What If Trump Was Right, and the Recount Shows a Rigged Election?
Trump vs Clinton ... Again!
What's It All About ...
ON NOV 22, 2016, THE NEW YORK MAGAZINE REPORTED THAT the Clinton campaign had been approached by a group of election lawyers and prominent computer scientists that there is something very suspicious in the Wisconsin (1%), Michigan (0.3%), and Pennsylvania (1.2%) voter results1. John Bonifaz and J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, reported that their research shows Hillary Clinton received 7% less votes in precincts which had electronic voting machines than would be expected when compared to precincts which had optical machines.
Halderman has made it clear that there is NO evidence of hacking or any other manipulations to change the results. What he found were results that simply didn't make sense and they thought needed investigating so they called John Podesta, former chairman of the Clinton campaign, suggesting they file for a recount.
There is also this, which isn't connected to Halderman's group, from a website I would normally not pay attention to ... but they had proof;
"Three precincts in Outagamie County [WI] were each claiming that more people had voted in the presidential race than had voted at all. That’s not possible, of course. So after it became a minor online controversy, those precincts each revised their totals" http://freakoutnation.com/2016/11/busted-three-wisconsin-precincts-had-to-revise-vote-totals
They also reported that when the totals were revised, Trump lost over 1,000 votes . That is 3.8% of the difference in vote total difference between Clinton and Trump! Add this to what Halderman found and other counties when similar problems as Outagamie, then Clinton might have a shot.
12/5/16: Philadelphia, which had the same issue as in Wisconsin, finished a local recount with disappointing results for Stien's effort; Clinton picked up only 5 votes and everybody else saw no changes.
1 Percentages are how much Trump beat (or is beating) Clinton by.
What Democrats Think
Voter Anomalies Does Not a Rigged Election Make
"I think I said that right," Halderman said, and as a statistician I agree, the kind of discrepancy he found between voting patterns using electronic machines and optical readers are not normal and certainly requires more investigation; BUT, it is not proof of a "Rigged" or "Hacked" election; not by a long-shot. To hack an electronic voting system is not impossible, but it verges on it.
There are ways that electronic devices can be accessed and controlled remotely, even when not connected directly to the Internet. But, to do it on the scale that it would take to result in the outcome Halderman et, al. has found requires a sophistication and coordination that boggles the mind. More likely, but still not probable, is that the voter registration was hacked into (already proven in Illinois and Arizona) and manipulated in the favor on one candidate or another. That, however, as its own problems ... why were the only rolls effected in precincts with electronic voting machines?
There are other ways, none quite as hard, the election could be rigged as well, but still requires a series of willing participants to subvert the system. The easiest, and this was done in several Republican controlled states, is to purge the registration list of voters from one Party or another; in this case the Democratic Party. Some of the states who did this were forced to reverse what they did by the courts, Yet this still has the issue of "why only in the precincts with electronic voting machines.
Do You Think the Voting was Some How Rigged in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and/or Wisconsin?
Should the Recounts Happen?
ABSOLUTELY, IF FOR NO OTHER REASON THERE IS REASONABLE SUSPICION. Throw in the facts that Clinton is beating Trump by over 2,600.000 at the moment and that the margins of victory were extremely small, less than 1.3%. Then you have the additional facts that one of the candidates is complaining and that the recount is well funded. there is no reason not to go through with the recount, otherwise Donald Trumps victory will always be doubted by many and therefore delegitimizes his presidency.
Will Hillary Clinton become President with a recount? I don't think so. It might put Michigan in her column, if it isn't going that way already, for there is only 0.3% margin in Trump's favor there. With the imaginary Trump voters added in, it might even flip Wisconsin because that difference is a minuscule 1%. But to overcome a 1.3% margin in Pennsylvania is highly, highly unlikely.
Nevertheless, because of the legitimate questions asked by Halderman, without a recount Donald Trump's Presidency will forever remain under a darker cloud than it already is.
Questions & Answers
© 2016 Scott Belford