2 letters Requesting VP Harris to Request of Demand Recounts of 2024 Presidential Election

[Time for change]

Through my participation with an election integrity group, I have come across two letters to VP Harris, requesting (first letter) or demanding (second letter) hand recounts in the swing states. The first letter is from a group of seven computer security experts who refer to “serious election security breaches” as the rationale for the recounts, without claiming that the security breaches changed the outcome of the election. The second letter is from Stephen Spoonamore, also a computer security expert, who goes beyond the claim of security breaches to say that it is a near certainty that the breaches changed the outcome of the election.

Below are brief excerpts from both letters, starting with hyperlinks to the full letters. My brief excerpts do not contain the details of the security breaches, but the full letters contain a great amount of detail on that:

First letter

Dear Vice President Harris,

We write to alert you to serious election security breaches that have threatened the security and integrity of the 2024 elections, and to
identify ways to ensure that the will of the voters is reflected and that voters should have confidence in the result. The most effective
manner of doing so is through targeted recounts requested by the candidate. In the light of the breaches we ask that you formally request hand recounts in at least the states of Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. We have no evidence that the outcomes of the elections in those states were actually compromised as a result of the security breaches, and we are not suggesting that they were. But binding risk-limiting audits (RLAs) or hand recounts should be routine for all elections, especially when the stakes are high and the results are close. We believe that, under the current circumstances when massive software breaches are known and documented, recounts are necessary and appropriate to remove all potential doubt and to set an example for security best practices in all elections….

Second letter

Dear Madam Vice President:

Professionally I have worked as the CEO or CTO at seven high technology firms including two which specialized in hacking and counter-hacking operations. My clients have included numerous governments [including DoD, DHS, Dept. of State], F100 Financials and F500 Industrials. I am a lifelong Republican who has long placed service and participatory democracy over party….

You should reverse your concession, call for both a full investigation of criminal activity and demand hand recounts in all seven swing states. In my professional view there are multiple and extremely clear indications the Presidential vote was willfully compromised.

I wholly agree with the public letter of Duncan Buell, et. al. of Nov. 13th stating they believe there is a possibility of hacking and calling for hand-recounts. That letter’s clear call to action is commendable, but its cautious tone may belie the severity of what I believe has happened. In my view it is a near certainty the results have been changed at a scale which reversed the US Presidential Election…. A hand recount will most likely show you did win…. In my view, a capable and skilled series of exploits, electronic tools and hacks were used to change the Presidential vote in all seven swing states. These activities have reversed the outcomes in at least Arizona, Michigan, North Carolina, and Wisconsin. I will lay out the basics of the attack…. Finally I will outline how I would recommend investigating….

Lastly, this hack methodology may or may not have some correlation with the series of Bomb Threats called in by Russian affiliated assets. The use of distraction or diversion of this kind is common…. any jurisdiction which was subject to a bomb threat was forced to break standard operating procedure. This alone should be grounds for you to ask for a hand-recount….

I will continue to investigate with a growing group of volunteers. We are also planning to offer rewards for information. But our efforts to preserve the integrity of this election cannot take this to completion. You, and only you, can call for a full hand-recount and engage the vast public resources at your disposal. I can’t. This is all I can do. Let me know how I can help.

Given this information, in combination with past history of evidence of extensive electronic manipulation of voting machines in Presidential and other elections, almost always in favor of Republicans, I feel confident that full hand recounts of swing states will reveal the manipulation of this election enough to change the results. I desperately hope that VP Harris will believe that and take appropriate action. If any DU members have enough influence with her or those she is close to to influence their opinion on this, please attempt to do so.

[Think. Again.]

1. K&R

[Tribetime]

85. Yep things don't pass the smell test to me st least look at it

[BoRaGard]

2. Dear Madame Vice President

Ditto Letter #3

[SoCalDavidS]

3. Thanks For Trying

I would not expect your efforts to go anywhere though. It has been made abundantly clear that the Harris campaign is over, and they want us to move on to the midterms in 2026.

