Jill Stein Appears to be Getting More Publicity Now than During Campaign

Posted on by

Jill Stein has been featured in so many news stories for the last four days, one wonders if she isn’t getting more publicity now than during the presidential campaign. The Election Law Blog, which had little occasion to mention her before the election, has had several posts about her this week. Here is a Fox News story about her from November 25.

This interview with attorney John Bonifaz, a long-time electoral reformer, explains why recount supporters believe the recount is worthwhile. Also see this Alternet story about the status of the recount requests in each state.

Comments

Jill Stein Appears to be Getting More Publicity Now than During Campaign — 12 Comments

  1. How much publicity about the various ANTI-Democracy minority rule gerrymander systems ??? —

    ALL major legislative bodies in the USA having single member district systems and the Electoral College.

    —
    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.

  4. I am beginning to suspect that the true purpose of the recount challenges is NOT to overturn the results from Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, BUT to drag the process out as long as possible with challenges and counter challenges, so that NO electors are certified from those states in time for their votes to be cast.

  6. Walter Ziobro… And what would that accomplish other than sending it to the House to select a candidate, who would likely pick Trump, because they’d have to pick between Trump and Clinton with a Republican majority in the House.

  10. How many of those calling this a silly waste of time even know the rules for third parties participation in their state??
    Each is different. All involve gathering petition signatures of registered voters, to a certain number, between their chosen dates, some disqualify those who have voted in another party’s primary. Then when a state third party has achieved this access via petition, to retain it for the next election cycle , in certain states, the national party must receive a certain percentage of the presidential vote count. Therefore every single vote for the Green Party (or Lib, or Reform, etc) ticket counts toward this in that voter’s state, and if votes are lost, spoiled, stolen, etc. that threatens to affect the ability of that party to spend its resources on running candidates next time versus getting back on the hamster wheel of collecting signatures again. I don’t know the exact rules in MI, WI, or PA- I’m in NM and I know we managed to scrape past the required number. But when Green Party voters who knew they voted for Stein/Baraka don’t see any vote for the ticket reported in their county or precinct rolls, as some are apparently finding, something is rotten beyond Denmark. I’d like to see widespread recounts, but how much $$$ would be needed for that? Picking states where others have a vested interest too seems like an unfortunately logical way to go. And as Roque de la Fuente also has a horse in this derby, why aren’t folks questioning if Reform Party money is also in play?

  11. MI is one of the easiest to remain on the ballot. All you need is a statewide candidate to receive 1% of the winning SOS candidate’s vote. Right now it is just over 16,000. Party usually achieve this total by the statewide education of regent candidates. The Green Party had no problem cleaning this hurdle.

  12. AMcCarrick they would have to choose between Trump, Clinton and Johnson. They aren’t choosing Clinton obviously so it comes down to Trump or Johnson. Given the fact that Trump isn’t that well liked, it’s not a slam dunk for Trump.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.