A SCHEME IS AFOOT! Not content to respect the results of the election, green party candidate Jill Stein is on the cusp of formally requesting election recounts in battleground states, after a group of “prominent computer scientists and election lawyers” told John Podesta that while they did not find any evidence of tampering, they had observed a “suspicious pattern” in swing states (as reported last night):
The group, which includes voting-rights attorney John Bonifaz and J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, believes they’ve found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked. The group is so far not speaking on the record about their findings and is focused on lobbying the Clinton team in private.
The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots. Based on this statistical analysis, Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000
“While it’s important to note the group has not found proof of hacking or manipulation, they are arguing to the campaign that the suspicious pattern merits an independent review” –NY Mag
In conjunction, there’s a hilarious and asinine effort underway to flood the DOJ with calls for an investigation into vote rigging given the above “findings.” These morons seem to be under the assumption that the DOJ is “tallying” all the calls, so keep ’em coming liberal comrades! The effort is being fueled by posts on Reddit, the Huffington Post and even Huma Abedin’s sister. The problem, idiots, is that the DOJ only wants calls about new evidence which may be useful in launching or assisting an ongoing investigation. They do NOT decide to pursue investigations based on the fervor of the disaffected. Millions of people flooding the DOJ with requests to investigate is probably pissing them right the fuck off, and is effectively creating a “needle in the haystack” scenario for any actual evidence or leads. Go right ahead with that Trumper Tantrum™ snowflake.
That said, statistician Nate “I vote for Democratic candidates the majority of the time” Silver points out why the new findings are bullshit. In a nutshell democrats can’t fathom that there were dramatic shifts to Trump in traditionally blue areas. You know, the silent majority that was afraid to “come out” to their families in support of Trump? These are the same people who watched Michael Moore’s speech about how Democrat leadership kicked them to the curb, and absorbed all of the shocking bombshells about Hillary Clinton and her team of weirdos. Said voters then reflected, let the new information inform their decisions like an adult, and decided they didn’t want to vote for another job-outsourcing, oil war mongering neocon who masquerades as a liberal.
Run a regression on Wisc. counties with >=50K people, and you find that Clinton improved more in counties with only paper ballots. HOWEVER: pic.twitter.com/4swuU70NaY
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 23, 2016
…the effect COMPLETELY DISAPPEARS once you control for race and education levels, the key factors in predicting vote shifts this year. pic.twitter.com/NYOINx9lEz
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 23, 2016
Maybe a more complicated analysis would reveal something, but usually bad news when a finding can't survive a basic sanity check like this.
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 23, 2016
And Michigan has paper ballots everywhere, so not even sure what claim is being made there. pic.twitter.com/4YKrZEhTJl
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 23, 2016
Alas, no matter how flimsy the evidence, it appears that the generation that brought you participation awards – and their little pavlovian snowflakes who tantrum without them, are not going to take this sitting down.
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
Third-party Presidential candidates may have the biggest megalomaniac egos of them all.
Can’t you let a left winger have a single conspiracy? You right wingers have a zillion.
BTW… any thoughts on a billionaire donor getting Education job? Swamping filling up?
Talk to liberal Nate Silver about that @Trader, he’s the one who dismantled the argument.
DeVos? A conservative who has spent her life committed to helping children and who happens to be ideologically aligned with Trump? Shocking that she would contribute to the GOP. Not really seeing the “citigroup picked Obama’s cabinet”-esque bombshell here: http://www.excelined.org/team/betsy-devos/
Jill Frankenstein is a fucking man hating commie. Go ahead play the without cock and balls game. Will Pass. Thanks.
A good friend of mine was a suitemate of Betsy Devos in college and knows her well. She is about as decent a person as you will find. I have no doubt she will put a sound education and the welfare of students first and foremost regardless of politics and regardless of the social “status” of the children involved. Her emphasis will most definitely NOT be on the contents of school lunches…if you catch my drift…
Trump certainly has right to pick whomever he wants.. but she has bragged that her family buys more political influence than any in the US.
So let’s drop this Trump swamp-draining narrative. His conversations about business issues with foreign leaders is the biggest pay to
play scheme ever. Having his kids sit in meetings and talk to govt officials is indefensible. He is a joke.
He’s draining the other guys swam to make way for his own.
http://www.excelined.org/region/michigan/
These positions and goals are admirable and should be duplicated all over the country.
I especially like “drafting” and certifying teachers from none traditional backgrounds. I can name a half dozen people off the top of my head who would make excellent teachers ut none have a piece of paper that says they are a teacher.
….Makes way too much sense though. Probably never happen.