t get that right, I do not trust them to handle this.

    The statement that InternetDragons mentioned in that Kos link, about what happens to excess money, is a very weaselly non-answer. They said they’ll use it to “promote systemic voting system reform.” That could mean any damn thing they want, and based on their previous rhetoric, I would expect it to mean basically “whatever we think is good for increasing visibility of the Green Party,” since they seem to believe that they are synonymous with “reform.”

  59. 59
    Suzanne says:

    @InternetDragons: Agree. Stein pisses me off royally for being a medical doctor who panders to the anti-vax community, which I think is craven and reprehensible and detestable. And she can shove that no-difference-between-the-candidates shit right back up her ass, where that came from. But this is the right call. There’s no significant downside.

    I know there is a valid concern about rioting and/or acts of violence by neo-Nazi fucks if results did prove that there was hacking or tampering or whatever. But I think that risk is already present. Let’s let the party that endlessly complains about voter fraud oppose a fair and transparent audit.

  60. 60
    Hitless says:

    So, here’s the thing, regardless of the outcome of this particular election (which is ridiculous to say but that’s where we are), the way the US allows people to vote and counts votes is ridiculous.

    If audit is performed on the behest of a crazy narcissist, it is still a much needed audit. So I’m all for it.

    If the election were a machine and we were engineers, we’d want to check s*** out and make sure it worked right. So do it.

  61. 61

    I’m not opposed to a recount or audit or anything, I just think that the supposedly suspicious figures are easily explained (Nate Cohn agrees with me), and Jill Stein is an idiot and a huckster, and giving the Green Party money is stupid.

  62. 62
    ruemara says:

    I think Stein is all of the above, but I don’t mind her doing this. They have to follow through on it when it’s done this publicly. Here’s my thought pattern on this:
    Stein & the Greens did not cover themselves in purist glory this election. They legitimately aided and abetted a white supremacist fascist to take over the US government. Pictures surfaced of Stein have a big blast at a Putin party, damaging that pure glow for new eyeballs & their wallets. Her views on vaccines & Wi-Fi came to light, making her a laughing stock. Plus her tax returns show she’s a rich ass dilettante who’s heavily invested in the industries she rails against. Not really good for the future 4 year outsider running for President racket. Plus a Donald win and government filled with fucking nazis doesn’t gain the Greens anything. They spend their time attacking democratic candidates and the Democratic Party. Why? because liberals and progressives love to attack anyone on their side that isn’t 100% exactly like them. They can’t fucking get together with someone who’s 90% like them because HOW DARE THEY. Criticising the Dems is a fucking cottage industry because it gives cool liberal cred. The Young Turks actually make money on it. RT is THE channel of progressives, because it’s so critical. They can’t even see the racial bias and problems with it. But under Trump, that all changes. You can’t make money as easy any more. Economy sucks, the neocons crack down more and people are more thinking about getting out from under the neocon thumb than GMOOOOS! LIbs, Progs & Dems banding together to fight a real threat won’t be making Green donations. They won’t be attending the rallies. They won’t be wearing Stein shirts.

    These movements thrive in a comfortable time where the super smart Lib/Prog has enough comfort and free time to bitch about errrythang. By taking this step, Stein can play the liberal hero (guaranteeing more donations for the Greens & Stein’s travel fund), be a big loser in 2020 and be a stalking horse for this issue by the Hillary for America campaign and the White House. If she funds the recounts and it looks like the totals flip to HRC, Stein will have earned a quarter of the forgiveness she needs for her bullshit this year. I say let do that work. I’m not donating tho.

  63. 63
    Davebo says:

    @efgoldman:

    But a Green candidate can’t be a grifter right? That would be 180 degrees against whatever principles she decided on this morning.

  64. 64
    Arclite says:

    @mike in dc:

    Juck Fill Stein

    She’s hot. I’d do her.

    J/K

  65. 65
    RaflW says:

    @Hob: I’m violating my bedtime, but a quick bit of googling confirms that in WI the total estimated cost of the recount has to be put up in advance in cash or other acceptable form if the margin is greater than .25%

    A recount as large as WI could easily cost $1.1 mil.

  66. 66

    @RaflW:

    cash or other acceptable form

    Maybe the libertarians could front some bitcoins.

  67. 67

    @ruemara: I thought the neocons were the capitalist-Trotskyites who tried to export liberal democracy and gunpoint and didn’t give a shit what happened at home.

  68. 68
    Bailey says:

    She’s all three.

    She is probably also doing the bidding of the Clinton campaign who won’t ask for the audit for fear of looking like “Sore Loserman.”

  69. 69
    CaseyL says:

    I’m in favor of an audit and/or recount, and don’t understand the reasons offered against it.

    How does a recount give Shitgibbon more legitimacy than he has? Is this like a Schrodinger’s Election: as long as the count isn’t audited we can tell ourselves Shitgibbon wasn’t really elected, but if we know the actual count we can’t do that? That makes zero sense.

    I would be interested in knowing how much has to be raised, and if there’s a realistic chance of raising that much.

  70. 70
    piratedan says:

    well… if she puts the money raised to a recount… win… if she pockets the cash and doesn’t do anything, then all she’s done is burnish her reputation and will turn off people who were Green curious…

    if the recount shows more shenanigans or shines a light upon the GOP voter suppression efforts and how effective/illegal they are… then maybe America shrugs.. just like they shrugged at the Russians hacking the DNC, just like they did at all of Trump’s bullshit… because America wants change. They want someone to say he’s just going to fix things for white people because they’re tired of feeling squishy upon self examination about brown people, black people, gun ownership, gay people and trans people. They don’t want to feel squishy about this shit anymore. Also, if they get a tax cut, that’s awesome but will still allow them to complain about all of the services they used to get but now can’t because we cut that shit out of the budget in order to save them 200 bucks on their taxes… but hey, its most likely the fault of the Democrats anyway because of all of the power that they wield.

    So my question is, what happens if they actually uncover something nefarious that illustrates that the GOP really did fuck the Democrats out of an election victory?

    Do we suddenly expect Donald Trump and Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell to acknowledge this? Do we expect the media to suddenly have buyers remorse and turn into dispassionate journos?

    I’m not saying give up.. just wondering how this games out.

  71. 71
    Amir Khalid says:

    If you all are going to give money for a recount, I think it better to give to John Cole than to Jill Stein. His motives don’t look as hinky.

  72. 72

    @Amir Khalid: Amir! People were asking how you were earlier.

  73. 73
    Elizabeth says:

    @InternetDragons:
    They are not all idiots and some of them actually have good ideas otherwise the Democrats wouldn’t keep stealing them.

  74. 74
    Elizabeth says:

    And not a few of those contributions came from people who dislike Stein as much as any of us here do. But they donated anyway. That’s a testament to how badly people want to do something, and how strongly people feel about preserving the integrity of our elections. Regardless of who wins.

    This is why I am glad they raised it. Because I am fairly sure that Clinton’s campaign is looking at this and thinking “we have some backing. Let’s do it.” They don’t throw caution to the wind easily and they know what kind of hell the media will put Clinton through if she does file.

    They need to be very very sure and having back up from the public helps.

  75. 75
    Amir Khalid says:

    @Major Major Major Major:
    I’ve been doing relatively poorly healthwise, alas. Bad reaction to an antibiotic, I think.

  76. 76
    NotMax says:

    The Pirate Party in the U.S. has greater legitimacy than does Stein and the Libertarians.

  77. 77

    @Amir Khalid: I’m sorry to hear that. You are missed and I hope you feel better soon.

  78. 78
    Elizabeth says:

    @efgoldman: *shrugs*

    She raised barely 3.5 million for the entire campaign. This is people saying “any port in a storm.”

  79. 79
  80. 80
    SWMBO says:

    @Amir Khalid: Good to hear from you, always. Here’s hoping that a change in meds fixes what ails you.

  81. 81
    piratedan says:

    @NotMax: will you be quiet!!!!! I’ve been trying to build a grass roots organization to be more legit than the Greens have ever been, but it takes time…. I really can’t afford the media scrutiny just yet until a few more villagers have been successfully suborned.

  82. 82
    Amir Khalid says:

    @SWMBO:
    Oh, I’ve finished the antibiotics. I’m waiting for the side-effects to wear off.

  83. 83
    Aleta says:

    @piratedan: What’s all this talk about sunburned villagers? Where did all the giant shade trees go? Think about the little village children! The little children who would climb the trees and build their forts and rake the leaves into piles, and then run, and jump into the piles of leaves and … what? Oh. Never mind.

  84. 84
    Dog Dawg Damn says:

    I hope she gets her hands on all that sweet, sweet hippy money.

    And then I hope she keeps it for herself, spurning her idiot supporters, and forever delegitimizing the ridiculous Green Party farce.

  85. 85
    Amir Khalid says:

    @Dog Dawg Damn:
    The Green movement is an entirely legitimate political force in most of Europe. Only in America does it seem to have been joined by the politically immature and led by grifters.

  86. 86
    Steeplejack (tablet) says:

    @Amir Khalid:

    Sorry to hear that. Get well soon! Liverpool need you.

  87. 87

    @Amir Khalid: I don’t think anybody means anything other than the Jill Stein Vanity Project Green Party when they say ‘Green Party’ over here.

  88. 88
    Steeplejack (tablet) says:

    @Major Major Major Major:

    Similar to “Tyler Perry Presents Tyler Perry’s Madea Starring Tyler Perry.”

  89. 89

    @Steeplejack (tablet): It’s “Tyler Perry Is Tyler Perry Presents Tyler Perry’s Madea Starring Tyler Perry.”

  90. 90
    Gretchen says:

    Here’s one reason I have a tinfoil hat about voting machines:
    Did you ever take a chemistry class where you put various concentrations of something, say glucose, in test tubes, boiled them for awhile, put them all in a spectrophotometer to measure their absorbance at a particular wavelength, and then plotted absorbance vs. concentration on an X-Y graph to determine absorbance of an unknown? That’s what the instruments I run do, only faster, easier, and with amazingly minuscule amounts of sample and reagent. So, for everything we measure, we calibrate the instrument. We give it a sample of none of whatever we’re trying to measure, say creatinine, and a known amount of the same thing, say 20 milligrams per milliliter. We tell the instrument which is which, and it carries out the reaction and measures the absorbance of each. Then we run controls, in this case 1.25, 3.5, and 20 mg/ml creatinine, and the the instruments compare the absorbances of the controls to a curve drawn from the calibrators. The values of the controls are read off the calibration curve, and the controls have to come out within an expected range to prove that the instrument is working correctly and everything is as it should be. Then we run unknowns, and assume that they are correct if the periodic controls we run continue to fall within expected ranges. We have one test where we are expected to measure something that’s below the range for which the test works well. The cutoff is supposed to be 20, but the controls often run, say, 12 and 19, when they should be 15 and 25. Not good. So in the software of the instrument, where, for every test, it says “what is the concentration of the calibrators?”, where it should be 20, we enter 25 or even 30 or 35, to get it to bump up and work. Every single other one of the dozens of other tests we run has an accurate factor value, but this one doesn’t. We have numerous inspectors from various federal and state agencies throughout the year come through and inspect our instruments and our records. They can look at whatever they want to look at. The software is open, and if they wanted it to look at it they could. They could ask why the factor for the 20 level is 30. Nobody ever has. I don’t think anyone has ever asked me to see the parameters at all, but if someone did, I would of course show them the parameters of any other test on the instrument, or any 10 parameters. All the rest of them are exactly as they should be. I don’t feel bad about this, because for every positive test, a new sample is collected and run by gas chromatography, which is much more accurate than what we do, and it doesn’t come up false positive, but less positive than one would expect. But it’s not kosher and would not bear inspection. Nobody has ever looked.
    The voting machines in my county have proprietary software that the manufacturer assures us is kosher, but nobody else is allowed to look at it. The county can’t look at it or test it to assure that it’s working properly. They’re saying “trust us”. They think it’s working properly because nobody has ever been allowed to look. Remember, I run controls every 30 minutes on my instruments, but we are not allowed to run controls on our voting machines.
    Anybody who wants to has been allowed to look at our software, and many inspectors have been tasked with making sure we are doing things correctly, but nobody has ever thought to do so. Every report on that test for the last 15 years has gone out about 5% higher than it would have been if measured with the correct factor. Voting machines with software that nobody has been allowed to look at or test could do the same thing.

  91. 91
    Glaukopis in Ohio says:

    When people talk about voting machine hacks they almost always talk about external hacks, which seems unlikely, as many have said, but I’ve always assumed the real danger was from internal sources – the companies that write that proprietary software. It’d be trivial to take each 50th vote for a Democrat & flip it to the Republican.

  92. 92
    prob50 says:

    @eemom: Lurkers, help me out here. Aren’t there millions of you?

