Election Recount to Begin next week

NOV 25 2016, 6:56 PM ET

Election Recount to Begin in Wisconsin Following Green Party Petition, Officials Say

by ADAM HOWARD and ALEXANDRA JAFFE

Wisconsin accepted Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein's petition for a statewide recount of votes for President of the United States, state officials said Friday. The recount is expected to begin late next week.

"The Commission is preparing to move forward with a statewide recount of votes for President of the United States, as requested by these candidates," Wisconsin Election Commission's Administrator Michael Haas said in a statement.

The state's election commission is still waiting to receive a cost estimate from county clerks to calculate the fee that Stein's campaign will have to pay before the start of the recount, but Haas anticipates the recount will begin next week after the fee is paid.

Follow
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images...5n1_normal.jpgWisconsin Elections @WI_Elections

The Commission has received the Stein and Del La Fuente recount petitions. Details and news release posted soon at http://elections.wi.gov .
1:36 PM - 25 Nov 2016

• 
  
• 
  3,2873,287 Retweets
• 
  2,4182,418 likes

Stein announced that she intends to mount a legal challenge to re-examine the vote totals in three states, including Wisconsin, that performed wildly different than polling suggested they would on Election Day. The other two states are Michigan, where NBC News has yet to officially call a winner, and Pennsylvania.

Stein's Wisconsin filing came about an hour and a half before the afternoon deadline. Her campaign said Friday that it had surpassed its initial fundraising goal to fund the recount effort and crossed the $4 million mark.

Costs are likely to be steep. In Wisconsin alone, past statewide recounts for a non-presidential year cost more than $520,000, according to an incomplete survey carried out by the Associated

Press in the wake of a contested Supreme Court election in 2011.

Nearly double the number of voters turned out to the polls this year compared to the previous recount election, Haas said. In addition, Wisconsin officials would need to scramble to finish the recount by the federal Dec. 13 deadline.

"The recount process is very detail-oriented, and this deadline will certainly challenge some counties to finish on time," Haas said in the statement.

The Michigan and Pennsylvania recount deadline dates are next week.

Playhttp://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/msnbc/...x-1080-600.jpg




Jill Stein seeking a presidential recount 7:27


While Stein said her initial fundraising goal was $2.5 million, her campaign website now says she's trying to net $7 million, which would pay for the fees for filing costs, attorneys and statewide recount observers.

President-elect Donald Trump still holds narrow leads in all three states, and his victories in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin provided him with the Electoral College advantage he needed to win the presidency.

However, reports of irregularities in the vote count — brought to light by a collection of scientists and activists — along with concerns over whether Russia may have attempted to influence the results and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton's historic and growing popular vote victory, have provided the momentum and emotion behind this admittedly long-shot fight to force a recount.

Related: How Would a Contested Election Work? Five Things to Know

"After a divisive and painful presidential race, reported hacks into voter and party databases and individual email accounts are causing many American to wonder if our election results are reliable. These concerns need to be investigated before the 2016 presidential election is certified." Stein said in a Wednesday statement. "We deserve elections we can trust."

For its part, the Clinton campaign, which stands to benefit the most from overturned election results, has remained quiet on Stein's crusade.

Although two advocates for a recount, lawyer John Bonifaz and J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, did attempt to lobby members of her team to back the effort during a conference call last week.

Playhttp://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/msnbc/...x-1080-600.jpg

Few precedents for popular vote gap like 2016 13:21


"There's either a huge subset of hidden voters that didn't tell pollsters how they were going to vote, or something went awry with those voting systems. If we can X out that second option, why not," a source who was privy to conversations with the Clinton camp recently told NBC News.

The Clinton campaign was reportedly unmoved because there have no been widespread reports of fraud or vote tampering. Many experts believe that the real culprit behind the polling disparities in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania was an unmotivated Democratic base, which failed to turn out in full force on Election Day.

The Trump campaign has also been dismissive of Stein's actions, with the president-elect's aide, Kellyanne Conway, mocking the Green Party candidate's supporters on Twitter:

Follow
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images...VjA_normal.jpgKellyanne Conway
✔@KellyannePolls

Look who "can't accept the election results" Hillary Clinton Supporters Call for Vote Recount in Battleground States http://nyti.ms/2fTaGA8
5:57 AM - 24 Nov 2016
https://o.twimg.com/2/proxy.jpg?t=HB...Xj_tVio3tjhTP0

Hillary Clinton Supporters Call for Vote Recount in Battleground States

Her supporters have seized on reports by experts suggesting that Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin should manually review paper ballots.
nytimes.com

• 
  
• 
  3,1053,105 Retweets
• 
  5,8945,894 likes

Still, Stein's push is moving forward and she is up against the clock. With Wisconsin's Friday deadline, Stein has said the initial $2.5 million she raised will cover that effort.

Further funding will be redirected to Michigan, where the filing cost will be $600,000 and the challenge deadline is Monday, and Pennsylvania, where the filing cost is $500,000 and the deadline is Wednesday.

Some critics have expressed skepticism about whether the money donated to Stein will really finance a recount effort, or will simply amount to a replenished war chest for the Green Party, which failed to reach the 5 percent threshold in the popular vote that could have led to federal funding in future elections.

The fine print on her website tells donors that she cannot guarantee that a recount will happen and that any surplus money raised will go towards "election integrity efforts and to promote voting system reform." All of their money has come from private citizens, the Green Party does not accept corporate donations.

A recount would mean a hand-counting of ballots, including those from electronic machines, which are the ones most in dispute, and experts believe it is highly unlikely that the process would overturn enough votes to help Clinton reduce her deficits.

But according to Stein, that's not the point.

"This is not being done to benefit one candidate at the expense of the other," she said Thursday during an appearance on the PBS NewsHour. "This is being done because Americans, you know, come out of this election not happy campers."

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elec...consin-n688316

North Carolina governor files for recount

Clinton Campaign Will Participate in Stein’s State Recounts

Bret Lemoine (@BretLemoine)

1 hour ago - View on Twitter
Update: some 3,000 volunteers have signed up to assist with/observe Wisconsin's recount, according to Green Party official. @fox6now

David Sirota (@davidsirota)

1 hour ago - View on Twitter
Trump said election would be rigged & now says millions "voted illegally." So wait: why does he oppose an audit/recount of election results?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

David Sirota (@davidsirota)

1 hour ago - View on Twitter
Trump said election would be rigged & now says millions "voted illegally." So wait: why does he oppose an audit/recount of election results?

---

Because the illegal voting occurred by the millions in states with very large illegal alien and immigrant populations like California and New York, not Wisconsin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Because the illegal voting occurred by the millions in states with very large illegal alien and immigrant populations like California and New York, not Wisconsin.

---

You can have a recount in any state you want.
You just have to put your money into it and get a candidate to file it for you.
(In any state that the deadline hasn't passed.)

How does counting the votes again expose illegal voting?

County with more than 100% voter turnout voted for

Illegal voting is voting by people who aren't living citizens of the United States old enough to vote or multiple voting by the same person. I don't see how recounts of ballots or votes exposes that problem.

Electoral fraud, election manipulation, or vote rigging is illegal interference with the process of an election.

Acts of fraud affect vote counts to bring about an election result, whether by increasing the vote share of the favored candidate, depressing the vote share of the rival candidates, or both.

What constitutes electoral fraud under law varies from country to country.

Many kinds of election fraud are outlawed in electoral legislation, but others are in violation of general laws, such as those banning assault, harassment or libel.

Although technically the term 'electoral fraud' covers only those acts which are illegal, the term is sometimes used to describe acts which are legal but considered morally unacceptable, outside the spirit of electoral laws, or in violation of the principles of democracy.^[1]

Show elections, in which only one candidate can win, are sometimes classified as electoral fraud, although they may comply with the law.

In national elections, successful electoral fraud can have the effect of a coup d'état or corruption of democracy.

In a narrow election, a small amount of fraud may be enough to change the result.

Even if the outcome is not affected, revelation of fraud can have a damaging effect, if not punished, as it can reduce voters' confidence in democracy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_fraud

Types of voter fraud

The following are the common types of alleged voter fraud:^[1][5][6]

• Double voting (ballot stuffing): One individual casts more than one ballot in the same election.
• Dead voters: The name of a deceased person remains on a state's official list of registered voters and a living person fraudulently casts a ballot in that name.
• Felon voter fraud: The casting of a ballot by a convicted felon who is not eligible to vote as a result of being a felon.
• Voter suppression: A variety of tactics aimed at lowering or suppressing the number of voters who might otherwise vote in a particular election.
• Registration fraud: Filling out and submitting a voter registration card for a fictional person, or filling out a voter registration card with the name of a real person, but without that person's consent, and forging his or her signature on the card.
• Voter impersonation: A person claims to be someone else when casting a vote.
• Vote-buying: Agreements between voters and others to buy and sell votes, such as a candidate paying voters to vote for him or her.
• Fraud by election officials: Manipulation of ballots by officials administering the election, such as tossing out ballots or casting ballots in voters' names.

https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_fraud#...of_voter_fraud

In order to expose illegal voting by noncitizens, one would have to have a verification of citizenship process which some states do and abide in their voter registration process but others don't, so the election commissions would have to have a means by which to verify citizenship either at the time of voter registration or on the day of the election if they allow same day registration and then run a comparison to that as part of the vote count.

Recounting the votes isn't going to expose that problem. You'd need a different type of activity like an investigation with the software capability of doing matches and examinations. It's this problem that led to Republicans wanting a Voter ID system in their states.

Confidence in our elections has been lost due to massive illegal and excess legal immigration and the refusal of Democrats to support measures to protect again illegal voting by noncitizens. Republicans are going have to push this envelope all the way to a solution to this problem by a) removing illegal aliens from the population b) pausing legal immigration. When we achieve a) and b), the problem will be very small, perhaps do a match with E-Verify for everyone who doesn't have a driver's license that's linked back to a birth certificate and increase the penalties for noncitizen voter registration and noncitizen illegal voting.

I doubt anything will be done about it for this election so we'll just have to deal with what we have, but by next election this problem needs to be fixed in all 50 states, especially those with high illegal alien and immigrant populations.

They already found some vote fraud.

According to local reports, there were four precincts in Hortonville, Cicero, Bear Creek, and Grand Chute, where it was reported that more people had voted in the presidential race, than had voted overall.

The discrepancy, which was attributed by local officials to human error, added over 1,000 votes to Donald Trump.

Election Fraud Complaint Filed As More People Voted Than Total Voters In 4 Wisconsin Precincts

@ Trump Claims, With No Evidence, That ‘Millions of People’ Voted Illegally

Those were found when they did the canvass as part of the original vote count. That's why the almost 12,000 vote lead Trump had ended up being 10,700. It was tally errors. In one county there was a single error of 543 more than half of the total errors. But look, if you and the Dems wants to call it "voter fraud", then go round up the counters, charge them with a crime and lock 'em up.

What I'm talking about and what most anti-illegal immigration activists are talking about when we use the term illegal voting, are the people who cast votes who are not eligible voters because they aren't citizens of the United States, not the people who make mistakes when they count the votes, but the illegal voters themselves.

There's more than one type of vote fraud. It's all illegal.

Types of voter fraud

The following are the common types of alleged voter fraud:^[1][5][6]

• Double voting (ballot stuffing): One individual casts more than one ballot in the same election.
• Dead voters: The name of a deceased person remains on a state's official list of registered voters and a living person fraudulently casts a ballot in that name.
• Felon voter fraud: The casting of a ballot by a convicted felon who is not eligible to vote as a result of being a felon.
• Voter suppression: A variety of tactics aimed at lowering or suppressing the number of voters who might otherwise vote in a particular election.
• Registration fraud: Filling out and submitting a voter registration card for a fictional person, or filling out a voter registration card with the name of a real person, but without that person's consent, and forging his or her signature on the card.
• Voter impersonation: A person claims to be someone else when casting a vote.
• Vote-buying: Agreements between voters and others to buy and sell votes, such as a candidate paying voters to vote for him or her.

• Fraud by election officials: Manipulation of ballots by officials administering the election, such as tossing out ballots or casting ballots in voters' names.

https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_fraud#...of_voter_fraud

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Those were found when they did the canvass as part of the original vote count . . .

---

And they might find more with the recount.

Sure, they might. Is that what you're hoping for?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Sure, they might. Is that what you're hoping for?

---

Why would you say such a thing to a fellow ALIPAC member? That's just not necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

Why would you say such a thing to a fellow ALIPAC member? That's just not necessary.

---

Why? What's wrong with it? He seems pretty excited about the recount in Wisconsin and hopes more mistakes are found when that isn't the position of ALIPAC. Did you all not get your notice from ALIPAC about our "countermeasures to Dems recount plan"?

Maybe you all need to learn how to play with a team and keep your eyes on the ball.

Just Sayin'.

I mean what next? You're defending Plyler vs Doe and using it an an excuse to support public schools being used as "sanctuaries" for illegal aliens, claiming this Supreme Court Ruling prevents the federal government from enforcing US immigration law in schools, and JD2 is all excited about Jill Stein's and Clinton' recount plan, so what's next, anchor babies are actual citizens of the United States and illegal aliens can't be arrested on highways if they have a driver's license or for soliciting work on street corners because it's public property or they can vote in US elections because of the 14th Amendment?

These are the screwball views of the Democratic Party, MW, that have gotten US into this mess we're in. Come on. It's time to get with our program and purpose here which is to fight the destructive views of the American Immigration Council, the National Education Association, and the Democratic Party, not post and defend their absurd propaganda.

MW, here is a link to the American Immigration Council that you cited on the thread about "can schools defy immigration law"?

https://www.americanimmigrationcounc...ut/our-mission

And this is what they're about:

Quote:

---

About the American Immigration Council
Honoring our Immigrant Past, Shaping our Immigrant Future

The American Immigration Council (“Council”), established in 1987, works to strengthen America by honoring our immigrant history and shaping how America thinks about and acts towards immigrants and immigration. The Council promotes the prosperity and cultural richness of our diverse nation by standing up for sensible and humane immigration policies that reflect fundamental American values; The Council insists that our immigration laws be enacted and implemented in a way that honors fundamental rights; The Council works to achieve justice and fairness for immigrants under the law; and The Council strives to educate policy makers and the general public about the enduring contributions of America’s immigrants. The Council employs a diverse set of strategies, including policy advocacy, litigation, research, communications, and education.

The Council has become a national leader in challenging the myths and misinformation that too often dominate the political and public debate around immigration. Through research and analysis, the Council promotes the development of immigration policies that reflect our proud history as a nation of immigrants that respects fundamental principles of fairness and due process. The Council has become a leading resource for policy and opinion makers at the state and local level who seek to understand the power and potential of immigration and to develop policies that are based on facts, not myths. At the same time, the Council is highly respected for its willingness and ability to bring cutting edge lawsuits that hold the government accountable for unlawful conduct, restrictive interpretations of the law, and failures to ensure that the immigration laws are implemented and executed in a manner that comports with due process. In all its work, the Council seeks out and lifts up the problem-solvers and the creative thinkers who can help shape a more humane and fair approach to immigration—not only as a matter of law and policy, but also as a tool for continuing to protect and nourish the values of tolerance and dignity on which the United States is based.