[tritsofme]

5. That's because the campaign is over.

We have no choice but to move onto 2026.

[Time for change]

16. There most certainly is a choice

Recounts are not only legal, but most election computer security experts believe either recounts or audits followed by recounts when indicated should be done routinely in elections that are close and where there is any evidence of election security breaches.

[MadameButterfly]

9. Some of us are not presuming there will be valid 2026

elections so we have to try while we can

[colorado_ufo]

20. This!!!

If there is a problem with the election results, and it is not fixed, it will simply continue! The midterm "elections" will mean nothing.

Remember, Trump said that we won't ever have to vote again.

[BComplex]

55. And, when you get right down to it, elections in this country HAVE NEVER been safe, for the most part.

Ballot box stuffing, disenfranchisement, buying votes, throwing people off voter rolls, beating people up....and on and on. From the beginning, we, as a PROUDLY "democratic republic" country, have NEVER made voter safety and protections a major priority, and we are now, obviously, paying the price.

If messing with the elections had been codified with strict penalties for ANYONE breaking those laws, even for the very wealthy ( they are never held to any standard! ) , then we would have avoided where we have landed now.

IT IS TIME, for once and for all, to make voting security and accuracy the #1 priority. Obviously the republicans would vote for it, right? I mean, wasn't all that whining about a "stolen election" what 1/6 was about? There are very few penalties for totally trashing people's rights to vote, and have those votes counted safely and accurately.

Fat chance, but it needs to be said.

[DiamondShark]

65. Making a law against Citizens United would be a good start.

[BComplex]

71. Amen!

That was a symbol of what I'm talking about.

[AloeVera]

66. From this Canadian's perspective, U.S. elections are...

To put it gently... a farce?

Honestly.

[BComplex]

72. I agree at this point.

Our elections have always been hinkey.

[Seeking Serenity]

74. "Landslide" Lyndon, amirite

[Abnredleg]

4. We are already covering this in depth in several other threads

it's a good topic but you risk diluting the discussion by starting another.

[niyad]

15. Some may not hhave seen the other threads.

[h2ebits]

22. Thank you. I, for one, have not seen the other threads

and I posted this one on Facebook.

[KPN]

31. Ditto here.

[David Boyle]

79. Here's mine:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219730328

[malaise]

67. Huh!

I disagree - the more the better

[Cetacea]

97. Good!

It hasn't been covered enough.

[garybeck]

98. is there a limit of one thread per topic?

when there is a serious issue going on, i've seen 10 or 20 treads on the same topic here at DU before.
I don't think it's diluting.
there are many aspects and facets of this discussion and multiple threads are warranted, logical, and expected.
just my two cents!

[pandr32]

6. Please, Madame Vice President...

Do it for all of us--at home and around the world.

[Fiendish Thingy]

7. The letters will be ignored, as they are CT nonsense

If there was even a shred of credibility to these CT’s, does anyone seriously think these letters would be the first time Harris had heard of them?

[SoCalDavidS]

12. Assuming There Were Legitimate Concerns

They still would go nowhere, because Democrats wouldn’t want to look like the repubs, even though the voters actually rewarded them with a sweep in the elections.

They can continue fixing future elections for all I care.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

21. Dismissing legitimate concerns as "conspiracy theories" is not reasonable or helpful.

Defcon hackers have broken voting machines in minutes every year since they began.

[TheKentuckian]

29. What is the specific concern and what supports that it is valid?

People are calling conspiracy theories because that is what the concerns seem to add up to so far making them less than legitimate.

Incredulity is not evidence, it isn't a hypothesis, it isn't even really an argument.

There is not even an underling a testable theory, people are holistically asserting "something isn't right", but cannot even offer what the issues are and at this point most of them have positioned themselves to only accept the magical proof that something didn't happen and rankle at being asked what did happen which is a far more provable position.

People are making the Chump 2020 election case but with much larger margins, unsupported and very generalized speculation at best that would not exist if the results aligned with desires.

[Time for change]

37. Did your read the two letters?

They are full of extensive evidence to support their claims.

[TheKentuckian]

40. I did. Our concepts of what evidence is must diverge apparently

because I see none, maybe I'm missing it and you would be kind enough to clarify for slower folks like myself.

[Time for change]

56. For now, I'll start with the first major point that Spoonamore makes

He notes that there were over 600,000 votes for Trump that were not accompanied by any down ballot choices

He notes that this is a rare phenomenon, in that all 7 swing states manifested historically unprecedented numbers of this phenomena (he refers to it as bullet ballots), manifested only in the swing states and none of the other 43 states. Then he notes that the best explanation for this is that most of those ballots were "surgically added" rather than put in by the voters.

Do you disagree with his stated finding (which could be easily assessed by anyone with access to the applicable computers) or do you disagree that the excessively large number of bullet ballots only in the 7 swing states but no other state provides no good reason to doubt the election results enough to do a recount?

[TheKentuckian]

59. No, I don't even agree he has any findings.

I don't see how he is in any position to conclude anything.

No, I don't see how people voting only for the top of the ticket proves anything whatsoever because I know people do it or that at least that is what people have said they have done my whole life.

Nor do I see what pointing to them is going to do to change the results..

I'm not against whatever audit but I am against the witch hunt, Chumpian rationales.

[Time for change]

63. You didn't answer my question

I stated a finding to you in the first sentence of the body of my response, and you won't say whether you agree that it might be true. And instead of answering that, you say that you don't see it as a finding.

Apparently you speak a different language than me, so I can't think of anything more to say to you.

[TheKentuckian]

81. That is correct. I don't agree with the premise that any findings were made to agree with.

Do I believe Chump MIGHT have cheated? Absolutely.

Do I have an articulable and supportable case that he did? No.

Do I have any specific accusations? No, I do not.

Can I identify even a particular "how"? No, I cannot.

You seem to be working backwards from a conclusion rather than following a trail of clues or evidence and that puts us into a spot that is between difficult and impossible to differentiate from a Conspiracy Theory because you want proof that something could not happen instead of proving it actually did.

The one making the accusation has the burden of proof and incredulity is never proof.

There is no evidence. There are no specific reasonable suspicions.

[Foolacious]

93. But there IS evidence, and there ARE specific reasonable suspicions.

Last edited Mon Nov 18, 2024, 11:42 AM - Edit history (1)

The evidence is statistical:

Spoonamore notes an extreme discrepancy in voting behavior between the seven swing states and all other states. The explanation that Trump voters in only those states were just more focused on their candidate to the exclusion of other candidates and issues on the ballot is implausible, given that the ratio of the discrepancy is two to three orders of magnitude (that is, 100 to 1000). Why would swing state Trump voters be 100 to 1000 times more likely to "bullet" vote than in non-swing states? Why would they be 100 to 1000 times more likely to "bullet" vote this year than they did in 2020 or 2016? This is evidence that something is amiss in the counting. Is it proof? No. Is it evidence? Yes; for example, we use exit vote totals all the time as a statistical check against reported vote totals (though primarily in other countries; when there is a discrepancy in our domestic elections, we tend to change the exit vote totals to match final reported votes -- see Ohio, 2004).

The suspicion is specific and reasonable:

Spoonamore suspects a hack. He describes the nature and mechanism of the hack, and recommends a procedure (a hand recount in suspicious jurisdictions) which will detect whether such a hack occurred.

To reiterate: there is evidence but, as you note, that evidence is not proof and the burden of proof lies with the accuser -- or, more accurately, the party raising the suspicion. That's why Harris ought to request the suggested hand recounts, which will elevate the evidence to proof, or dismiss it. Spoonamore cannot do that on his own; Harris must engage, or the evidence will forever remain only evidence.

[Fish700]

73. Apparently the specific concern is that Harris lost.

The same concern Trump had in '20

[Time for change]

99. I'm really sick of hearing a request for a recount being cmopared to what Trump did

I request for recounts is nothing at all like a violent insurrection with the purpose of keeping Trump in power, perhaps for the rest of his life.

And furthermore, there is plenty of evidence that indicates that a recount is sorely needed. Whereas Trump's claims were based on nothing but lies. And he never even requested a full hand recount of the votes in any state, probably because he knew that that would show that the election was rigged in HIS favor.

[Fish700]

105. If there was plenty of evidence you would think Harris would be interested in a recount.

[Time for change]

106. Yes, one would hope so

But there seems to be some sort of taboo among Democrats about requesting recounts. Neither Kerry in 2004 nor Clinton in 2016 requested one, even though there was plenty of evidence in the form of the discrepancy between unadjusted exit polls and official vote counts (Ohio in 04, WI, MI, PA, FL, NC in 16), among other things, to suggest a high probability that cheating reversed the winners of those elections.

This time the primary evidence is somewhat more obscure (though unadjusted exit polls in PA, WI, and MI did predict Harris wins), but the fact that so many computer security experts, in the two letters in this OP (there may be many more that I'm unaware of), are urging her to to request recounts should be enough for her .to do it.

[gab13by13]

8. Democrats concede when they really won, reference;

Al Gore and John Kerry.

[Time for change]

83. And Hillary Clinton

Exit polls in 2016 showed showed Trump losing 5 states that the official count showed him winning (PA, WI, FL, NC, MI). Enough money money was raised by the Green Party candidate for statewide hand recounts in 3 of those states, Trump sued in all three to stop the recount, and the state courts stopped them in all three states. If Clinton had requested the recounts instead, it's unlikely that they would have been shut down by the courts.

In 2020, with all Trump's whining, more than 60 court cases, and a violent insurrection attempt to keep him in office, he didn't request a statewide hand recount in a single state. Why? The only reason I can think of is that he knew that they would be shown to have been manipulated in his favor.

[MrWowWow]

10. Here are the Experts Who Should Sign the First Letter

Dr. Halderman
U. of Michigan
[phone]
[e-mail]
____________________________
Dr. Douglas W. Jones
Email:[e-mail]
Snail Mail ouglas W. Jones
201H MacLean Hall
University of Iowa
Iowa City, IA
52242-1419         
 Phone [phone] -- leave a message(319)335-0713 -- department secretary
_____________________________
Harry Hursti
Election Integrity Foundation
https://www.linkedin.com/in/hhursti
https://www.election-integrity.org
https://www.votingvillage.org
[e-mail]

[e-mail]
PO Box 1754
New York, NY 10017-4019
_______________________________
Dr. Barbara Simons
[e-mail]
_______________________________
Dr. David Jefferson
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
[e-mail]
[phone]

_______________________________

[MadameButterfly]

14. Are these people you are suggesting we send the letters to?

One of these names is already on the first letter.

[MrWowWow]

18. Yes

These are the experts we need to sign the first letter. Might be good to have Thom Hartmann conduct a panel discussion with them during his broadcast. Go big or stay home.

[markodochartaigh]

27. Thom Hartmann is going to have

Mr Spoonamore on his show tomorrow.

[MadameButterfly]

11. This is very good. Have you sent it to Kamala

and to anyone else? Should we follow suit?

This is an idea I raised in an earlier thread and I felt unqualified to judge the credibility of both, especially the second one. However the writers seem to have sufficient credentials, and our goal doesn't have to be judge their veracity ourselves, but to get them to people who have the resources to do so. I agree with a poster who said it's likely we aren't the first to try to get her attention on this, but I still think hearing our response in sufficient numbers could make a difference. I'm also unsure whether there really remains any legal recourse for her to get the recounts even if she was convinced, but I believe the writers of those letters would know.

Some people say nothing will happen. I've learned in life that not speaking up because you think something is hopeless often passes up real opportunities which you only realize later.
Leave no stone unturned, I say. Raise our voices if only because we still have a right to do so.

[SoCalDavidS]

24. I've Reached Max Cynical Level

Been through this before. I still think OH was fixed in ‘04. I just get more depressed, and I’m ready to throw up my hands.

[Beck23]

44. Spoonamore did a report on Ohio in 2004

You can get a report on that off the web. Ken Blackwell was in the tank for Bush. He kept all the computers locked in his office. At about 10:30 pm the results were sent to an unauthorized outfit in Tennesse to count the votes.

I was on the Ohio election commission website watching the results on my computer. At about 11 pm the winner changed to Bush in all precincts. Maybe that didn't mean anything, maybe it did.

[Beck23]

45. Sometimes all you can do is watch.

[MadameButterfly]

87. Yes, it was

[Time for change]

32. Thank you

Over the past couple of years, I have sent letters to more than 50 high profile journalists, politicians, office holders and others whom I thought would be interested in the need for more election security. In most of those letters, I attached a 43 page summary document (with about 80 references) that I wrote regarding evidence of large scale and frequent voting machine manipulation over the last two decades, always favoring the more conservative candidate, and I recommended hand recounts of paper ballots on a frequent basis as the best means of addressing this issue. I received no response to any of my letters.

I also got connected with three different election integrity organizations, where I tried to convince them to urge the Biden administration to announce, well before the election, that they would probably request recounts or at least audits of all close state elections (that they lose) that could influence the election winner, and also noting that they would have no problem with the Trump campaign doing the same. I did sign a petition from one of these groups recommending something very similar to what I recommended in my summary document -- prior to the election.

Given my track record when trying to make contact on my own with very high profile people, and especially given that several high profile computer experts have already written letters to VP Harris, I have not written her a letter, with the rationale that those who have are much more likely than me to be listened to.

[Igel]

13. Spoonamore has an interesting history.

(And it's unclear, at least to me, if his data are accurate, look around DU for the counterclaims. Before looking at any claim, always examine the data or letter those more knowledge and who are unbiased examine the data in a clear, hard, unbiased manner.)

https://www.the-daily-record.com/story/news/2012/09/24/spoonamore-s-wide-range-interests/19488674007/
He's been CEO and started a lot of startups, so he's obviously a go-getter and a smart guy, but it's far from clear that he's actually worked in security; most of his IT startups have involved making hardware and hiring similarly smart people that work for him.

He's a lifelong (R) that ran as an (I) against a (R) in a Ohio district election and lost. (https://ballotpedia.org/Stephen_Spoonamore). That right there produces a certain amount of cognitive dissonance.

Harris can call for a full hand recount, but that's going to take a hell of a lot of $ and a hell of a lot of time and states are under the gun to make sure that their votes are certified, the electors vote in their home states, and then the electors' results are received by the archivist. https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/key-dates That gives 24 days from today (not from when the request is made and recounting starts), and would be sure to be slowed down by all sorts of claims and counterclaims and couldn't start in some places until the current legal issues are resolved and there's an official count that could be subject to a recount.

Miss some of the deadlines and you wind up disenfranchising some states' voters and that's a problem.

[Time for change]

23. Spoonamore has spent many years working in computer security

and he has extensively written and talked about it:
https://tpzoo.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/stephen-spoonamore-2008-interview-paper-ballots-please/

You're right that the recounts will cost a lot of money. So did the campaign. If there was a 1% chance that the money spent will reveal something of great importance to our democracy or change the election results, I think it would be worth the expense. And I believe that the chances of that happening if VP Harris follows the advice in the letters is far closer to 100% than 1%.

[totodeinhere]

17. Not according to a lot of independent experts

"There have been no credible allegations of election fraud or evidence of votes that disappeared during the 2024 election.

On November 6, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Director Jen Easterly said that election officials are still counting votes and reported no incidents of compromised election security.

As we have said repeatedly, our election infrastructure has never been more secure and the election community never better prepared to deliver safe, secure, free, and fair elections for the American people,” Easterly said. “This is what we saw yesterday in the peaceful and secure exercise of democracy. Importantly, we have no evidence of any malicious activity that had a material impact on the security or integrity of our election infrastructure.”

Similarly, Ishan Mehta, director of media and democracy at Common Cause, a public advocacy group, said the 2024 election was safe, secure and “pretty smooth.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/9/fact-check-did-20-million-democratic-votes-disappear

[Qwe]

78. "No evidence of votes that disappeared"

FWIW, the claim is not that votes disappeared, but rather that votes were fraudulently added.

[Silent Type]

19. NIH: Denial is a common defense mechanism used to protect oneself from the hardship of upsetting reality.

[Time for change]

64. That is sometimes true

But sometimes denying something provides the path towards investigating whether or not what is denied is actually true or not.

Unless this is investigated we'll never know.

In 2000, the US Supreme Court stopped the vote count

In 2004, John Kerry's request to examine voting machines prior to the election was denied in court, and then, when the results of the election turned out to be highly suspicious in Ohio, he didn't request a recount

In 2016, with highly suspicious results, Hillary Clinton did not request a recount. The Green Party losing candidate paid $5 million for statewide hand recounts in WI, PA, and WI. But Trump successfully sued to stop all 3 of them, with the judgement in at least one of those states implying that if a candidate with any chance of winning the election had requested the recount, it would have been approved.

We are not interested in denying the results of this election. We are interested in finding out what the truth is, and thus preserving our democracy.

[Silent Type]

68. Think we know the truth, some haven't accepted it.

[Richard D]

25. I see only two important questions . . .

. . . 1. Would they cheat? We know the answer to that one. They would if they could.

2. Could they cheat?

[Loupe Garoue]

75. They had help

Russia/Putin seem to have the will and means to help as does Elon. They could definitely pay for it.

[polichick]

26. With this info there is only one choice for VP Harris - otherwise she'll be complicit.

[TheKentuckian]

38. There is no information. Someone wrote letters with amorphous at most speculation in them.

For all this "info", nobody but nobody can form a specific allegation much less offer evidence to support one.

The idea is to dig and dig and "surely" something will be found or some pattern might emerge or some hint will come to light that potentially can be explored if only we would just look for something...anything.

There is no evidence that will satisfy because it is the same mentality that lead to witch hunts.

It will forever be "something" unless proof of cheating is found because the root is that the results can only be illegitimate and the excercise is to find out how rather than proving something did happen at all in the first place.

I'd say it seems like fling shit to the wall to see if any of sticks but we are very very short on even the poo to throw, we don't even have clear concepts of the poop and are just blindly hoping to locate some.

[polichick]

53. With the entire planet on the line, no info is needed to fully examine the vote...

If Dems once again surrender prematurely, they’ll have to live with that legacy.

[Time for change]

82. You sound like you think you understand this issue better than election security experts

Do you really believe that?

What they call evidence of breaches of election security, you call "speculation at best"

[LonePirate]

28. Some on the left are embracing election denialism that so many on the right expressed in 2020.

I, too, don’t like that Harris lost. However, she did lose and we need to dispense with these nonsensical and conspiratorial efforts that will not alter a single result. Just stop and start moving forward.

[SoCalDavidS]

33. And It Worked Out Poorly For Them This Year

Nobody likes a sore loser. Except perhaps America.

[Ms. Toad]

30. Just like 4 years ago . . .

Weren't we ridiculing Trump for identical theories just a month ago?

Conspiracy theories should be subject to ridicule, no matter which side wins.

[SoCalDavidS]

35. The Alternative

America prefers someone like T ahead of someone like Harris.

