Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Statistical

(19,264 posts)

5. There is razor thin and then really razor thin.

Reply to hedda_foil (Original post)

Wed Nov 4, 2020, 11:29 AM

Nov 2020

90%+ of recounts result in no change. Most the successful recounts have been on margins below 0.1%. Clinton was down by far more than that.

I think it is incredibly unlikely that a recount would have made any difference. Also didn't that piece of shit Stein sucker everyone's money to do a recount and it has essentially negligible effect.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

13 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why didn't Hillary's team file for recounts in MI, WI and PA in 2016? [View all] hedda_foil Nov 2020 OP

I seem to remember a recount in MI in 2016 yodermon Nov 2020 #1

I remember a Wisconsin recount because of that idiot Rice4VP Nov 2020 #4

I believe Stein asked for a recount SomedayKindaLove Nov 2020 #13

Recounts never change the outcome Thrill Nov 2020 #2

Perhaps They Understood The Realities, Ma'am The Magistrate Nov 2020 #3

Lol flying rabbit Nov 2020 #8

There is razor thin and then really razor thin. Statistical Nov 2020 #5

Because she lost and was grown-up enough to admit it BeyondGeography Nov 2020 #6

See above. Because they were realists. stopdiggin Nov 2020 #7

Because unless you are willing to throw out a lot of ballot during recount, Claustrum Nov 2020 #9

Jill Stein asked for a recount in WI. 33taw Nov 2020 #10

Jinx! BumRushDaShow Nov 2020 #12

Jill Stein did the honor BumRushDaShow Nov 2020 #11