3rd Party Recount, The Candidate You Most Oppose

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/23/us/politics/vote-count-hillary-clinton-trump.html?_r=0&referer=

The linked article in the NY Times talks of the need for re-counts and possible "voting irregularities" now that Trump has won. I'm quite sure that the election was "rigged" in the same way it usually is -- but sometimes in a storm, even the rigging fails.

But that has not quieted Mrs. Clinton’s supporters, who see the inequity of her growing lead in the national popular vote, which is now more than two million votes, or 1.5 percent of all ballots cast, according to the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, which regularly updates its count as states continue to tally and to certify votes.

The popular vote discussion is like the Vikings arguing that it is unfair they lost to the Kitties on T-Day because they had the ball 31 min vs the Kitties 28 (time of possession). You can bet your bottom dollar that if football was played for time of possession vs points, it would be PLAYED DIFFERENTLY ... same with elections.

Isn't it just a TINY bit funny though to hear Democrats who were telling us that any sort of claim that US elections could be anything but completely fair was "crazy, dangerous, etc" -- and who typically, while fighting off the idea that people need IDs to vote claim that "there is no such thing as voter fraud"? Their only accidental act of consistency is to be consistently inconsistent! Favorite standard media/Democrat pre-election or voter ID quote "There is no voter fraud!".

EVERY human system has some level of corruption ("bezzle") in in it, I wrote one of my most read blogs on it was called "Tiger And The Bezzle". Since the entire election apparatus is mostly operated by government workers, and the "system" is tilted to allow fraud (no ID, mail in voting, etc), the highest percentage of the "bezzle" tilts left. It's always there, so it tends to be like "inflation / gravity / taxes" -- it just "IS", and has to be dealt with in every election.

Unsurprisingly, we see "Hillary's popular vote margin" rising. In the areas where she won, the bezzle is strongest -- they are working feverishly to "make every vote count". In the vast areas where Trump won, the election is over -- absentee, provisionals, etc are of no interest. When there are less "possible votes" in the stack than the margin of victory -- the election is over, no need to count them.

Which brings me to "libertarians", for which I use scare quotes because they are basically "None Of The Above" voters -- they have even less specific agreed to policies than Trump -- which is REALLY saying something! Had the "Big Johnson" vote gone for Trump (as most of it would have), we would not be having this "whole popular vote sideshow".

Libertarians had HIGH hopes this year -- maybe they would approach Ross Perot sorts of numbers around "20%".  I could have imagined them breaking 5%, but they didn't ... 4 million measly votes nationwide. Possibly because I worked in computers for over 3 decades, the "number of choices" doesn't resonate with me at all. Computers do everything with two, on and off -- nobody is out there pushing for 3 or 4 -- although quantum computers collapse a superposition from like 10 to the 400 options so there is that to consider. Since there are only like 10 to the 80th atoms in the universe, representing truly significant higher numbers of candidates could be difficult -- but I digress.

I don't believe that most libertarians are the sorts of people that do "sober postmortems", but if they were, they might want to do one.

1. Until a known party platform is created, accepted and understood by millions of voters, there really isn't a "party", only a protest vote. ACTUAL positions on taxes, roads and bridges, defense, laws (or repeal thereof), borders (yes/no/ ??), foreign policy yes/no/??, etc. 
2. Once that is done, CANDIDATES need to be ELECTED on the basis of a KNOWN PLATFORM ... at least a few hundred in state houses, mayorships, governors, US house of representatives, etc. There needs to be actual known Libertarians that have GOVERNED AS LIBERTARIANS (and a platform so you can tell!). 
3. Form a solid NATIONAL party that has a MESSAGE ...  "Make whores legal again!"? (it has to be a simple message).

I could go on, but it isn't worth the time -- perhaps they could come up with "libertarian values" to appeal to the "values voter" ... I'll offer "Whatever" as the most recognizable libertarian value. 

Note, I didn't say they would WIN ... only that those are some of the steps if they ever want to be taken as anything than people that just vote "NOTA" and complain a lot.

Addendum: As PowerLine points out here, if Jill Stein had not run and all her voters turned out for Hillary,  Hillary would have won Wisconsin and Michigan (on the college and elderly hippy vote no doubt). So there you have it from the left and the right! Third parties DO matter, they allow the candidate you most oppose to be elected!