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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Hillary Clinton just floated the possibility of contesting the 2016 election [View all]Hortensis
(58,785 posts)131. "Do you think, at some point, it would be legitimate to challenge the legitimacy of the election?"
Only wish it were possible.
Hillary: I don't know if there's any legal constitutional way to do that. I think you can raise questions. ... He (Trump) knew they were trying to do whatever they could to discredit me with emails, so there's obviously a trail there, but I don't know that in our system we have any means of doing that, but I just wanted to add to the point you made. There's no doubt they influenced the election: We now know more about how they did that.
Let me just put it this way, if I had lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College and in my first day as president the intelligence community came to me and said, "The Russians influenced the election," I would've never stood for it. Even though it might've advantaged me, I would've said, "We've got to get to the bottom of this." I would've set up an independent commission with subpoena power and everything
Terry Gross: I want to get back to the question, would you completely rule out questioning the legitimacy of this election if we learn that the Russian interference in the election is even deeper than we know now?
Hillary: No. I would not. I would say
Gross: You're not going to rule it out.
Hillary: No, I wouldn't rule it out.
Gross: So what are the means, like, this is totally unprecedented in every way
Hillary: It is.
Gross: What would be the means to challenge it, if you thought it should be challenged?
Hillary: Basically I don't believe there are. There are scholars, academics, who have arguments that it would be, but I don't think they're on strong ground. But people are making those arguments. I just don't think we have a mechanism.
Hillary: You know, the Kenya election was just overturned and really what's interesting about that and I hope somebody writes about it, Terry the Kenyan election was also a project of Cambridge Analytica, the data company owned by the Mercer family that was instrumental in the Brexit vote.
There's now an investigation going on in the U.K., because of the use of data and the weaponization of information. They were involved in the Trump campaign after he got the nomination, and I think that part of what happened is Mercer said to Trump, "We'll help you, but you have to take Bannon as your campaign chief. You've got to take Kellyanne Conway and these other people who are basically Mercer protégés."
And so we know that there was this connection. So what happened in Kenya, which I'm only beginning to delve into, is that the Supreme Court there said there are so many really unanswered and problematic questions, we're going to throw the election out and redo it. We have no such provision in our country. And usually we don't need it.
Now, I do believe we should abolish the Electoral College, because I was sitting listening to a report on the French election and the French political analyst said, "You know in our country the person with the most votes wins, unlike in yours." And I think that's an anachronism. I've said that since 2000.
Let me just put it this way, if I had lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College and in my first day as president the intelligence community came to me and said, "The Russians influenced the election," I would've never stood for it. Even though it might've advantaged me, I would've said, "We've got to get to the bottom of this." I would've set up an independent commission with subpoena power and everything
Terry Gross: I want to get back to the question, would you completely rule out questioning the legitimacy of this election if we learn that the Russian interference in the election is even deeper than we know now?
Hillary: No. I would not. I would say
Gross: You're not going to rule it out.
Hillary: No, I wouldn't rule it out.
Gross: So what are the means, like, this is totally unprecedented in every way
Hillary: It is.
Gross: What would be the means to challenge it, if you thought it should be challenged?
Hillary: Basically I don't believe there are. There are scholars, academics, who have arguments that it would be, but I don't think they're on strong ground. But people are making those arguments. I just don't think we have a mechanism.
Hillary: You know, the Kenya election was just overturned and really what's interesting about that and I hope somebody writes about it, Terry the Kenyan election was also a project of Cambridge Analytica, the data company owned by the Mercer family that was instrumental in the Brexit vote.
There's now an investigation going on in the U.K., because of the use of data and the weaponization of information. They were involved in the Trump campaign after he got the nomination, and I think that part of what happened is Mercer said to Trump, "We'll help you, but you have to take Bannon as your campaign chief. You've got to take Kellyanne Conway and these other people who are basically Mercer protégés."
And so we know that there was this connection. So what happened in Kenya, which I'm only beginning to delve into, is that the Supreme Court there said there are so many really unanswered and problematic questions, we're going to throw the election out and redo it. We have no such provision in our country. And usually we don't need it.