    We may be millions./, but it’s a little hard to tell because we don’t communicate with anyone, even other Lurkers, should they actually exist.

    But all the voices in my head are telling me that we are many. I sure wish they would shut the fuck up, I’m trying to watch “Jeopardy” and I can’t hear Alex when he tells us the answers to the questions.

    Other than that I’ve got nothing to say.

  93. 93
    Srv says:

    @eemom: I’m a meta troll lurker, but no, the readership of this blog would be relatively small. And, you seem nice.

  94. 94
    Bruce Baugh says:

    Stein does have a clear, simple vested interest in an honest recount: she’s got automatic ballot access at stake. That’s a pretty sensible concern for any candidate.

    I was an early boarder on the “Stein is terrible and so is her campaign” bus. I was right, too. :) But America’s stupid, pernicious rules on legal standing say that she’s one of the few people who can initiate a recount. The Clinton campaign should have taken the lead on this, and have a nagging feeling that the results of a recount will end up making their declining to do so reflect badly on the Democratic Party. (While I’m at it, I’d like to see more Democrats point out that the mass media aren’t any branch of government and that their projections of winners aren’t binding on candidates. And a pony.) But since they’re not, I was glad to donate a bit to the Stein effort.

    I’ve always been pretty inclusive on recounts. Whenever there’s room for honest people of good will, both parts of that required, there should be a recount. It’s better to know than to wonder. (Strictly speaking, “honest people of good will” as I define them doesn’t include Stein. But if she can be responsible for something that will help remove uncertainty for people who do fit it, I’m fine with that. I don’t only support good deeds done by people I entirely approve of.)

    If Stein takes the money and runs off to record an electro-folk album or whatever, I will readily admit I got rooked. If the recount happens and interesting things get revealed, I’m hoping to see a little crow-eating from those super-quick to dismiss it all.

  95. 95
    Ken says:

    Long time Lurker here: let’s play a game: what would hillary owe Jill stein if these audits somehow resulted in trump having to step down and hillary becoming president?

  96. 96
    BretH says:

    I think it’s highly unlikely anything hinky would be found. Trump’s victory pretty much surprised everyone so if any manipulation were to have been done it would have been pretty large to overcome the apparent odds – and he would have won by bigger margins. Unless the machines could somehow in real time adjust themselves so that they let Trump win by “just that much”. Furthermore, of machines were tampered with, they were tampered with by someone. Someone coded the exploit – and not just from one company. Seems to defy logic that something wouldn’t get leaked given it would be, oh, the #1 news story of the decade.

  97. 97
    Srv says:

    @Ken: based on your totally plausible scenario, I would say Hillary owes Stein a sparkly unicorn.

  98. 98
    Nancy R. Richardson says:

    The most gifted con artists will get you to pay to break your own heart, and are safely out of town before you realize you have been had. At best this a public relations gimmick, at worst this an effort to damage Democrats by painting them as gullible bad losers. In any case, it is always in Steins interest to have a Trump presidency, because that way she will attract more disaffected liberals looking to blame Clinton.

    And let’s be honest, the likelihood of any real change of character of this person is extremely remote.

  99. 99
  100. 100
    artem1s says:

    whatever they do with it, they’ve got over $3M. I hope their donors hold their feet to the fire. I hope they have decent lawyers working on it and not some vaxxer hack. But I fear it will be all, ‘we tried but the system is rigged against us’ when the states turn down their petition.

  101. 101
    elm says:

    I’m confident this will end up in Stein’s 2020 campaign fund to attack Democrats and re-elect Donald Trump.

  102. 102
    PhoenixRising says:

    @Bruce Baugh:

    The Clinton campaign should have taken the lead on this, and have a nagging feeling that the results of a recount will end up making their declining to do so reflect badly on the Democratic Party.

    No response to this unprecedented situation could be more wrong.

    In the unlikely event that a recount or audit uncovers results that throw the AP calls (where in the COTUS does ‘AP tells us who won MI’? appear again?) into question or require the states to reverse them, the candidate who can credibly use the facts to sway the EC can’t be the one who led this charge. There will be riots in the streets if those states change their EC votes regardless; I’d be concerned about a military coup if the recount and reapportionment were a Democratic Party project.

    These really are 2 distinct problems:
    1) A catastrophically unprepared lifelong con artist may have persuaded a slim majority of white men in Rust Belt states to elevate his con into elected office, and
    2) We don’t have a system to be sure whether that occurred.

