Matt BlazeJun 14

A couple of things about these claims circulating that the 2024 election was "rigged":

1. The supposed "proof" is essentially the same nonsensical statistical gobbledygook that the MAGA people were claiming about 2020, with the parties reversed.

2. There is no legal mechanism to "recount" an election after the results are certified. None. The ship has sailed.

3. SHOCKINGLY, they need funds to continue their "work"

4. Nope, not linking to it. Not giving them oxygen.

Show threadMatt BlazeJun 14
OK, that was four, not a "couple". A quadruple, then.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 14

An important difference between this and the 2020 fraud claims is that here, you don't see the supposedly "defrauded" candidate amplifying the BS. Harris wants no part of this.

Also, you don't get a discount on an overpriced pillow for donating.

Show threadEvan ProdromouJun 14

@mattblaze what do you think about the post facto research on the Florida recount in the 2000 election? Some work by the New Yorker, for instance, suggests that if the recount had continued, Gore would have had more votes.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/12/24/recounted-out

Recounted Out

Signed comment about the Florida recount of a year ago which led to Bush’s victory over the 2000 Presidential election... The first thing to say about …

The New Yorker
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 14
@evan That's historical research, not grounds for a lawsuit.
Show threadEvan ProdromouJun 15
@mattblaze right. So, your concern is less about digging up the details of the 2024 election, and more about using whatever is uncovered (which is pretty patchy and unconvincing) to try to change the current government.
Show threadMatt Blaze
@evan Also, they’re ripping people off based on a false hope and evidently meritless claims, promising a remedy that isn't possible. But other than that…
Jun 15 at 12:39pmWeb
Show threadSP⟁CED GO⟁TJun 15

@mattblaze @evan

Sort of like, it's fine to seek the truth, but the truth now isn't going to deliver the promise being made when asking you to donate money to assist in uncovering the truth.

I understand that finding the truth now won't overturn the certified election. But, *IF* there did end up being proof of actual vote manipulation, the individuals that did so could still be held accountable at least right?

Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15

@finner @evan Go for it. But understand a few things:

- the supposed "smoking guns" indicating fraud in 2024, like those put forward in 2020, aren't really anything.

- elections are ultimately human endeavors, run by fallible people, and small but inconsequential "irregularities" are normal and expected. But it's often very easy to make them seem much more sinister and significant than they are.

- versions of almost everything claimed about 2024 were claimed by the MAGA people in 2020.

Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15

@finner @evan Does any of this this *disprove* that there was fraud in 2024 (or 2020, or 2016, or ...)?

No. It's *possible*. But saying that an election was "rigged" is an *extraordinary* claim, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, which no one has produced.

Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15

@finner @evan Another thing to keep in mind: You probably *want* to believe it, and that's very dangerous.

US national elections in recent years are hotly competitive. The country is split across parties pretty evenly. This means that whatever the outcome of a presidential race, there are a *lot* of disappointed people, all primed to be receptive to claims that the outcome they wanted was stolen from them. Beware!

Show threadChris SamuelJun 15
@mattblaze I have been dismayed to see in other places folks who disputed claims of previous elections being stolen now repeating claims that this last one was. I think they (as in only the particular people I'm referring to, not a general claim) are so distressed by the outcome they just can't believe that people would have willingly voted for it despite the lack of evidence to support a claim of rigging. Grief is a powerful emotion.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15
@chris_bloke Yes indeed. All these claims have to be calibrated for human nature.
Show threadMaier AmsdenJun 15
@chris_bloke @mattblaze Optimism bias is big these days.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15
@finner @evan (I'm no exception. I want to believe it too! Both for personal/political reasons, and also because it would vindicate speculation that technical fraud is in US possible in practice. So I have to be doubly careful to not fool myself with ghosts in the data.)
Show threadParker MorseJun 15
@mattblaze I know you get a lot of grief for these threads, but know also that the first thing I thought when I saw this speculation was, "I wonder what Matt Blaze thinks of this." (My initial reaction - along with that "I want to believe" feeling you note - was that the things they've cited as "proof" do not actually rise to that standard.)
Show threadSP⟁CED GO⟁TJun 15

@mattblaze @evan

That's exactly the state I'm in. I want to believe it. And I want people to be held accountable. But I've never done anything more than read a handful of articles. I agree I've seen nothing that looks like hard evidence. I just don't know enough about this stuff to have a good opinion about what may or may not be true. So I leave it up to the people that actually study this stuff.

