Answer to Kentucky recount....................
From CNN, again, are they trying to cover their butts? Why the sudden articles that would appear to favor Bernie Sanders?
"But is Kentucky actually over?
More people voted for Martin O'Malley in Kentucky than the margin between Clinton and Sanders at the end of the night, a margin close enough to make a recount possible.
With all precincts reporting, Clinton held a 1,923 vote lead over Bernie Sanders, the office of Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes told CNN.
The state's results don't become official until May 31. Sanders has a week to request in writing a re-canvass that would involve Kentucky officials manually checking voting machines to make sure that the totals are correct."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/18/politics/kentucky-oregon-primary-highlight...
It goes on to point out that Lundergan-Grimes is a big Hillary fan and proclaimed Hillary the presumptive winner on this razor-thin margin before all the votes were in. People voted for O'Malley? Hard to believe, he's been out of the race for awhile. I understand that is how they stole votes in Ca's governor's race with ARRRRnold. An analysis of the votes showed that people way down the ticket received a lot of votes in area's where they didn't even run or where anyone would know their names. Instead of increasing Arnold's vote count they shifted votes from him opponent so it would not be as obvious a fix. I would be interested to see all those O'Malley votes, would have to be over 2000. Keep the heat on, we need real elections, not this BS that posses as elections. If we were a third-world country, the UN would be all over this!
Comments
I hope he requests a recount, since there were some problems
with voting machines. The votes for O'Malley or "other" don't bother me, though. That's just people saying they don't like either Hill or Bern. We all know why people might not like Hill. I can see relatively conservative Democratic Kentuckians also not liking Bern. Thus about 5% protest votes. Sounds about right to me. 0.5% difference between the two candidates, though - that's thin enough that I think the votes should be rechecked by hand. Of course, it will result in more smears of sour grapes, but who cares? They smear him thusly anyway.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
... but by a number of measures --
inequality; percentage of population below the poverty line; healthcare outcomes -- the U.S. IS a third-world country. Maybe the U.N. monitors should just step in, anyway.
When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.
Again, tweet this to Sanders
Maybe we can get a recount and promote c99
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
They should recount
Just as a double-check on the machines.
"Polls don't tell us how well a candidate is doing; Polls tell us how well the media is doing." ~ Me
FYI on Kentucky recounts
More here: Kentucky Recount Laws
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass