DREAM ON: Some think the election results need a closer look. Odds are Hillary Clinton's only win will remain her primary victory.
A call for audits of election results in three important swing states by Michigan researchers has broken into mainstream media coverage
I note it for the record, along with skepticism expressed in several quarters, including by some liberal voices such as Vox and 538.
The key to the suggestion is a finding of a wide variance in vote margins between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton when comparing counties that use electronic voting machines and those that scan paper ballots and thus aren't connected to the Internet. The electronic machines favored Trump. A group of computer scientists thinks this is suspicious and calls for an audit. As yet, the Clinton campaign is officially silent. The group claims anomalies in three states — Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — where reversal of narrow margins for Trump could give Clinton an electoral win.
Vox urges skepticism
. So, too, does Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight,
with a series of tweets taking down the theory, at least based on the elements of the argument that are known.
I'm guessing this goes nowhere, but everyone loves a good conspiracy. Here is a broader bundle of argument
on a rigged election. Some of it IS correct. Many Republican-controlled states DID take steps to disqualify voters likely to support a Democratic candidate. But the courts allowed most of these efforts to stand so the reduction in turnout — though perhaps critical in some states — was legal. Also outrageous.
This is also true: The polls nationally were NOT wrong. Clinton's popular vote lead is at 2 million and rising. The analysis by electoral vote was another matter, though the close decisions in several key states fell within margin of error in many polls.
UPDATE: Green Party candidate Jill Stein is trying to raise
$2 million to pay for recounts in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin because of voting "anomalies."