Federal judge Mark Goldsmith dooms Jill Stein's ill-fated and ill-advised Michigan voter recount effort, which was clearly aimed to thwart Trump's electoral win.
WASHINGTON, December 8, 2016 — Finally, the author of the bestseller “The Art of the Deal” had his presidential win sealed as a Federal judge halted Michigan’s vote recount effort. On Wednesday, according to Fox News, U.S. District Judge Mark Goldsmith finally agreed with Republicans who argued that the three-day recount must end. Goldsmith linked his ruling to a state court decision, which found that last-place finisher, Green Party candidate Jill Stein, had no legal standing to launch a recount effort.
President-elect Donald Trump won Michigan’s 16 electoral votes by beating his Democrat opponent Hillary Clinton by a little over 10,000 votes. In an ultimately losing battle to thwart Trump’s surprise victory in that state, Stein attempted to liken her thinly-supported voter recount effort to the 2000 presidential Florida recount contest between then-Republican candidate Texas Governor George W. Bush and then-Democrat Presidential Candidate, Vice-President Al Gore.
Stein not only finished at the bottom of the 2016 presidential election sweepstakes. She was buried. Out of 4.8 million votes cast, she only received 51,463. Perhaps the only option for the Green Party candidate in the aftermath of Trump’s crushing electoral win was to generate millions of dollars in additional donations along with as drawing added media attention to her quixotic efforts.
Both State Republican Party Chairman Ronna Romney McDaniel and the state’s Attorney General Bill Schuette called the Federal court ruling a solid victory for voters and Michigan taxpayers. As Michigan GOP leader McDaniel noted, “Jill Stein, is not legally entitled to hijack the will of voters and drag them into an arduous and expensive publicity stunt,” reported Fox News.
In fact, since she launched her 3-state recount effort, which losing presidential candidate Clinton happily joined, Stein did more to disrupt the voting process than to call attention to actual legal issues involved with the electoral process. Stein only received some 1 percent of the vote in all three Rust Belt states—Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin—where she later pushed for recounts: hardly a mandate.
It appears likely that Stein’s effort to secure recounts only in those three formerly “Blue Wall” Democrat strongholds actually had more to do with working to hand Clinton an unearned presidential win over Trump. In the final national tally, Trump received 306 electoral votes to Clinton’s 232. If Stein’s “snowball’s chance in hell” recounts had successfully overturned the official tallies in all three states—which all experts deemed highly statistically unlikely—switching Michigan’s 16 electoral votes along with Wisconsin’s 10 and Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes would have handed Clinton an improbable electoral victory
Fortunately, the legal test for a recount is not based upon the wishes of a political presidential small-fry like Stein who never was harmed by 2016’s election result, which only affirmed her marginal candidacy. That point was acknowledged by Judge Goldsmith. He ultimately declared Stein’s recount effort had been doomed from the start because she had no realistic chance of winning the 16 Michigan electors after a recount and was, therefore, not legally an “aggrieved” candidate.
The political recount avalanche Stein apparently expected never materialized. Instead, it remained a small snowball even before it started rolling down the presidential recount hill. For the record, Stein would be well-advised at this point to head back to school and take a few political science courses to discover why her speculative claims and “not actual injury” demonstrate her alarming lack of integrity—something that the nation should now be clearly aware of.Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Communities Digital News
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.
Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.