Now, I do believe we should abolish the Electoral College, because I was sitting listening to a report on the French election and the French political analyst said, "You know in our country the person with the most votes wins, unlike in yours." And I think that's an anachronism. I've said that since 2000.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
145 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Hillary Clinton just floated the possibility of contesting the 2016 election [View all]
babylonsister
Sep 2017
OP
"Do you think, at some point, it would be legitimate to challenge the legitimacy of the election?"
Hortensis
Sep 2017
#131
Whoa. Well the PTB did screw her over, which is ironic because people thought "they" were coronating
bettyellen
Sep 2017
#2
She should treat it like a campaign, make stops all over the country rallying her supporters
Not Ruth
Sep 2017
#6
How can you say that when you don't know what Mueller will discover? Why should she rule it out
pnwmom
Sep 2017
#14
There is theoretically a possibility, although I cannot imagine this would occur.
stevenleser
Sep 2017
#29
Why would Congressional repubs agree to a process that resulted in a Democrat becoming president
onenote
Sep 2017
#61
Exactly as I explained, to avoid having Trump, Pence and a large retinue of underlings prosecuted.
stevenleser
Sep 2017
#118
They aren't sacrificing themselves. You need to think this through and research the history
stevenleser
Sep 2017
#121
There was no "constitutional process" for the way Al Gore was denied the Presidency,
pnwmom
Sep 2017
#30
We don't know what Mueller will discover. If he discovered, for instance, that Russian hackers
pnwmom
Sep 2017
#71
The "system" knew all about ballot box stuffing and other forms of electoral fraud
onenote
Sep 2017
#113
Always remember, there is no "throw out the US Constitution" provision in the US Constitution.
longship
Sep 2017
#90
I must be dumb. I don't get how questioning legitimacy means contesting or a formal challenge. n/t
seaglass
Sep 2017
#12
It doesn't. But that doesn't stop the wishful thinkers from hoping pigs will fly.
onenote
Sep 2017
#67
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'll see your golf ball and raise you a nuke.
L. Coyote
Sep 2017
#19
"questioning" is not the same as "contesting". she only comments on "questioning" nt
msongs
Sep 2017
#24
I'm not sure about setting that precedent at this date. Kind of like rubbing a dog's nose in dung
Hoyt
Sep 2017
#25
There was no possibility of electronic hacking when constitution was written.
we can do it
Sep 2017
#108
Doesn't matter. You ammend the Constitution then. The only alternative is impeachment,
still_one
Sep 2017
#112
"and I have never heard her broach the possibility of a formal challenge of the results." - and...
PoliticAverse
Sep 2017
#31
The problem is there is no remedy for this. The election won't be thrown out . . .
Vinca
Sep 2017
#41
Relevant to your first statement. Things are the way they are until they aren't.
Fullduplexxx
Sep 2017
#68
Idk . I'll leave that to the lawyers to pull something out of their butts like scotus did with
Fullduplexxx
Sep 2017
#129
questioning the legitimacy of the election and "contesting" it in some formal way are different thin
onenote
Sep 2017
#53
I heard the interview on NPR and Hillary says it is impossible to contest the election
LeftInTX
Sep 2017
#58
I just don't see anything like that happening. It seems highly unlikely to me.
NurseJackie
Sep 2017
#59
chris cillizza poops on the floor me: dude clean it up chris: youre just goading me me: nah dude it
Madam45for2923
Sep 2017
#65
everyone who voted should be cheering loudly. we need to know our elections are legitimate.
spanone
Sep 2017
#77
I love this. I hope every roach in the WH is squirming, including the Trump crime family.
Tatiana
Sep 2017
#95
No judge is going to be kicked off the bench. The Senate seats the SCOTUS nominees.
AncientGeezer
Sep 2017
#116
I'm worried with SCOTUS stacked in the GOP's favor it would be another Bush V Gore.
Initech
Sep 2017
#119
good for her.....trump would have been in the courts for 8 months now if he had lost.
spanone
Sep 2017
#143