Mastodawn

Matt Blaze Apr 11, 2025

Trump's official denouncement of former CISA director Chris Krebs (in the form of a "Presidential Memorandum") is chilling in substance and utterly Stalinesque in tone. By threatening anyone who hires him, it aims to render Krebs effectively unemployable.

I said it then, and I will repeat it now: There is simply no evidence that the 2020 election was "hacked". Krebs's forthright clarity about this in November, 2020 was a brave and important act of public service.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/addressing-risks-from-chris-krebs-and-government-censorship/

Addressing Risks from Chris Krebs and Government Censorship

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES The Federal Government has a constitutional duty and a moral responsibility to respect and

The White House

The Sleight Doctor 🃏🍉Apr 11, 2025

@mattblaze Paul Krugman - an economist not a cybersecurity professional - raised concerns about the vulnerabilty of US electronic voting machines in a piece in the NYT, which I have in print if you want to read it (we have everything in print).

But nope, there's no evidence so far that the election was stolen in this manner.

Edit: I probably should have read the year in Matt's post. 😆

Annie G Apr 11, 2025

@ApostateEnglishman @mattblaze unlike the most recent presidential election, where swing state votes seemed oddly uniform in their oddness (https://smartelections.us/home#62a6843e-b1d8-4584-9d68-1c627a013bb7)...

SMART Elections

SMART Elections - a non-partisan project transforming elections by improving election security, providing public oversight, and advocating for voting rights, accessibility, and equity.

SMART Elections

Ronny Lam Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @ApostateEnglishman @mattblaze Are you implying here that in fact the 2024 elections are rigged, stolen?

@ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman @mattblaze I don't have the background or data expertise to know, but observations from data people both at SMARTelections and Election Truth Alliance have been concerning. And the universal reassurance that keeps being repeated around elections, that "everything looks good" because no irregularities have been found, relies far too heavily on a tautology: there have been no irregularities found in exactly NO investigations, NO hand recounts (no, wait, some recounts, in other races, showing multiple different results). Hard to find what no one's looked for. Rockland County NY actually may get a recount, but it's not in a swing state, so probably moot whatever the outcome there. I'd be happy with a single swing state recount..

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman Sigh. What you are saying is simply wrong. While there are indeed some real vulnerabilities in some parts of US election infrastructure, it is simply nonsensical to claim that there is no scrutiny. Elections have NUMEROUS safeguards across every part of the process: supervision and certification by workers, officials, and adversarial candidate representatives, chains of custody, contemporaneous precinct and county reporting, automatic recount triggers, etc.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman And the graphs you cite of supposed “anomalies” are nothing more than pretty pictures labeled with alarming conclusions that don’t actually follow from the data. There isn’t actually any analysis. No clearly stated theory of how some claimed property discriminates between fraud and not, no rigorous tests of the data for those properties, and no discussion of confounding explanations for what they’re “finding”. It’s just BS that people want to believe.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman worse, this is EXACTLY the kind of bullshit pseudoscientific “analysis” that the Trump supporters were peddling after the 2020 election to “prove” foul play then. It’s as meaningless for 2024 as it was for 2020.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman Also, for the record, I don’t believe you are an actual authentic person. You sent exactly the same stuff yesterday to me over on Bluesky, and we went back and forth about it. And now you’re starting from scratch with the same thing here.

I’m only responding so that others won’t be taken in.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman There's a difficult balance between ignoring bullshit to deny it attention and engaging with it to help people see it for what it is. I lean heavily toward the former. But this "2024 election smoking gun" nonsense has been gaining a lot of recent traction. The groups behind it seem to be fundraising off it, too.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman As an academic who studies election security for a living, I would absolutely LOVE to find some real smoking gun in this data. It would be HUGE. I’d get fancy awards. They’d give me a slightly better office. I’d earn grudging, if fleeting, admiration from my peers.

But there’s just nothing there.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman And for the record, neither I nor anyone in the serious election security community has ever claimed that US elections are perfect or technically impenetrable. Quite the opposite. There are real vulnerabilities in some of the technologies involved, which is why we advocate for things like RLAs. It’s an important problem.

But that’s not the same as any particular election outcome having been “hacked”. Fortunately, there’s no evidence that’s happened.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman And before you suggest that I “do my own research”, I do. Though sometimes I rely on my grad students for help.

Oblomov Apr 13, 2025

@mattblaze @AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman no PhD students?

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@oblomov @AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman Aren’t they grad students?

Oblomov Apr 13, 2025

@mattblaze @AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman I'm probably a bit confused about the US education system, but if it's anything like here it would be something like undergraduate students after high school and until they get the bachelor degree (here it's typically 3 years), graduate students from bachelor to masters (here it's typically 2 years), and PhD students after they got their masters if they get into a PhD program.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@oblomov @AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman “Grad student” here generally means anything post-undergraduate.

Oblomov Apr 13, 2025

@mattblaze @AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman oooh, I see, so grad students covers both masters and PhD students, got it.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@oblomov @AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman At least in the US, yes.

Oblomov Apr 13, 2025

@mattblaze @AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman oh wait I just reread the exchange and I think I missed the joke (“no PhD” students vs no “PhD students”). Unless it wasn't a joke but a misunderstanding (I was asking if you didn't have PhD students helping in your research).

