In a classic example of “Never Say Die,” more than two weeks after Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump was declared the winner in this year's race to occupy the White House, a group of computer scientists and election lawyers are urging Democrat Hillary Clinton to demand a manual recount of ballots, saying they noticed some “statistical irregularities” in key swing states.
Computer scientist J. Alex Halderman has asserted that voting machines across the nation “have serious cybersecurity problems” that open them up to hacking. He also emphasized that there’s currently no evidence machines in key swing states that went to Trump were hacked, but it’s necessary to examine physical evidence to make sure they were not.
According to an article by Marina Fang, politics editor of the liberal Huffington Post website, Halderman stated:
I believe the most likely explanation is that the polls were systematically wrong rather than that the election was hacked. But I don’t believe that either one of these seemingly unlikely explanations is overwhelmingly more likely than the other.
The only way to know whether a cyberattack changed the result is to closely examine the available physical evidence --- paper ballots and voting equipment in critical states like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
“Unfortunately,” Halderman continued, “nobody is ever going to examine that evidence unless candidates in those states act now, in the next several days, to petition for recounts.”
“New York Magazine's Gabriel Sherman previously reported that the activists said electronic voting systems in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania produced discrepancies that hurt Clinton,” Fang claimed.
“The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin,” the reporter stated, “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,” she indicated, “Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000.”
“Clinton needed to win all three states for an election victory,” the reporter stated. “Wisconsin and Pennsylvania went for Donald Trump by the smallest margins of all the states that he won. The race in Michigan hasn’t been certified, but the state is likely to go to Trump. A Clinton win in all three states would give her enough Electoral College votes to claim the presidency.”
There is also the complicating factor of “faithless electors,” or members of the Electoral College who do not vote according to the popular count in their states. At least six electoral voters have said they would not vote for Trump despite the fact that he won their states.
The activists, who unsurprisingly have not spoken publicly about their findings, presented their evidence to Clinton’s campaign team last week. An aide to Clinton told said the campaign is “not saying anything yet.”
However, some data scientists and political statisticians, including FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver and the New York Times’ Nate Cohn, cast doubt on the claims, Fang stated. “Silver and Cohn said the suspicious results disappear when controlling for demographic factors like race and education.”
“Others, however, noted that the experts who want Clinton to challenge her loss include formidable figures” such as Halderman, who is among the foremost experts on computer security and is usually cautious,” she claimed.
“If he’s on board, there should be an audit,” Fang stated.
Nevertheless, “the activists don’t have evidence that voting machines were hacked, only a statistical suggestion that something is off,” she noted. “Federal officials have said the Russian government hacked into the Democratic National Committee’s emails over the summer.”
Clinton supporters have been using the hashtag #AuditTheVote on Twitter to advocate for a recount. They also have circulated petitions to force people in the Electoral College not to vote for Trump and to eliminate the Electoral College altogether.
Sherman stated that last Thursday, the activists held a conference call with Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta and General Counsel Marc Elias to make their case, according to a source briefed on the call.
The group, which includes “voting-rights” attorney John Bonifaz, is arguing to the campaign that the suspicious pattern merits an independent review.
“The Clinton camp is running out of time to challenge the election,” Sherman stated. "According to one of the activists, the deadline in Wisconsin to file for a recount is Friday; in Pennsylvania, it’s Monday; and Michigan is next Wednesday. “
Whether Clinton will call for a recount remains unclear. The academics so far have only a circumstantial case that would require not just a recount but a forensic audit of voting machines that would probably be nothing but a colossal waste of time and energy.
