2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWE CROSSED 2.5MIL target... lets have a recount
Last edited Thu Nov 24, 2016, 04:09 AM - Edit history (1)
https://jillstein.nationbuilder.com/recountI did my part... please everyone else
pangaia
(24,324 posts)What's up with that?
msongs
(67,405 posts)MyNameIsKhan
(2,205 posts)Lower down it says total cost 7-7 million!
musicblind
(4,484 posts)Apparently the first 2.5 million was just for Wisconsin.
LisaM
(27,811 posts)pnwmom
(108,978 posts)that the money raised will only go to pay for the first state's audit, and they need to raise more for the others.
Silver Gaia
(4,544 posts)I figured there would be additional fundraisers. Maybe they just figured to go for it, since they raised in one day what they had only hoped to raise by Friday. ?
pnwmom
(108,978 posts)Now she says it will cover the total costs of ONE audit, and they need to raise more money for the others.
Silver Gaia
(4,544 posts)needed says the same thing. I thought maybe I just misunderstood it. But then, it seems that most of us misunderstood it, so it was either poorly communicated, or was intentionally vague. Either way is a bit disappointing, isn't it? But I still have to hope this will happen. *sigh* I'm getting so tired of every day being a stress-filled nightmare.
pnwmom
(108,978 posts)JSup
(740 posts)Wisconsin: $1.1 million by Nov 25
Pennsylvania: $0.5 million by Nov 28
Michigan: $0.6 million by Nov 30
Those are filing fees alone. The costs associated with recounts are a function of state law. Attorney's fees are likely to be another $2-3 million, then there are the costs of the statewide recount observers in all three states. The total cost is likely to be $6-7 million.
They've got the filing fees for all three and are now working on attorney fees.
Though to be honest, you'd think some attorneys would jump at the chance for this for free.
Silver Gaia
(4,544 posts)And it still says that. I had been going on the $2.5 million being for the initial filing fees for all three states because those things all have close deadlines. I assumed they would do additional fundraising for attorney fees and observers, etc. later. If this is what they had intended all along, I wish they would have stated that more clearly. Doing it this way has just created mistrust.
Silver Gaia
(4,544 posts)recount Wisconsin, and need more to do MI and PA.
pnwmom
(108,978 posts)that amount they'd be able to file for all three states.
They didn't make it clear that the $2.5 was for only one state. What would be the point of doing only one? That wouldn't be enough to flip the election.
Silver Gaia
(4,544 posts)as a Democrat, as a Hillary supporter, as someone deeply disturbed by Trump and all he represents: I think I saw what I wanted to see. By this I mean that my view of what was said on the fundraiser page was based in my personal perspective of wanting to turn this thing around. I see this kind of thing all the time in misread communications. What is perfectly clear to one person may say something totally different to another person.
JSup captured perfectly the monetary information from the webpage in his or her post above:
Here are the filing fees and deadlines for each state:
Wisconsin: $1.1 million by Nov 25
Pennsylvania: $0.5 million by Nov 28
Michigan: $0.6 million by Nov 30
Those are filing fees alone. The costs associated with recounts are a function of state law. Attorney's fees are likely to be another $2-3 million, then there are the costs of the statewide recount observers in all three states. The total cost is likely to be $6-7 million.
Above that, it also says this (emphasis mine):
Election integrity experts have independently identified Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin as states where "statistical anomalies" raised concerns. 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.
All money raised goes toward recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. We hope to do recounts in all three states. If we only raise sufficient money for two, we will demand recounts in two states. If we only raise enough money for one, we will demand a recount in one state.
We cannot guarantee a recount will happen in any of these states we are targeting. We can only pledge we will demand recounts in those states.
If we raise more than what's needed, the surplus will also go toward election integrity efforts and to promote voting system reform.
It clearly says that the intention is not to help Hillary Clinton, but since that was MY intention, I (unintentionally) approached it from that point of view. It also states that they are looking at this on a state-by-state basis, but I (also unintentionally) ignored that. From THEIR point of view, I think they thought what they intended was perfectly clear. But in my own mind, I twisted it to match how I thought it should be done, which was this:
The filing fees ($1.1 + 0.5 + 0.6 million) add up to $2.2 million, so I figured the first goal was to raise money for the filing fees, with a .3 million buffer. I thought this because, to me, the MOST IMPORTANT thing was to file in all 3 states, because all 3 states would have to be turned around for it to affect the outcome of the election (what *I* wanted to see). There are also deadlines for these amounts, so again, to my way of thinking, if we want to recount ALL THREE, raising the money for the filing fees was obviously the priority. I figured there would then be additional fundraisers to raise money for attorney fees and observers (the additional amounts noted that brought the total to $6 or 7 million).
But reviewing all of this again, I can now see that this is not what was said. It was my interpretation of what was said, but I was ignoring two key factors: 1) that their intention was not to overturn the election in favor of Hillary, and 2) that they saw this as a state-by-state endeavor.
It could perhaps have been stated more clearly. For instance, it might have helped had they outlined the costs in the same manner, but then explained that they needed to raise money in this order: 1) $2.5 million to cover costs for Wisconsin, the state with the first filing deadline (11/25); 2) $2 million for Pennsylvania, with a filing deadline of 11/28; and finally, 3) $2,500 for Michigan, with a filing deadline of 11/30. But to them, I think it probably seemed clear enough, since they did say they were doing it on a state-by-state basis.
Anyhow, while I think they could have made things a bit more clear, I also think I am guilty of simply seeing what I wanted to see.
OK, so this was long... sorry. But I hope I was able to clearly convey how, from MY point of view, I believe I misread this situation.
That said, I am still onboard with this because I think these recounts NEED to happen.
Vinca
(50,271 posts)There needs to be an examination of the electronic equipment people vote on and any equipment used to count paper ballots.
woolldog
(8,791 posts)What surprise. You all are being taken advantage of.