From the first Morning Jolt of the week:
Hillary Clinton 2020: Because America Hasn’t Suffered Enough.
Hillary Clinton declared Saturday, through her campaign, that she supported the recount process in Wisconsin started by Green Party candidate Jill Stein and would support potential recounts in two other closely contested states, Pennsylvania and Michigan.
The margin in these states is small in terms of percentage, but still pretty darn large in terms of actual votes.
In Michigan, the first count found Trump leading by 10,704 votes.
Michigan’s Board of Canvassers is scheduled to certify the state’s election results at 2 p.m. Monday. After those results are certified, Stein has until Wednesday to request a recount through the Secretary of State. If that happens, a tedious and expensive process will begin to hand count the 4,799,284 ballots cast in the presidential race in the state.
The Michigan Secretary of State’s office said Saturday it is researching how federal law affects the timeline to complete a recount, but it anticipates that a recount would have to be done before Dec. 19 when the electoral college, including the 16 people who make up Michigan’s, meets to cast its votes for president, said spokesman Fred Woodhams.
To cover the cost, Stein, as the person requesting the recount, will have to pay $125 per precinct – 6,300 in Michigan – for a cost of $787,500.
In Wisconsin, Trump leads by 22,525 votes. In Pennsylvania, he’s ahead by 68,030 votes.
In 2011, a recount in a Wisconsin State Supreme Court race found an additional 310 votes for the Democratic challenger – with a remaining margin of 7,006 votes.
The explanation from the Clinton camp is that they don’t expect the results to be reversed – they’re just going along with Stein’s effort to reassure the public!
Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides. If Jill Stein follows through as she has promised and pursues recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan, we will take the same approach in those states as well. We do so fully aware that the number of votes separating Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the closest of these states — Michigan — well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount. But regardless of the potential to change the outcome in any of the states, we feel it is important, on principle, to ensure our campaign is legally represented in any court proceedings and represented on the ground in order to monitor the recount process itself.
This morning Ron Fournier, who’s been covering the Clintons since the 1980s, offers an intensely groan-inducing report: “Raising doubts about legitimacy of election, even w/out overturning result, is part of Clinton’s plans to keep her options open for 2020… Make some calls. You’ll hear the same from her confidants.”
Yes, we may not be as finished with Hillary Rodham Clinton as we thought we were.
If you think you’re depressed about the thought of Hillary Clinton 2020, imagine how Democrats feel! If you’re any Democrat with presidential ambitions, you might end up sidelined for yet another cycle as the woman who managed to blow a presidential race with more advantages than any other candidate ever gives it one more shot! Sorry, Corey Booker, Kamala Harris, and every other rising star: the 73-year-old Clinton, who’s only won two general elections in her life against a pair of tomato can Republicans, is entitled to the nomination for one more chance against an incumbent!
You know who’s thrilled about the idea of Hillary Clinton 2020? Anyone involved with fundraising for the Clinton Foundation. They can finally tell those angry foreign governments that they might get some belated return on their investment!
As noted this weekend, the recount fundraising effort by Jill Stein is proving wildly lucrative, with more than $6.2 million now in her account for “election integrity efforts and to promote voting system reform.”
Suckers.