@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)...

@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..

@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.

@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.

@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.

@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.

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

@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.

@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

@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.