---

This organization is our foe, our enemy, in the cause to stop illegal immigration and reduce/pause legal immigration into the United States, yet you quote them as experts on the subject of Plyler vs Doe and enforcing immigration law at schools. Why would do that?!!!

To quote another great line from the movie Open Range:

"You need to get your mind right about what's got to be done, Charlie".

NEA Doesn't Represent All Teachers

July 2, 2008
About the Author
EDUCATION NOTEBOOK:
NEA Doesn't Represent All Teachers

By Lindsey Burke

Today, the National Education Association opens its annual convention in Washington, D.C. For teachers across the country, the gathering is sure to offer a lesson in how the NEA is out of step with the views of many of the members it claims to represent.

Teachers face intense pressure to join the union. I know from experience. As a former public school teacher, my graduate school's halls were covered with teacher union posters. My first day student teaching included a lecture from an overzealous teacher who told me what life would be like without an NEA membership.

Had I joined, I would have had to fork over $541 dollars a year to the Virginia Education Association, to include membership in both the state affiliate and the NEA. But I resisted, not wanting to support the union's leftist political agenda.

But I was an exception. In all, over 3.2 million teachers are currently dues-paying members of the NEA. With annual dues generally exceeding $500 (about 1 percent of the average teacher salary), teachers should know how their dollars are being spent. Many will probably be surprised by the causes they are unintentionally supporting.

At the convention this week, the NEA leadership will vote on dozens of resolutions declaring the agreed-upon view of the union. There will be standard resolutions condemning school vouchers, homeschooling, and competency testing for teachers-no surprise for anyone familiar with the union's positions in education policy.

They will also consider a number of social issues. Last year, the NEA passed resolutions supporting affirmative action in college admissions, new teacher training programs on racism, sexism, and sexual orientation, and expanding sex education instruction to include more information about birth control, gender identification, and homophobia.

In the past, other resolutions have had nothing to do with the classroom. Recent NEA resolutions have included calling for an "exit strategy" for the Iraq war, amnesty for illegal immigrants, and single-payer health plans.

Of course, that the National Education Association supports liberal policies and organizations shouldn't be news to anyone now. According to OpenSecrets.org, since 1990, the NEA has given 93 percent of its political contributions to Democrats.

Moreover, federal disclosure laws require that the NEA and other public sector unions publish annual reports detailing how they spend member's dues. In all, the NEA took in more than $352 million in 2007. (To see this report, visit this Department of Labor website and search for the NEA by "union abbreviation.")

The report shows that the NEA spent $32 million on political activities and lobbying and made $80 million in contributions and gifts to various organizations. Included in the list of groups receiving funding is a roster of left-wing organizations: People for the American Way, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, ACORN, Amnesty International, the Human Rights Campaign, GLAAD, Campaign for America's Future, Rainbow Push Coalition, the NAACP, and the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network.

Beyond politics, the financial disclosure report also reveals that member's dues are used to fund lavish salaries for its national leadership. NEA President Reg Weaver earned more than $400,000-about 8 times more than the average American teacher's salary. In all, 346 NEA employees earned six-figure salaries. The group also spent well over a million dollars on hotels and resorts across the country. They even spent $34,000 on tropical plants and $30,000 on costumes.

Are American teachers' interests really being served paying dues to support this bloated organization and its leftist political agenda? In states like Utah and Washington that have paycheck protection laws, less than 10 percent of teachers continued to contribute their money to political causes when given the chance to opt-out.

Alternative professional associations exist and serve as a good option for those teachers looking for an organization that will provide liability insurance and legal fees, without the political agenda that the NEA pushes. Two associations - The Association of American Educators and Christian Educators Association International - serve many of the same functions for teachers as the NEA does, minus the partisanship.

As teachers across the country watch the coverage of the NEA convention this week, they should ponder why it is they joined the NEA in the first place. Most likely, it was because they believed they were becoming part of an organization that had children's best interests in mind. However, they should ask themselves who the NEA is really looking out for. The answer is most certainly not the children.

