[ExI] ok, so prove it
spike66 at att.net
Fri Nov 11 05:26:00 UTC 2016
>… On Behalf Of John Clark
ubject: Re: [ExI] ok, so prove it
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 1:59 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net <mailto:spike66 at att.net> > wrote:
> >…what if we do a recount, but only count those votes which have some kind of physical proof.
>…Throwing away millions of votes when there is no evidence there is anything wrong with them is no way to increase the confidence of the American people that things are not rigged…
Agreed. However, if things are rigged, then we want to decrease confidence of the American people that things are not rigged. OK, so prove it.
>…If even Hillary publicly accepts that the election was not rigged then I think we should too…
If even Hillary publicly accepts that the election was not rigged, I still don’t. You know I am not a fan of Hillary, but this is her one chance remaining: request a recount.
Here’s where I am really going with this: I don’t really think the vote was rigged, or if so not by all that much. But it doesn’t take much, just 1 percent. And what if it is rigged? And what if it had gone the other way but just barely, and Trump did call for a recount? And what if the election people had just said no? Then what? Oh this could have been trouble. So why do we keep playing American roulette, when we don’t need to? It’s risky, dangerous.
Today we see protestors calling for murder, these peaceful types:
Our local high school principal is in the news today for going to a student walkout and shouting over the public address system “Fuck Donald Trump!” to the cheers of students. I just don’t recall that happening when I was in high school and Jimmy Carter won.
How much worse would it have been had it gone the other way, with all those disappointed deplorables?
We need a system which we can trust and verify. We are playing with fire.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat