"The conclusion drawn was that it has minimal effect because the net votes was -4"

But that is only the numerical effect on that one race.

The obvious unasked question is:

Why were so many votes not counted by the machines, and where else has this occurred when ANY race might have been effected?

Also, does this obvious, and now proven machine error force a recount on other, WORKING MACHINES or by hand?

This post prompted me to look further into automatic audits.

It seems the "automatic recounts" are only triggered if a race margin is at or below 0.5% difference, any margin that is larger is ignored and no check is done to verify the votes reported by the machines.

"Under Pennsylvania law, a recount is automatically triggered when a race’s result falls within 0.5%." - https://www.spotlightpa.org/news/2024/11/pennsylvania-election-audit-certification-recount-explainer/

So far I also found this interesting tidbit..

"FairVote, a nonprofit that advocates for ranked-choice voting, analyzed nearly 7,000 statewide races between 2000 and 2023. It found 36 recounts in that time, only three of which resulted in a change of outcome."

That's 3 out of 36 races that were found to be initially counted for the wrong candidate, almost 10%·

for not just whether enough error happened to cause a race to flip but what was the percentage error for each machine and which way? In other words if you had two machines and one had error of 5% and of that 90% went for one candidate and the other machine had 5% error but the error didn't favor one or the other is a whole different matter than if a race could flip or not. A glaring question would be why was one machine so much one way and the other machine not? It's important to ask those kinds of questions because what happens if machines that swing heavily one way in ballot scanning are predominantly the machines assigned to a precinct that normally favors the opposite candidate from the machine skew?

Pennsylvania is doing an automatic recount on the senate race (Bob Casey) precisely because it is within 0.5%..

It is 0.5% that triggers an automatic recount in Pennsylvania.

I have corrected my post.

Guessing just a couple hundred votes at best

...is that the machines are miscounting at all.

Russian bomb threats.
HAMAS attack.
Relentless Russian propaganda.

Planes crash, mail gets lost, medical procedures have undesired outcomes, people make mistakes, machines can fail.

You will never eliminate any possibility of error in any system like 50 state wide elections. You can do everything possible to minimize it, but impossible to eliminate. No one expects that voter fraud can be eliminated 100%, but we say it is rare and doesn't happen enough to affect results.

My state, like many others, uses optical scanners. Voters fill in the circles too lightly or incompletely, put an "X" instead of filling in the circle, mark more than one candidate, etc, etc. That is why states have automatic recounts if the margins are very close, but none of the presidential margins were anywhere near that threshold.

Hand counting would have significantly more errors.

You know how you double-check, or even triple-check important things?

It's like that.

Why would you believe that the elected officials in my state like Gov Whitmer, AG Nessel, and SoS Jocelyn Benson are that incompetent?

...to assure election accuracy and no, I don't think specific individuals or state offices alone have the sole authority or capacity to do this.

Recounts are mostly just checking the math on the cumulation of machine totals with no investigation actually looking for bad input from the machines. Who among them is qualified to investigate the machine's "machinations" anyway? Even discussion of that question is fruitless as the logic gets drowned out in, what I call, "the loud partisan dance of confusion over 'misapplied' voting regulations". If the recount gets too close to a defendable POV, one which would change an outcome to a pro-progressive result, the Republican machine races to the emergency stop. The emergency stop in 2000 was the USSC...................

Easy-peasy. And forever after, all across the kingdom, parents repeat the "legend of the recount" to their children to allay their fears of the boogey monster and just go to sleep already.

in a close race.

But this is the kind of evidence we need to really question the voting and if it was in fact manipulated.

How is that possible?

There were discrepancies in something like 13% of the batches, but it was off by something like 17 votes total. Out of 750,000. I think it showed a discrepancy of something like 0.00015%. (I forget the exact number)

Which shows the original count was stunningly accurate.

But people on social media didn't understand how to read the data, so some people started running around saying things like 13% of the votes were wrong, which isn't what the data says at all. But that's not going to stop people in the current . . . speculative environment.

Pennsylvania is going to audit a massive number of votes statewide. We'll see how many votes change. If it's anything like Georgia's numbers, people won't have anything to hang their hats on.

If people misunderstand the numbers (or dishonestly present statistics in an inflammatory and misleading way), it'll be off to the races.

I put my bet on it'll be off to the races no matter what the audit shows. Because that's the environment we're in now. Truth is rapidly separating from purpose in all this.

...among all the other indications of things not being accurate, there must be SOME reason why rightwingers are fighting so hard AGAINST rigorous verification of such an important process.

I suspect those people check their credit card statements for inaccuracies, I can't imagine they would put up an actual fight with themselves against doing that.

You can’t fight against something that isn’t happening or being pursued in any way.

...reports from people who are strongly arguing against doing recounts, it is those people I refer to.

His messages are Chat GPT code.

Don't give away secrets.

It’s just folks pushing conspiracy theories on the internet with no standing to do anything, at this point.

...are very strongly against doing recounts, or taking any action to verify the results in anyway.

It’s more like some folks being unable to accept reality and move forward.

I have read statements from people who are very strongly against doing recounts, or taking any action to verify the results in anyway.

I bet there’s tons of folks fighting against something that isn’t happening and no is trying to do!

If people want to throw a pie in their own faces, go nuts.

At the end of the day, Harris needs to be on board. And all indications are that she does not share the internet hinterland's enthusiasm for pastries.

...but she did write about her concerns on election issues similar to this in her 2019 book.

And bashing Democrats. He even said bad things about Kamala Harris in a recent post on substack. This is why I don't trust the GOP (Spoonamore) when they say they want recounts nationwide. I would recommend taking his posts with less authority on the topic.

Dad will be back from the store with those milk and cigarettes any minute now.

in states where the vote margins are so big that there is 0.0000000000001 % chance it would ever be reversed.

The money would be better used for nearly anything other than throwing it down a black hole.

Their voting machines are very vulnerable since the software is in the Republican’s hands and the GA Republican legislature refused to fund a security patch AND despite that 60 Minute piece the Sunday before the election, there is a time the machines are connected to the internet.

The actual countable (“original vote”) is encrypted in a QR code. The voter never sees their actual vote.

and the paper ballots are compared to the tabulator numbers during post election audits.

https://sos.ga.gov:8443/news/voters-around-georgia-love-new-paper-ballot-voting-system

...and the most basic question in all of this is...

Although we can check to see if the machine-reported totals of very close races was reported by the machines correctly, we CAN NOT check to see why any given machine might have reported an incorrect total, due to the "propietary" nature of the source codes.

Source code (and therefore the actions of the machines) that may have been manipulated at any point since leaving the factory is hidden from us forever.

Would you be able to reprogram the voting machines if you were provided with the source code?

Question reposted in the title. Can you do it, or would you have to "trust" another person to do it for you?

I need to check my email I guess...

It is not a question about a "task" it is a question about skill.

Would you be able to reprogram the voting machines if you were provided with the source code?

We all know computers can be programmed, and reprogrammed, and hacked.

Lots of people do that work every day.

why it happened and potential implications in other races. From that, further actions and an action plan as necessary. At very least, changes so it doesn’t happen again.

I assume and certainly hope something this important is being systematically reviewed if anomalies are found.

It was a multi-layered strategy.

No one thing stole the election, but many pieces together tipped the scales.

Democrats are arguing about what they did wrong, what they need to change, just as Magats intended.