    Only a party on the ballot can request a recount. If Gary Johnson and Bill Weld were patriots they’d have filed this. Instead they put party (both are former GOP governors) before country.

    Jill Stein is all 3, but that’s no reason to suggest that the Dems should have done this instead.

  103. 103
    Applejinx says:

    Jesus, you people. I grew up in Lexington and that is literally as far as my sympathies for Jill Stein go. I do not care whether she does well, I don’t like her silly music, and I don’t like her general attitude.

    But a bunch of you Balloon Juicers are goddamn lunatics. Why the fuck are you desperately arguing against recounts, and casting aspersions on that whole process? Clinton’s DRAMATICALLY won the popular vote, by millions of votes, and we know with reasonable confidence that the Russians were heavily involved in Trump’s electoral win, but it’s snarkaliciously uncool to try and push for any recounts… because Stein is making it all up and will only take all the money and spend it on patchouli oil?

    What the fuck. You’re sounding like Alex Jones nutbags of the left. When did Clinton Democrats get this unmoored from reality? I know from working on Election day that Clinton Democrats did not canvass all the places that we had turfs in VoteBuilder for, in New Hampshire for fuck’s sake which is a swing state.

    Have you been trying to lose for some godforsaken reason and now it comes to light? None of this makes any sense.

  104. 104
    kindness says:

    While I love seeing anyone mess with TrumpCo’s head giving Jill any credence is a reach for me. But that would be one fun recount, eh?

  105. 105
    PhoenixRising says:

    @Applejinx: I think a bit of dread and resignation, with a light coating of regret, explains it.

    Think about it this way: I actually DID do everything I could to make sure that GOTV happened. (There were 0 precincts in Maricopa County that didn’t get canvassed by Dems, and that had never happened before.) Many of our cynical commenters didn’t. They were too cool to bestir themselves because the polls were not close. The heartbreak of realizing that this may have happened and they didn’t stop it is more comfortable than the heartbreak of knowing that it DID happen and they didn’t stop it. That’s the explanation for Schroedinger’s election advocates: they can’t bear to know for sure.

    As to the more reality-based, less-emotional aspect: I am taking my daughter and niece to a firing range and teaching them how to concealed-carry responsibly, either way. This outcome is catastrophic for their futures if it is what it looks like (small last-minute swing among white Rust Belt late Boomers). If it’s not what it looks like (verifiable Russian interference at the margins, targeted to match a credible narrative) I don’t know which way the National Guard in Oklahoma swings. And no one else does either. There is a rational argument for leaving ill enough alone. Not saying anyone has made it, but…

  106. 106
    Tilda Swinton's Bald Cap says:

    To be clear, I don’t think that in the end Stein swung the election; like most such counterfactuals, it founders in Pennsylvania. I also don’t think this is much of a defense. In a period of political crisis, she ran a campaign whose only possible material effect would be to put Donald Trump in the White House, and spent her campaign reinforcing the ridiculous narrative that this was a race between to equally corrupt candidates who were similar ideologically. We can be extremely confident that this campaign was dishonest as well as counterproductive. When you willingly join a firing squad set to execute much of the New Deal and Great Society, it’s not much of a mitigating factor that you were ultimately given a blank.

  107. 107
    Ella in New Mexico says:

    @eemom:

    Cole, for fuck’s sake, please take this issue seriously. It really is a CHANCE, however slim.

    @Applejinx:

    But a bunch of you Balloon Juicers are goddamn lunatics. Why the fuck are you desperately arguing against recounts, and casting aspersions on that whole process? Clinton’s DRAMATICALLY won the popular vote, by millions of votes, and we know with reasonable confidence that the Russians were heavily involved in Trump’s electoral win, but it’s snarkaliciously uncool to try and push for any recounts… because Stein is making it all up and will only take all the money and spend it on patchouli oil?

    This is the Achilles heel of a chunk of Balloon Juice regulars: confident self assurance that they’ve got the one and the only answer and everyone else can just STFU. Even if it is directly opposed to their own interests.

    I don’t think anyone here mocking Jill Stein understands the back story, or the very suspicious information that warrants her doing exactly what she says she’s going to do.

    I’m not one to glom onto improbable conspiracy theories. But after doing some research, and finding out things like how the Russians did a dry run practice in the Ukraine’s last Presidential election and nearly succeeded in hacking their voting machines, I’ve come to the conclusion that it is a real possibility that the same thing COULD have occurred here in the US.