Show threadMichael WeissJun 15

@finner @mattblaze @evan something to keep in mind...

Yes, the outcomes of these elections is hugely impactful, but the fact that these elections are as close as they are, given the stark differences between the candidates, says far more than any cries of fraud.

Show threadSP⟁CED GO⟁TJun 15

@mweiss @mattblaze @evan

Exactly right. I truly almost wish there was proven fraud. Because the actual reality is even worse.

Show threadMaier AmsdenJun 15
@finner @mattblaze @evan What I say for sure is that Democrat leadership has done little to assure us that all diligence has been done regarding risk-limiting audits in swing states. Maybe we need a little CyberNinja op of our own.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15

@MaierAmsden @finner @evan There's more work to do, to be sure, but it's simply incorrect to suggest that nothing has been done to improve elections in recent years. Over the last 15 years we

(1) developed the formal requirement of "software independence" in elections

(2) Invented risk-limited audits, which achieve (1)

(3) have greatly diminished the use of paperless "DRE" (touchscreen) voting terminals, which are now considered obsolete because of (1) and (2).

There's been huge progress.

Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15
@MaierAmsden @finner @evan And this progress has been reflected in policies and practices across the board at the county, state, and federal levels. Elections are now considered part of national critical infrastructure, with national threat intelligence and guidance provided by CISA (something Trump cut back on, but, to his credit, he created the agency in the first place). Many states now prohibit paperless DRE and are rolling out RLAS. And cybersecurity practices have improved generally.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15
@MaierAmsden @finner @evan Is everything where it needs to be? Absolutely not. But by EVERY measure, election security in the US has made REMARKABLE, steady progress, and continues to do so. And this progress has been far more rapid and sustained that I thought possible a decade ago.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15

@MaierAmsden @finner @evan An essential, and perhaps unavoidable, irony here is that as all this progress has been made - as US elections become more secure - public confidence in the integrity of our elections seems to be at an all-time low.

This is partly because the progress is driven by (and produces) public awareness of the threats and risks elections face. This awareness is generally good - knowledge is power! - but it can lead to this perverse inversion between reality and perception.

Show threadMaier AmsdenJun 15
@mattblaze @finner @evan I'm aware of these advances. I'm assuming thorough risk limiting audits were done in all the swing states. (But were they?) My concerns are not about current best election practices, but radicalized fascists who outright disregard election results and broke into sensitive voting equipment and have big tech at their back. The lame opposition/ institutions that let an aggravated coup plot slide don't inspire me with confidence.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15

@MaierAmsden @finner @evan I said what I said, and it's all I've got.

I can't prove the election wasn't tampered with. I don't think it was, for the reasons I mentioned. If you've got evidence it was, go for it.

I know that's not satisfying. But I'm not holding back on you.

Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15

@MaierAmsden @finner @evan I know I must seem like some kind of jerk here, like I'm refusing to reveal or admit some basic truth that would make all this clearer.

But the fact is, it's just messy. There's been great progress. But also still uncertainty.

- There are vulnerabilities. They're real!
- But there's thus far been no credible evidence that they've actually been used to alter an election outcome.

You casts your vote and you makes your choice.

Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15
@MaierAmsden @finner @evan Anyway, I'm *exhausted* here. We all are. I appreciate any available slack, and will try to extend some myself, too.
Show threadMaier AmsdenJun 16
@mattblaze @finner @evan It's on the Democratic Party to ensure their voters have faith in the elections. Otherwise, why vote? We need reassurance that the evil wealthy powerful people didn't do the thing they've always intended to do (subvert representative government).
Show threadBronMasonJun 15

@MaierAmsden

No, in 2024 risk-limiting audits were required in only five states — Colorado, Georgia, Nevada, Rhode Island, and Virginia, so two of the swing states.

Below is a chart of the laws in the swing states, regarding audits and recounts. trump won them all, but none of the conditions that trigger an audit or recount occurred in any of the swing states in 2024.

https://verifiedvoting.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Final_11.7.24_Audits-and-Recounts-A-State-By-State-Summary.pdf

@mattblaze @finner @evan

Show threadMaier AmsdenJun 16
@bronakins @mattblaze @finner @evan I live in GA and am fairly confident in our result. But this is also the state where My Pillow cracked voting machines and mucked around as part of an aggravated coup plot. How do we know Cyber Ninjas wasn't looking for vulnerabilities to expoit? I'm just not confident that Democrats have the fortitude to stop the ongoing coup (because they're not).
Show threadBronMasonJun 16