Lindsey Burke is a Domestic Policy Research Assistant at the Heritage Foundation and a former public school teacher in Virginia.

http://www.heritage.org/research/edu...t-all-teachers

________________________

The NEA is our foe, our enemy. They voted for the Dream Act and Amnesty for Illegal Aliens and use their dues to lobby in favor of these horrible positions. They collect hundreds of millions in dues, yet we at ALIPAC have to fight them. NEA is not a source of fact, it is a source of self-serving propaganda on the issues of illegal immigration and excess legal immigration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Why? What's wrong with it? He seems pretty excited about the recount in Wisconsin and hopes more mistakes are found when that isn't the position of ALIPAC. Did you all not get your notice from ALIPAC about our "countermeasures to Dems recount plan"?

Maybe you all need to learn how to play with a team and keep your eyes on the ball.

Just Sayin'.

I mean what next? You're defending Plyler vs Doe and using it an an excuse to support public schools being used as "sanctuaries" for illegal aliens, claiming this Supreme Court Ruling prevents the federal government from enforcing US immigration law in schools, and JD2 is all excited about Jill Stein's and Clinton' recount plan, so what's next, anchor babies are actual citizens of the United States and illegal aliens can't be arrested on highways if they have a driver's license or for soliciting work on street corners because it's public property or they can vote in US elections because of the 14th Amendment?

These are the screwball views of the Democratic Party, MW, that have gotten US into this mess we're in. Come on. It's time to get with our program and purpose here which is to fight the destructive views of the American Immigration Council, the National Education Association, and the Democratic Party, not post and defend their absurd propaganda.

---

There you go again!!! Nobody defended Plyler v. Doe, just attempted to explain the ruling to you. The truth is the truth, regardless of who is delivering it or how difficult it may be to accept and/or handle. Same thing on the recount. JohnDoe didn't seem excited about it as you say. He's was just trying to explain some things to you.

As difficult as it may be for you to believe, not everyone that doesn't agree with you 100% of the time or corrects untruthful, exaggerated, and hyperbole information is not your enemy or an enemy to our cause. Attempting to shame or humiliate long-term members of ALIPAC for disagreeing with you is not what I'd call being a good "team" member, nor is twisting their words to mean something different than was intended.

EVERYONE INVOLVED IN ANY VOTE FRAUD SHOULD GO TO JAIL.

Who or what they support or oppose is irrelevant.

Yes, MW, the American Immigration Council and the NEA are enemies of our cause to stop illegal immigration because they both support illegal immigration. If they should ever state something truthful on the subject, I'll be the first to give them credit for it, but so far that has not been the case with them, any more than MALDEF or the ACLU or National Council of La Raza.

You said you read the ruling, I posted the link for you, so just quote the actual ruling if you want to discuss what the ruling said not what pro-illegal alien orgies say it says. This is in part how our country has gotten so far off track on so many things and is why we're in the horrible mess we're in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

EVERYONE INVOLVED IN ANY VOTE FRAUD SHOULD GO TO JAIL.

Who or what they support or oppose is irrelevant.

---

Then Jerry Brown and the majority of the California Legislature should go to jail. Start rounding them up. I'm all for it. But so far, there is no voter fraud identified in Wisconsin. I'm not saying there isn't any, Milwaukee probably has a ton of it, but none of it will be identified during a recount. A recount is a repeat of the same procedure that counted the votes to begin with. Yes, human errors, mistakes in tallies and so forth by the counters occur with each cycle. There were some found during the canvass which is the way they check for these in the first count, there will be others that occur during the second count and the same canvass procedure that found the first ones will find the second ones.

