Computer scientists urge Clinton campaign to challenge election results

Nate Silver commented (debunked, I would say) this issue on Twitter. It seems that the &quot;abnormality&quot; detected or does not make sense (Pennsylvania, Michigan) or disappears when controlling for race and educations levels (Wisconsin).<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;NateSilver538&#x2F;status&#x2F;801220813890277376" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;NateSilver538&#x2F;status&#x2F;801220813890277376</a>

Is there anything floating out there beyond the article in New York[1] and everyone reiterating it?<p>The stuff over at Election Law Blog[2] seems to be worth quoting here:<p>&gt; Without public evidence on the record to examine it is hard to really evaluate this claim other than by looking at the credibility of the people involved. Halderman is very credible, and if he says there are anomalies that deserve investigation, they should be investigated. But the fact that this group has gone to Elias and Podesta, and so far the campaign has said nothing since learning of it last Thursday, should give you pause. Time has just about run out. Claiming a hacked or rigged election is about as explosive a claim as one could make—-especially coming after Trump made unsupported allegations of vote rigging throughout the election. If there’s a realistic chance of anything here that could be proven to affect the election outcome, you have to trust Clinton’s legal team to advance it (or have advanced it already).<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;nymag.com&#x2F;daily&#x2F;intelligencer&#x2F;2016&#x2F;11&#x2F;activists-urge-hillary-clinton-to-challenge-election-results.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;nymag.com&#x2F;daily&#x2F;intelligencer&#x2F;2016&#x2F;11&#x2F;activists-urge-...</a> [2] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;electionlawblog.org&#x2F;?p=89454" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;electionlawblog.org&#x2F;?p=89454</a>

Why is electronic voting accepted? Proprietary software means the election results can never truly be trusted. Richard Stallman has written about this [1].<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stallman.org&#x2F;evoting.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stallman.org&#x2F;evoting.html</a>

I have been a Democrat my whole life. In my opinion rehashing the vote would be very bad for our country.<p>Something that disturbs me greatly is the reaction of the media to the election. My wife had MSNBC on for an hour last night. There was one Trump supporter on briefly and they were constantly interrupted. Otherwise it was all editorializing against Trump.<p>We have lost a free and impartial news media, and that bodes ill for our country.

A challenge to the results could discover Hillary Clinton lost the total popular vote as well, or see Trump&#x27;s margin increase.

&quot;The computer scientists believe they have found evidence that vote totals in the three states could have been manipulated or hacked&quot;<p>then few lines later: &quot;Their group told Podesta and Elias that while they had not found any evidence of hacking, the pattern needs to be looked at by an independent review.&quot;<p>Great journalism, great scientific findings they probably used the same ML algorithm that predicted Clinton would get 80%

ohh, the Irony.<p>From the guys that accused Trump of not accepting the result of elections(because they considered done in Hillary&#x27;s favor), turns out they don&#x27;t want to accept it either.<p>Of course electronic voting machines could be hacked, but it is way easier to hack it when you know the source code, like the NSA knows, and the company that makes it is American, than Russia. So I bet the hack will be in Hillary&#x27;s favor instead of otherwise.

If the result was changed and Clinton became president elect there would be civil war. The US would never have a peaceful election ever again.

CNN? MSM is the real deal when it comes to fake news.<p>Tip from a brazillian: this would break your country.

Democrats would do a better favor to the country in the next 4 years focusing in the problems that caused this (internal, bad politics, corruption) and let Trump do its job as President.

I guess that&#x27;s an improvement on rioting. Hopefully folks are finding the tantrums from the Left enlightening, as we&#x27;re getting to see their emotional reaction to having their power lust denied.<p>Sadly, it&#x27;s been denied by electing Trump :( Win some, lose some, I guess.

Seen on hacker news 3 days ago, and the blog post was written on november 14 already. Don&#x27;t know who originally got the idea?<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=12993153" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=12993153</a>

Related to the last paragraph, and in advance excuse me for my lack of knowledge about US history, has the electoral college ever voted for another candidate?

It&#x27;s funny: the article says some CS folks think the election might have been hacked. Then it says well there is no evidence of hacking, but some stats indicate something may be off. In my worldview, when you want to base an article and conclusion on statistics, you should probably talk to some statisticians, not computer security experts.

I&#x27;m all for it, given the widespread reported issues, but I&#x27;d love to see their data and work.<p>Some big names tho.

Funny how the perception on possiblity of fraud changed after the election when the &quot;wrong&quot; side won.

I wish voting in some districts would move to apps and a blockchain.<p>Australia is already using Ranked Voting and now this is taking shape:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cointelegraph.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;australia-to-make-blockchain-voting-app-a-global-democratic-movement" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cointelegraph.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;australia-to-make-blockchain-...</a>