@MaierAmsden

I’ve been uneasy about 2024 after the letter (below) from computer experts warning of trump allies extraordinary access to voting hardware & software in at least 5 states after 2020. Court & other public records show they got into Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Colorado & Arizona, including software of the two largest companies that process 70% of the votes cast in the US.
https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/letter-to-vp-harris-111324-1.pdf

@mattblaze @finner @evan

Show threadRich Stein (he/him)Jun 15
@mattblaze @MaierAmsden @finner @evan
To me the awareness is primarily good. It is the misleading skepticism expressed in the name of purposely creating doubt — expressed by the same so-called "leaders" (a variety of politicians/legislators) who are overly sanctimonious & hypocritical re. *their* interpretation(s) of religion vaccines, science, etc. (& *their* bootlicking "news" outlets, prominent influencers, et al.) — where reality is subsumed. It's grift & as they say in Spain, caca del toro.
Show threadMᴀʀᴋ VᴀɴᴅᴇWᴇᴛᴛᴇʀɪɴɢJun 15
@mattblaze @MaierAmsden @finner @evan Humans are inherently poor at judging risk that doesn't involve a bear chasing you.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 15
@brainwagon @MaierAmsden @finner @evan Plus we're being chased by bears.
Show threadNorman WilsonJun 16
@mattblaze @brainwagon @MaierAmsden @finner @evan Human beings are preprogrammed to see bears where there are none.
Show threadEvan ProdromouJun 15
@mattblaze @MaierAmsden @finner OK, but I think there's a formal difference between "election tampering" as "formally breaking election laws" or "changing votes after they are cast" versus a looser informal definition of "warping the outcome of elections". Billion-dollar budgets, PACs and SuperPACs, negative media campaigns, voter roll purges, and online disinformation all feel like "tampering" in an informal way, even if they aren't about changing votes after they are cast.
Show threadEvan ProdromouJun 15
@mattblaze @MaierAmsden @finner and, yeah, all the things I listed are mostly legal. But they *feel* wrong and unfair.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 16

@evan @MaierAmsden @finner This is what drives me nuts about a lot of these discussions. People confidently assert “The election was stolen! They rigged the voting machines!” But when you dig a liittle, they have no idea about rigged voting machines and are upset (often reasonably) about the electoral college, gerrymandering, PAC money, or whatever.

That’s a legit discussion to have! But I wish people would just start there instead of pretending it’s about hacking.

Show threadMatt BlazeJun 16
@evan @MaierAmsden @finner (I’m not complaining about you here, just this pattern, which is maddeningly common).
Show threadEvan ProdromouJun 16
@mattblaze @MaierAmsden @finner no, it's perfectly fine. *I* feel like something went terribly wrong in the 2024 election, but I don't think what went wrong happened somewhere between the polling stations and the Joint Session of Congress to Count Electoral Votes.
Show threadEvan ProdromouJun 16
@mattblaze @MaierAmsden @finner but it might be wrong to speak at cross purposes. "Something is essentially broken in our democracy" and "The institutional machinery of elections is mostly intact" can both be true.
Show threadStar12MtJun 16
@mattblaze @evan @MaierAmsden @finner I agree here. This election was,IMHO, illegally influenced in a myriad of ways, but I never thought the voting machines were the problem
Show threadMaier AmsdenJun 16
@Star12Mt @mattblaze @evan @finner I'm worried about My Pillow cracking and mucking around in voting machines in Coffee County GA. Were they looking for vulnerabilities to exploit? Did they find any? I mainly just want assurance that thorough risk-limiting audits were done in all the swing states, and I'm hearing nothing but ??? 🤷‍♂️ probably-ish on that front. The Democrat Party needs to reassure their voters, and maybe *approach* holding R's to their own shitty precedents.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 16

@MaierAmsden @Star12Mt @evan @finner As has been explained several times here, by different people, RLAs aren’t yet routinely done on in all but a handful of states. That’s not great, but there’s been significant progress in that direction (as well as in decommissioning inherently insecure DRE machines).

If (like me) you’re unhappy with the pace of the progress, I suggest lobbying and working with your state and local election officials.

