Election Recount Effort Stalls
The presidential election recount initiated recently by former Green Party candidate Dr. Jill Stein has stalled. Citing potential vote tampering and interference, Dr. Stein began recount efforts in three key battleground states: Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. In order to win the election, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton would need to win all three of these states, all of which went narrowly to Trump on election night. However, as the days ticked by and the federal certification deadline of December 13 passed, the chances for a different outcome grew less likely. Here, a look at where things stand in each of the three recount states.
Other Recounts Underway
In a response to Dr. Stein’s recount, independent presidential candidate Roque De La Fuente (who finished last nationally, with less than 1 percent of the vote) has paid for a recount in Nevada, where Clinton defeated Trump by 27,200 votes out of 1.1 million ballots cast. And in Florida, three voters filed a lawsuit asking for a hand recount of every paper ballot in Florida, claiming that election results were flawed due to hacking and other voting problems. Officially, Trump won Florida by more than 112,000 votes out of 9.4 million ballots cast. The Electoral College will convene to vote for the next president on December 19.
| The same federal judge who initially ordered the Michigan recount to begin ruled last Wednesday that it be halted. According to U.S. District Court Judge Mark Goldsmith, Dr. Stein never had the right to initiate the recount in the first place because she had no chance of winning the election in Michigan (she received only 1 percent of the vote) and thus could not be considered an “aggrieved candidate” under Michigan law. Goldsmith also argued that there was no evidence of hacking or vote tampering at the polls. Stein took her case to the Michigan Supreme Court, where it was denied on Friday afternoon – thus sealing Donald Trump’s narrow victory in Michigan (10,700 votes out of 4.8 million ballots cast). |
| According to Stein’s lawsuit, Pennsylvania’s aging, paperless voting machines make it a prime target for hacking. Because Pennsylvania is so ill-equipped to handle a massive recount effort by the deadline of December 13, many Republicans urged that it not take place at all. Dr. Stein used this as incentive to push forward with demands for a statewide recount, rather than drop it. However, the recount request awaits approval by a federal court, which is expected to come on Monday. Even if the recount effort is approved, that leaves only a day to complete it and certify the vote–a highly unlikely, and probably impossible, task. As of last week’s update, Trump led Clinton by 44,000 votes out of more than 6 million ballots cast. |
| Wisconsin is the one state where Stein’s recount effort is going well–as of Friday, it was about 70 percent complete, and is expected to be completed by the December 13 deadline. However, it has not had the outcome that Stein and the Democrats hoped for. As of Thursday, Clinton had only picked up 82 additional votes (Trump won by over 22,000 votes out of nearly 3 million ballots cast). Stein herself has gained 60 votes. |
What Do You Think? Some voters believe that a recount is necessary to ensure that fair and valid elections have taken place. Other voters believe that recounts, which are very expensive, are a waste of time and money. Do you think that candidates should be allowed to initiate ballot recounts after an election? Why or why not?