    Memories are very short in here at BJ and in the US, but it was only months ago that their hackers broke into the email accounts of a national political party and other associated people, and disseminated a ton of embarrassing information that DID effect the voter’s choices.

    It’s only been a couple of months since we all saw a giant DDoS using “internet connected toasters” (look up that phrase-it’s short for all the blind internet connected devices we now own that have their own IP addresses and can be used to ping internet sites without the owner’s knowledge) that shut down Twitter, Paypal, and and the entire east and west coast operations of Dyn. It has only been a few months since US intelligence services announced concerns that indeed, Russia was able to and may be trying to hack into our electronic voting systems.

    When you read the information the Professors of Computer Science took to the Clinton campaign, and you realize that these guys are not nut jobs, not conspiracy theorists and are risking their professional stature simply by bringing up the potential of hacking, you understand that this is a serious assertion on their part. https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-was-hacked-look-at-the-ballots-c61a6113b0ba#.eo78qqdyz

    @Gretchen:

    The voting machines in my county have proprietary software that the manufacturer assures us is kosher, but nobody else is allowed to look at it. The county can’t look at it or test it to assure that it’s working properly. They’re saying “trust us”. They think it’s working properly because nobody has ever been allowed to look. Remember, I run controls every 30 minutes on my instruments, but we are not allowed to run controls on our voting machines

    Gretchen hits something key to why we are vulnerable: we have allowed our voting machine use to become a business enterprise, not a civic one. In too many states there is absolutely NO accountability on the part of the manufacturers of the machines, and they often have dubious allegiances with Republican or right-wing interests. It’s another reason they could have made shitty, easy to corrupt software-in case they were directed to use it someday.

    Go look at how many previously heavy Democratic precincts in just the Philly area alone magically flipped to Trump this time around. Ask yourself how that could happen, given the numbers, the solid history of the residents of those precincts voting heavily Democrat, and why the electronic voting machines there should not be audited, based on statistics alone.

    If you go precinct by precinct, you see a clearer picture than if you just look at state tallies, which, by the way, is exactly how most people in the cyber intelligence field say that flipping would be most successful: random machines in random places infected with malware that is triggered by date and might even self destruct afterwards. It’s what they found in the Ukraine.

    I donated $25 bucks to Stein because she is one of only a few people who has the standing to challenge the results in these states. Maybe she’s horrified enough of a world under Trump that she actually wants to know the truth. Or maybe she wants attention. Either way, because it’s a tricky, sticky thing for Hilary to do it herself, I don’t give a fuck if you hate Stein. She’s doing the right thing, even if it proves we did NOT get hacked, which would be a relief, in my opinion. I can go back to blaming my stupid in-laws for voting for a Nazi, not the Russians.

    So John Cole, and everyone else here allowing yourselves to be blinded by your dislike of someone who ran against Clinton: shake it off. You’re wrong on this one.

  108. 108
    Ella in New Mexico says:

    In addition to the above, don’t forget that the Russians have been monitoring our polling data for months now. Thanks to a free press, we post tons of detailed information daily here in the US in the run up to the election, down to the precincts and it would not take any genius to correlate the easier to hack machine districts with polling data. The experts say you target seemingly “random” locations in states that are close and you tip the vote to over to the 50+ zone where the winner takes all.

    You’ll notice that in states that no one really cares about, we are not seeing this “close” of an election. In PA, Hilary appears to have lost by only 68500 or so votes statewide, which is way outside the pre-election polls with her winning by 3-5%. In states which were not battlegrounds, her polling correlated with the vote pretty nicely.

  109. 109
    Phoebes says:

    Imagine my shock and dismay when I realized I went to high school with Jill Stein in Highland Park, Illinois and was only one year younger and that I could have possibly known her! Yuck…

  110. 110
    Hob says:

    @RaflW: Thanks for the correction— I had actually read the same document, I had just read it wrong.

  111. 111
    Ken says:

    @Srv: but half the posters here are taking it seriously. And it’s not implausible: has Wikileaks played their final card yet? Is Hillary and the dnc the only email they hacked? It’s only November 25.

