They have found no evidence of hacking, just a statistical anomaly that they can't explain.

and I would claim that ultimately we don't want this to be true because if true... well, there is only one actor capable of this and it isn't Donald Trump nor his minions.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/hillary-clinton-election-vote-recount-michigan-pennsylvania-wisconsin

Many more. I am NOT clearing Russia. But imagine rogue elements in the NSA, CIA, or a private group of multi-billionaires.

I honestly don't think Russia has the interest or have the manpower inside the US to pull off something large scale that would require close proximity to the machines.

I heard the defense industry is well represented in the Trump transition team which many defense firms are CIA fronts.

Plus the GOP has been at war with voting for years, what's to stop them from rigging machines especially since it is so easy to do so.

Either way I imagine something sinister cooked up that will probably never have inside knowledge of.

How can you expect anyone to put forward "evidence" of hacking when there has been no recount, no audit, no investigation of the machines?

Without an investigation, all you have is statistics. And statistical anomalies of this sort are extremely unlikely to be random.

This is only an issue because the elections were close, and they proved to be decisive in Donald Trump's win.

And what are they going to investigate? Are they just going to do a recount? Are they going to interview voters? Who's going to do such an investigation?

Anomalies like this can be explained by one polling station having a long line at a certain time, and some people choosing not to vote. Or maybe some neighborhood has an influential resident that convinced his neighbors to vote for Trump as opposed to Obama last time.

These experts are talking about very small scale discrepancies that could have any myriad number of explanations. 2 weeks ago we were ridiculing Drumph and the Repubs for saying stuff like this.

The Republicans have been hijacking elections for some time now. We know that, it's been proven, and we have every reason in the world to believe this problem is only growing as their policies become more and more inimical to more and more of the electorate. They can no longer win the presidency by popular vote, but fortunately for them election theft works. As long as we don't contest it.

Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary evidence -- Carl Sagan

i can smell something but it's all a conspiracy until i see it.....

Now, let's find out if they hacked anything else...

http://abcnews.go.com/US/russian-hackers-targeted-half-states-voter-registration-systems/story?id=42435822

There are enough anomalies to warrant a closer look.

Our election system is too important to look the other way. Too much at stake to shrug it off.

My main point is lets temper our language. We risk being dismissed as crackpots if we overstate our case on something this serious. Too many on this site are convinced that it is a fact that Hillary lost because of election fraud. We would be calling Trump supporters crackpots if he lost and they were claiming election fraud.

is that an act of war? I have no idea if they did or didn't, although I have my suspicions.

"A second group of analysts, led by the National Voting Rights Institute founder John Bonifaz and Professor Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan’s center for computer security and society, is also taking part in the push for a review, and has been in contact with Simons."


"Were this year’s deviations from pre-election polls the results of a cyberattack? Probably not. I believe the most likely explanation is that the polls were systematically wrong, rather than that the election was hacked."

Halderman
https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-was-hacked-look-at-the-ballots-c61a6113b0ba#.168pwqmmx


Doesn't leave one all warm and fuzzy.

Or it may not have been hacked,
or it may have been hacked equally to benefit both candidates,
or...