Wisconsin Presidential Recount to Begin Thursday


Officials say they have seen no problems, but say recount will boost confidence

By SHIBANI MAHTANI
Updated Nov. 28, 2016 12:21 p.m. ET 9 COMMENTS

A full recount of presidential election votes is expected to begin in Wisconsin on Thursday, following a petition by Green Party candidate Jill Stein.

Election officials, in a special meeting on Monday, said they had received petitions on Friday from Ms. Stein and Reform Party candidate Roque De La Fuente to hold a recount.

Though state election officials said they are confident in the results and how they were counted, the Wisconsin Elections Commission has no authority to deny or hold up the petition and a recount must be held as long as the candidates pay for it.

“As long as the petition is valid…the commission must issue a recount order,” said Michael Haas, the commission’s interim administrator.


THE TRUMP TRANSITION

Republican Donald Trump beat Democrat Hillary Clinton by more than 27,000 votes in Wisconsin, and Ms. Stein received 30,980 or 1.1% of votes. Because the margin between Mr. Trump and Ms. Stein, the candidate requesting the recount, is greater than 0.25% of total votes cast, Ms. Stein must pay for the recount.

Given the margins, election officials don’t believe the recount will change the results of the presidential election in Wisconsin.

“The outcome is not going to be different,” said Mark Thomsen, the commission’s chairman. “I don’t doubt that the president-elect is going to win that vote.”

Ms. Stein has also vowed to file recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan, both of which have deadlines this week. She has raised $6.2 million towards the effort, which includes filing fees and attorney costs.

In Pennsylvania, Ms. Stein faces a significant logistical hurdle of organizing roughly 30,000 voters across the state to file challenges in more than 9,000 individual districts to force a statewide recount. Her campaign could also go to court to ask for a recount. In Michigan, the deadline is Wednesday and state law allows the winning candidate, in this case Mr. Trump, to object.

The payment for the Wisconsin recount must be received in full before election officials can start the recount. Wisconsin clerks will estimate the cost of a recount—expected to be in the millions—and inform both candidates later today.

“Absent of a complete payment tomorrow, there will be no recount,” Mr. Thomsen said.

Under federal law, a recount must be completed by Dec. 13, 35 days from Election Day. The recount will involve looking at all votes in the state, or nearly three million votes. Officials said this will require clerks to work around the clock and overnight. The last time a recount was ordered in Wisconsin, in the 2011 Supreme Court election, it took a month.

Ms. Stein’s effort for a recount has been backed by Mrs. Clinton, whose campaign said it would participate in the process to ensure that it proceeds “in a manner that is fair to all sides.”

“Regardless of the potential to change the outcome in any of the states, we feel it is important, on principle, to ensure our campaign is legally represented in any court proceedings and represented on the ground in order to monitor the recount process itself,” wrote Marc Elias, general counsel for Mrs.

Clinton’s presidential campaign, in a blog post Saturday.

But President-elect Mr. Trump has dismissed charges that his victory was illegitimate, and on Twitter alleged that millions of people voted illegally, without providing any evidence.

Mr. Thomsen said the accusation of illegal votes being counted was “really inappropriate” and “an insult to the people who run our elections.” A recount, he said, will boost confidence in the voting process. It will “give us a very good audit” and “reassure Wisconsin voters,” he added.

Wisconsin election officials said they have seen no evidence of the voting machines being hacked, one of Ms. Stein’s claims when she filed the petition. The machines weren’t connected to the internet, so they couldn’t have been tampered with over the internet; and they had tamper-evident seals, and were under lock and key with only a few authorized election officials able to access them, officials said.

—Byron Tau contributed to this article.
Write to Shibani Mahtani at shibani.mahtani@wsj.com
Corrections & Amplifications:

Because the margin between Donald Trump and Jill Stein, the candidate requesting the recount, is greater than 0.25% of total votes cast, Ms. Stein must pay for the recount. An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated she must pay for the recount because the margin was smaller than 0.25% of total votes cast. (Nov. 28)

http://www.wsj.com/articles/wisconsi...day-1480352509