  112. 112
    tobie says:

    @Ella in New Mexico: I haven’t forgotten the hack of the DNC or the denial of service fiasco in the run up to the election. I love Obama and support his initiatives in many areas, but when it comes to cybersecurity and keeping tabs on his intelligence and law enforcement services he’s been pretty disappointing. He tolerated a rogue FBI director, whose agency had a large, rogue division in NY. What’s to guarantee that any of the other intelligence services did’t have rogue elements? We’re so divided as a country that it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if the people we charge with protecting the country aren’t motivated by strong partisan interests.

  113. 113
    Litany says:

    http://ijr.com/wildfire/2016/1.....r-just-30/

    This is worth watching. I don’t know if the election was rigged or not, but it certainly wouldn’t have been impossible to do so. As @Glaukopis in Ohio: points out, voting machines have big security issues with external hacks but even bigger issues with internal ones. The fact that they run on proprietary software is a major threat to our democracy, and something that we should move to address as quickly as possible.

    Unfortunately, this would be a lot easier to do if prominent establishment liberals hadn’t gone out and scolded Trump voters for thinking it was even possible to rig an election in America. Again, these are the sorts of issues that make me lose faith in the mainstream Democratic Party (to forestall the inevitable deflection and scold I’ll point out that I’ve been a reliable Democratic voter and GOTVer all my life, midterms and all).

  114. 114
    NR says:

    @Applejinx:

    Have you been trying to lose for some godforsaken reason and now it comes to light?

    I don’t know if ‘mainstream’ Democrats are intentionally trying to lose the entire country to the Republicans.

    But if they were, would they be doing anything differently?

  115. 115
    Ella in New Mexico says:

    @tobie:

    I love Obama and support his initiatives in many areas, but when it comes to cybersecurity and keeping tabs on his intelligence and law enforcement services he’s been pretty disappointing. He tolerated a rogue FBI director, whose agency had a large, rogue division in NY. What’s to guarantee that any of the other intelligence services did’t have rogue elements?

    EXACTLY. Who’s to say they didn’t just look the other way when they saw signs of something fishy?

    Even so, we did see reports from legitimate news sources that the nation’s cybersecurity folks WERE concerned and watching, months before the election. So maybe this will be a way to see if their suspicions were at all founded.

  116. 116
    Elizabeth says:

    If you go precinct by precinct, you see a clearer picture than if you just look at state tallies, which, by the way, is exactly how most people in the cyber intelligence field say that flipping would be most successful: random machines in random places infected with malware that is triggered by date and might even self destruct afterwards. It’s what they found in the Ukraine.

    This is why I am not that leery of a recount. It isn’t possible to hack all 3K odd counties in the US. But they don’t need to hack that many. They need to hack only a small group of them to put it just over the top. And that is what seems to have happened. He won by a tiny but uniform amount in just the wrong states. With one state having a correction that dropped his total vote by 1,500.

    Jill Stein is a crackpot. No one cares if she does this. Which means that her doing this gives Clinton the cover she needs. Basically everyone is like “oh that grifter” when the media would have and probably still will explode at Clinton for “not accepting the results by asking for a perfectly legal part of the election process” if and when she files.

    This also gives Stein the press she loves and it might even convince Clinton to give the annoying creature a seat at some table. Whatever. But if it works-the world will be an immeasurably better place. I want Clinton to file. I want the DOJ to file. But I will take what I can get.

  117. 117
  118. 118
    Sub says:

    When this blows up in the left’s face, I’ll be standing by, smiling broadly. The arrogance of the left knows no bounds. Instead of learning from their loss, they stomp feet like children. Go ahead, waste your wallet on Steins loony scam, I can’t think of a better use for your money

  119. 119
    Amy says:

    @Suzanne: @eemom:
    Everyone, this is a scam. Obama and Hillary have said there is no evidence of voter hacking. Stein is only trying to raise money, that’s it. She is using Hillary backers vulnerabilities. Trump is our president, Get used to it. Obamacare will be replaced with something MUCH better. So dont worry about Obama Care, Trump will also save Social Security. Obama Care is a mess, many providers are pulling out, some states have none, Many people cannot find a doctor that will accept Obama Care. We need a change and something better that will work,

  120. 120
    Amy says:

    @Elizabeth: If anything, the vote machines were rigged in Hillary’s favor and she still lost. Alot of people noticed votes flip from Trump to Hillary, and, they are the ones that “noticed”. Many more probably did not. Soros company backed some of the machines as well.

Comments are closed.