So after almost a year, we’re starting to get some clarity on the election machines and who among the alternative media crowd is trustworthy. It is definitely a good thing that alternative sources of information have sprung up in the vacuum of traditional conservative media (hint: risible National Review) taking the concerns of Trump voters seriously.
Patrick Byrne did a yeoman’s job in funding the Arizona audit which was pretty helpful in identifying the vulnerabilities in the voting system and which caused Maricopa to delete data in front of the audit, a red flag which would be prosecuted if we had the rule of law.
One credibility winner in my book appears to be Matt Braynard of “Look Forward America”. His team’s study on Antrim County in Michigan comes to the reasonable solution of going with open source code and that human error was the cause of the problems there. (I'm guessing that going back to paper ballots would be politically and financially infeasible.)
His take is that by its nature, "the design of Dominion Voting Systems has additional points of potential failure in the chain of election events. While human error demonstrably had the largest contributing factor in the reported election irregularities, seemingly unintentional design flaws in Dominion Voting Systems (as well as the lack of publicly available documentation and disclosure of its design) increased that potential for human error. That no parties could review the source code made the claims difficult to prove, but likewise difficult to disprove."
I recall seeing a tweet from someone in Nov 2020 that black-box machines are a joke when it comes to voting, a process that screams for transparency and integrity, and I instantly saw how obvious that is if in hindsight.
Braynard suggested that we cannot know if Coomer could or could not change election results without reviewing the code. We'll likely never know.
**
Mollie Hemingway has a new book out and she is not accepting machine fraud but still thinks the election was rigged by unethical (though smart) actions like those involving the Zuckerberg money dumps.
There’s always going to be an advantage for the cheaters even if they only get away with it once (as she says of the Zuckerberg strategy) since they, after all, are playing offense while the better guys are playing defense. It’s harder to anticipate the ways election misconduct will reveal itself than to come up with new ways I suppose - witness what a gobsmacked Wisconsin election official told Hemingway:“We didn’t even know it was possible to privatize elections.”
An analogy: corporations have to protect their cyber network zealously from hackers looking for vulnerabilities. Similarly Republicans need to protect voting integrity since Democrats are always seeking vulnerabilities. The major problem is Democrats see the mechanics of voting as a campaign strategy. (“Danger Will Robinson!”)
In that respect, machines are still very much of interest as a potential way to alter elections whether or not they were this time.
Mollie Hemingway points out how these newer ways of voting are being fought over so fiercely because it’s a change from our system of the last hundred years of having a private ballot unmolested by third parties. We’re going back to 1800s-era of outsourcing voting to private groups without, of course, any agreed consensus that that's how we want to go.
I feel confident now, given what I've learned in Hemingway's book, that the election was stolen from Trump through a combination of negligence and unethical behavior. Hopefully now the GOP will make voting integrity a campaign strategy, just as Democrats made cheating a campaign strategy. They don't call the GOP the stupid party for nothing, witness how outplayed we were in 2020 election.
No comments:
Post a Comment