Show threaddexterJun 16
@mattblaze Do you know if PA conducts RLAs?
Show threadJohn Mark OckerbloomJun 16

@dexter @mattblaze You can read PA's statewide RLA reports online. Here's the one they did for the 2024 general election: https://www.pa.gov/agencies/vote/elections/post-election-audits/2024-general-rla-report.html

In addition, each PA county does a 2% statistical recount for each election, as noted here: https://www.pa.gov/agencies/vote/elections/post-election-audits.html. (That page also describes a number of other voting machine safeguards PA undertakes.) I don't know offhand there the statistical recounts are reported, but @mattblaze may know.

Show threadMaier AmsdenJun 16
@mattblaze @Star12Mt @evan @finner I'm lobbying Democrat leadership, and I don't think they're listening. They're very adept at not listening.
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 16

@MaierAmsden @Star12Mt @evan @finner Election security hasn't really percolated up to being a national political issue, except sporadically (e.g., after the 2000 election). That's partly because almost everything about elections is controlled at the state and local level.

The good news is that state and local officials have become increasingly receptive to improving things, on the whole. That's probably where the maximum bang for the buck lies with having influence.

Show threadDark Phoenix 🇺🇦🇨🇦🇬🇱🇵🇦🇵🇸🏳️‍🌈Jun 16
@mattblaze @evan @MaierAmsden @finner social media propaganda is also a big issue
Show threadMatt BlazeJun 16
@Darkphoenix @evan @MaierAmsden @finner OK. But if it’s social media they’re worried about, JUST SAY THAT. I don’t understand why people start who think that feel compelled to make BS claims about something else first.
Show threadLinda MohrPJun 16
@mattblaze @evan @MaierAmsden @finner Thank you Matt. I so totally agree. I have been an election volunteer going on 10 years now. Is it perfect...no. But the alarm bells that would go off if there was massive voter tampering are just too numerous. I have friends also sending me this crazy data that the election was stolen. I went out to one of the sites, signed on, and asked some specific questions as to the HOW. On a site that said they would answer questions within 24 hours, I still haven't received any answers and it's been over a month. Gerrymandering, kicking people off the voter rolls, making it hard to register, voting precincts where one has to stand in line for hours, etc. are the real issues.
Show threadDenton GentryJun 16

@mattblaze

Heartening. DEFCON 2017 with the voting village was a real wake-up call for me.

Show threadpeter alvaroJun 15
@mattblaze @finner @evan thank you for your clearheaded commentary on this. Seriously
Show threadTodd KnarrJun 15
@mattblaze @finner @evan Only one side responds to those claims with violence, though.
Show threadDave C.Jun 15
@mattblaze @finner @evan people willing to voice any conviction is a powerful feature of social media. Pick any single thing you want to believe and there's is someone willing to fill the echo chamber. Instead of democratizing knowledge social media has created a multiverse of echo chambers.
Show threadTodd KnarrJun 15
@mattblaze @finner @evan They haven't even presented minimal proof. The best they've been able to produce, in the cases where they've been forced to produce it, is evidence that the losing side was over-counted and should've lost by more.
Show threadMaier AmsdenJun 15
@mattblaze @finner @evan We got questions and irregularities! Let's show Trumpers a little forced empathy! #TrumpPrecedent
#RedHerrings
Show threadaardvarkJun 16
@mattblaze @finner @evan the rigging is pretty much right out in the open. In a better world, Citizens United would be overturned and straight up outlawed. Mechanisms like Fox/breitbart/et al would be cast in a very stark light. They’re the cynical and well-funded brainchildren of people who thought like Goebbels. Propaganda mechanisms would be severely constrained. But today they are unfettered, and the people with the gobs of money are willing to lie and bend the truth to play to human frailties to seize more power.
Show threadSP⟁CED GO⟁TJun 15

@mattblaze @evan

I agree actually that there most likely might not be anything there, which is why I was putting a big IF there.

I was just trying to clarify the point you were trying to make, but it's two fold I guess. Not just that they are promising an outcome that isn't possible, but that the plausibility of actually finding some smoking gun is just far too low. Therefore, don't waste money and time with it at all.

Show threadMaier AmsdenJun 15
@mattblaze @finner @evan At least *someone* is willing to honor the #TrumpPrecedent. Democrat leaders are all too happy to high-road pre-compromise themselves into irrelevance.
Show threadEvan ProdromouJun 15
@mattblaze I also wonder if there's even a detriment to 2000-style research. When we determine that the election would have gone a different way if such and such event happened, is there any value? That event *didn't* happen, and the election went *this* way. Maybe there's a downside to holding onto shoulda woulda coulda scenarios instead of dealing with the world as it is? Especially when it comes down to microscopic margins. Anyway, thanks for the thoughts.