Hat tip for the video link to Joseph Cannon.
Donald Trump got more votes than predicted by exit polls. Was the problem the exit polls? Or was it hacked electronic voting machines?
We’ve known for a long time that electronic voting machines can be easily hacked.
We know that in 12 states, Trump’s excess votes exceeded the margin of error. There were four states—North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida—in which the Clinton won the exit poll and Trump won the vote count. If Trump had not carried those four states, he would have lost.
Is this proof that Trump supporters stole the election? No, but it is circumstantial evidence that needs to be investigated and explained. It should not be let drop.
As Joseph Cannon pointed out, exit polls prior to 2000 were considered absolutely reliable measures of the actual vote. After that there was a divergence in favor of Republicans.
That was roughly the same time that electronic voting machines started to come into widespread use. You didn’t have to be a rocket scientist or a Russian secret agent to be able to hack them. Almost any moderately-skilled hacker could.
Another way of rigging the election was taking voters off the election rolls by means of the CrossCheck voting system. The idea was that if there were two people with the same name (even if their middle name was different or one was junior and the other was senior) who were voters, they were the same person, and their names were deleted from voter registration lists without warning.
Of course this is ridiculous. Vote fraud, when it occurred in the old days, consisted of the same person voting under different names, including registered voters who had died or moved away.
Almost all the deleted names were typical names of African-Americans and Hispanics, such as Jackson or Hernandez.
Investigative reporter Greg Palast said the number of purged CrossCheck voters was equal to Trump’s margin of victory in Michigan, Arizona and North Carolina.
Here’s an explanation of CrossCheck from Greg Palast back in May.
LINKS
How to Hack an Election in Seven Minutes by Ben Wofford for POLITICO.
Donald Trump was right | The election was rigged | In his favor by Ben Gelblum for the London Economic.
Still time for an election audit by Ron Rivest and Philip Stark for USA Today. [added later] Hat tip to Mike the Mad Biologist.
PROOF of election fraud in Wisconsin? by Joseph Cannon for Cannonfire. [added 11/22/2016]
Hillary Clinton urged to call for election vote recount in battleground states by Jon Swaine for The Guardian [added 11/23/2016]
Experts Urge Hillary Clinton to Challenge Election Results in 3 Swing States by Gabriel Sherman for New York magazine. [added 11/23/2016] Hat tip to Joseph Cannon.
Want to Know if the Election Was Hacked? Look at the Ballots by J. Alex Halderman for Medium. [added 11/23/2016] Hat tip to Joseph Cannon.
Election Data Screams Fraud by Eric Draitser for Counterpunch. [added 11/23/2016]
Tags: Crosscheck, Donald Trump, Election 2016, Electronic Voting, Electronic Voting Machines, Greg Palast, Hacked Voting Machines, Rigged Election, voting, Voting machine tampering, Voting machines
Phil Ebersole's Blog 
November 21, 2016 at 2:49 pm |
Vote machine hacking added with poll intimidation is a winning combo.
LikeLike
November 21, 2016 at 4:11 pm |
Reblogged this on 61chrissterry and commented:
Rigged election or
LikeLike
November 21, 2016 at 8:44 pm |
An exercise in futility. He’s our Presidunce for good or bad. I don’t know what the End Game is, but i do know he is beholden to no one for campaign contributions. I do know he has admitted to the Great Lie of political campaigns, but he actually has admitted to the insane process we call the Electoral, which is that YOU HAVE TO LIE TO GET ELECTED.
I know he trusts his family and precious few others, a quality necessary in our World.
I know that what I don’t know about his intent is what worries me most, but I haven’t seen anything in writing yet except from the closed out media, speculating wrongly at every turn.
I am content to wait for any evidence of Munich, before I reach a contrary conclusion.
LikeLike
November 22, 2016 at 10:30 am |
I am obviously concerned enough about possible fraud to be listening to this. I also like that you are curious about it as well. However, Ithink your assumption that exit polls never have a systemic bias is wrong. They are not a true random sampling. In exit polls, voters self-report. It’s very believable that some Trump voters will tell the pollster that they voted otherwise. You get to avoid the public shame of admitting you like a racist, mysogenist clown. If the discepency was greatest in the surprise states (ex PA), I’d give your argument more weight. Remember, it’s supposed to be the alt-righties that don’t care about evidence. We can do better than this.
LikeLike
November 23, 2016 at 10:01 am |
The kind of systemic bias you suggest is certainly possible. But it seems odd that Trump voters should be more shy in North and South Carolina than in California.
The underestimation of Trump votes in Pennsylvania was greater than the margin of error and enough to swing the state from Clinton to Trump. In New York state, it was the Clinton vote that was underestimated.
While I think there is a need for an investigation, I admit it would take months or years, and the results would be inconclusive.
If there was electronic tampering, it would not be detectable unless there was a separate paper record. What an investigation would show is whether discrepancies between the recorded vote and the expected vote was greater with electronic systems or certain kinds of electronic systems.
I do not think it is feasible to overturn Trump’s apparent victory.
As I think about it, I believe that the most important thing is to remove the suspicion and possibility of voting machine tampering in future elections.
Congress should enact legislature calling for a paper record and public audit of all voting for President, the Senate and the House of Representatives, and state legislatures should do the same for state offices.
LikeLike