Donald Trump is against the efforts to recount votes in three key states (Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan), and is now claiming that he would have won the popular vote once you deduct the “millions” of illegal votes cast against him.
So…isn’t that basically a good reason to do a recount?
His assertion is bullshit, of course; there’s no real evidence of voter fraud. I’m against these recounts because I think it’s a waste of time and money and removes focus from where it should be. And because Jill Stein, who’s organizing it all, just strikes me as a basically terrible person.
But Trump is against them for no logical reason that I can tell. Surely if a bunch of “illegal” votes were cast for candidates other than him, then we should do a recount, yes? Not doing so makes no sense, as we can’t ever uncover the votes in question.
Of course in reality, there weren’t millions of people voting against him illegally. He lost the popular vote by well over 2 million votes (but, you know, Hillary was weak!), and no recount is likely to change that.