Team Clinton has announced they will launch vote recounts in three states that are currently in Trump’s column: Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. Her thugly Soros-funded crew of extortionists and thieves is looking to assemble enough electoral votes to put Madame Clot in the Peoples’ House. Can she do it? Here are some numbers and a few thoughts on the subject. All statistics are from http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president Despite Politico’s known leanings, their site is reliable for raw data. All figures given are current as of 11/27/2016.
Nationwide, Hillary holds a popular vote lead of 1,322,095 votes: Hillary 62,523,126 vs Trump 61,201,031. The electoral college is just the reverse: Trump has 290 in his column and La Clot has 232. Remember that 270 electoral votes are needed to win.
Six unnamed electors who were committed to Trump have gone on record this past week, announcing that they have caved to Democrat extortion and will cast their votes for Hillary. Assuming this is true, Trump now can count on 284 votes, just 14 more than the bare minimum required for victory. More importantly, Madame Clinton may now hold 238, which is 32 short of the required 270 votes to win.
In Wisconsin, Trump leads the popular vote by 27,257. He has 1,409,467 votes to Clinton’s 1,382,210. Wisconsin controls 10 electoral votes.
Pennsylvania’s scorecard gives Trump a popular vote lead of 67,436: The Donald 2,912,141 vs Hillaroid 2,844,705. The Keystone state controls 20 electoral votes.
Rust-belt Michigan shows Trump leading by a mere 11,612 popular votes: 2,279,805 to 2,268,193. Michigan holds 16 electoral votes.
Flip Pennsylvania and Michigan, and the Dems remain in control of the Presidency. Not a good thought. How likely is this to happen?
Team Hillary claims there “may be evidence” of Russian hacking of voting machines in the three states in question. On the face of it, that is an absurdly ridiculous claim. The only reported hacks (if they even were hacks) of voting machines caused some machines to select Hillary as the default choice for president if the voter left that field blank. And a very few precincts here and there reported machines that switched Trump votes to Hillary, if the voter did not carefully review the ballot before finalizing it. And speaking of hacks … the only evidence we have of Russia actually hacking something is Hillary’s emails, via her private server. Nonetheless, with the level of corruption in the DoJ and the Federal Elections Commission, Clinton’s recounts may well proceed. If her clowns make any claims of “victory”, I hope Team Trump has a phalanx of savage attorneys on standby.
Some conservative talking heads are making the argument that, if votes cast by illegals are subtracted from the totals, Trump’s 1.3 million national popular vote deficit may well disappear. Trump may even discover he has more legitimate popular votes than Chelsea’s mom does. This argument sounds good, but how would one determine how many voters were illegals? The states where illegal immigrants vote in significant numbers do not have voter ID laws. Should conservatives drive around cities like Detroit, looking for furriners standing on street corners, and demand to know how they voted? Even in states with voter ID requirements, there is no legal way to connect an illegal’s vote to a specific candidate, even if you identify that the vote was ineligible.
To answer the question in this article’s title: YES, there is a slim chance that Clinton can claim enough electors to steal the Electoral College vote. If I were a betting man (and I am not), I would make pretty slim book on this happening … but it remains a possibility. Folks, you might back off the gloating and the schadenfreude a wee bit for the moment. This one ain’t over until someone puts their right hand on the Bible on January 20, 2017.
— SafeSpace —