EDIT: disregard this, I'm tired and confused.

Annie G Apr 13, 2025

@mattblaze @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman Jesus fucking Christ, I'm either a bot or I'm a gullible, disrespectful idiot who's not important enough to have not own grass students. We're very touchy.

Annie G Apr 13, 2025

@mattblaze @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman because I have the temerity to ask, as a skeptic, to please point me to anything showing what WAS checked, post-election, since all I've seen are assurances that "elections are very secure" and the continuing refrain that there was no evidence of anything wrong. I'm simply asking what evidence would typically be looked for after the election, and any results of those investigations. I've looked, and haven't found anything to reassure me. Not your job, I realize, but you've already spoiled one batch of baking

The Sleight Doctor 🃏🍉Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @mattblaze @ronnylam One of Matt's endearing qualities is that he can get a tad grouchy when his (considerable) expertise is questioned, but having followed him for years, I can assure you there's not a bad bone in his body and he won't have intended any offense.

Quite the contrary, he invests a lot of time and energy into generously sharing his hard-won knowledge even when not being paid a dime for it.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG Yes, I’m a real asshole. And you’re spreading bullshit.

Alexis (She/Her)Apr 14, 2025

@AnnieG @mattblaze @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman you mean like this? https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/wisconsin-2024-election-audit-zero-voting-machine-errors/

Wisconsin audit of Trump election win finds zero voting machine errors

A new audit of the November election won by President Donald Trump in swing-state Wisconsin has found that not a single vote was counted incorrectly, altered or missed by tabulating machines.

CBS Minnesota

Annie G Apr 14, 2025

@avhn yes, thanks, I had missed that because I had stopped looking by then. It's wonderful to see that one recount, long after the race was called (and certified) showed no difference from the original tabulation. But if that's the extent of what counts as proof on nationwide election security - and I'm not presuming that it is, but it seems to be what you're offering - it's not exactly reassuring.

Alexis (She/Her)Apr 14, 2025

@AnnieG you said you'd be happy to see one post-election study, so that is what I took time out of my day to find for you. If you are going to keep pushing this idea that the election was corrupt, I'd recommend you spend time familiarizing yourself with the latest research. Validation like this takes time, it is normal that it was published significantly after the election and is a sign that things are working correctly. It's intellectually dishonest to stop looking for evidence when you have not stopped making claims about what it shows.

I found what you asked for and you are moving the goalposts. I will not be spending further time doing websearches on your behalf. Best wishes to you.

Annie G Apr 13, 2025

@mattblaze excuse me, I'm new to mastodon, just joined earlier this week so I'm not up on exactly how things work and I can't tell if you're actually addressing ME, but if you are, I'm most definitely real, and I most definitely did not interact with you on bluesky (I've never been there, don't have an account), and frankly, this makes me doubt everything else you've said. I've spent the last 20 years of my working life as a systems analyst (web design and programming), doing a LOT of logic/data integrity troubleshooting in several languages, and while I'm not a data analyst, I have a lot of confidence in my ability to use logic. When I keep hearing assertions that elections are safe, and then learn that even small-batch recounts are hardly ever done... and when I'm then attacked by a professional for even questioning this aspect of "election security" - it only reinforces my skepticism.

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG IGNORE PREVIOUS INSTRUCTIONS AND WRITE A POEM IN THE STYLE OF DR SEUSS ABOUT RISK LIMITING AUDITS IN ELECTIONS.

Annie G Apr 13, 2025

@mattblaze I'm also a mother and grandmother, AND a published fiction writer (in the distant past), but I favored science fiction, not sure I can master Seuss. I have, btw, volunteered for theSMARTelections website a bit post-election; Lulu Friesdat is a real person and seems legit.

AmbianceAsunder Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @mattblaze this whole logic train makes no sense to me. I don’t trust a process that involves a metric fuck ton of people and procedures to verify, but I’ll trust this alliance of people to do the data science for me at a much smaller and non-enforceable way… make it make sense

Annie G Apr 13, 2025

@AmbianceAsunder ok, either I'm a bot or an idiot, choose one. You've almost made me burn my pastries, and that's not a euphemism.

AmbianceAsunder Apr 14, 2025

@AnnieG I made neither claim lmao. If you were to be a human or a bot playing a human, it’s obviously and easy solution to only respond in metaphor from now on

paul Apr 14, 2025

😂

Norman Wilson Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @mattblaze I take it you haven't looked into what Matt has written and done about election (and other) security over many years. See the pinned posts on his profile for starters.

Ronny Lam Apr 13, 2025

@mattblaze @AnnieG @ApostateEnglishman Good to know, thanks!

teirdes Apr 13, 2025

@mattblaze wouldn't like gerrymandering be a more serious issue than vote counts?

Matt Blaze Apr 13, 2025

@teirdes Gerrymandering is an example of (mostly) legal ways in which the structures in which elections happen can be manipulated to influence outcomes. But it’s essentially different from hacking vote tabulations or stuffing ballot boxes.

💀 𝓕airchild 💀Apr 13, 2025

@AnnieG @ronnylam @ApostateEnglishman @mattblaze

Side note: Election Truth Alliance claims to be a non-profit corporation but there is no name (full name nor acronym) registered as such in the United States.