[Ms. Toad]

91. Unfortunately,

That appears to be true. Or, at least the portion who bothered to go to the polls believes they prefer someone like Trump. Whether they actually prefer the unbridled Trump remains to be seen.

[Beck23]

39. It's not a theory if you can prove it.

Virginia has people who audit these systems because breaches ARE possible. I did an audit at one location a few years ago. Why do you think these are needed? Why do you think the DOD and the other government agencies patch their software every week to stay ahead of hackers?

Don't you know that unfriendly nations have whole teams that work day and night trying to get into our computers?

Did you know that Russia got into some non-high security systems at DOD a few years back and sent IP addresses of some systems to computers in Russia? Do you think these are theories?

Our business and government systems are bombarded daily by hackers trying to get in. But I suppose you think they are not at all interested in hacking our election systems.

[Ms. Toad]

90. The voting machines are not connected to the internet.

Expressly to avoid the kind of cyber attacks you are worried about.

I probably have as much or more hands-on experience with voting machines, as well the physical safeguards in place to protect them from tampering, as anyone on this board. The conspiracy theories are touted by people who have had lots of fun tampering with machines in venues where they had full access to machines, without worrying about anyone noticing they were trying to hack in.

[Time for change]

100. The Internet isn't at all required to rig an election

Voting machines can be programmed to cheat before the election starts.

[Time for change]

48. No, we are not doing anything similar to what Trump did. There are 3 things that make what the writers of these letters

did and what Trump did.:

1) Trump's assertions were just a bunch of lies, based on no evidence at all. He sued in over 60 court cases and produced not a shred of evidence. He had the opportunity to request statewide recounts in the states he claimed he won, but he didn't even do that, probably because he knew that it would show that the machines were rigged in his favor. The 2 letters in the OP are filled with evidence to support their claims. If you want to challenge the evidence then do so by pointing to specific things they say that you have reason to doubt.

2) The recommended solutions are radically different. Trump's solution was violent insurrection, which is essentially treason. The recommended solution in the two letters is recounts in order to either verify or refute their claims.

3) The motives are radically different. Trump's motive was to stay in power and become a dictator. The motives of those who wrote these letters is to verify or refute the election results, so that we'll know what really happened. Election verification is something that was and is widely recommended by virtually all election integrity activists, regardless of what the result of the election is. Their motive is the preservation of our democracy.

[Ms. Toad]

89. The voting machine conspiracy theories are virtually identical.

They were ours before he stole them from us. Trump borrowed them, often literally word for word, from the same sources we used. Now we want them back, sans the ridicule we've been heaping on Trump for four years.

[stopdiggin]

34. false statement

- in combination with past history of evidence of extensive electronic manipulation of voting machines in Presidential and other elections, -

There is no such evidence. Thus, a false statement, leading to false premise.

And if Spoony is actually saying that (the above statement is I believe coming from OP poster) - he should be condemned as a conspiracy hack and purveyor of misinformation. Wait - - I just did!

[Beck23]

41. He is a cyber security expert and a Republican!!

Apparently you know nothing about computer forensics.

Trump's election deniers did not present valid evidence according to the experts. Their main evidence was Trump's claims, like the claim that undocumented immigrants are voting all over the country.

[stopdiggin]

46. and apparently evolving into a kook ...

there is no evidence of extensive (or really even small scale) manipulation - either past or present. Period.

And therefore - statements such as, "they've done it in the past .." - not only don't lend credibility (relying as they do on false claim)- but also serve to undermine the standing of further argument.

There are also (mostly self described) 'experts' out there that are still arguing climate change. The rest of the scientific community calls them - - Guessed it! -- Kooks.

[Beck23]

47. I don't believe anti-science people

[stopdiggin]

49. but will latch on to

scientific kooks?
Like the people 'trained and educated' in medicine - that went on to be (very vocal) anti-mask and vaxers? Those kinds?

Conspiracy advocates love to point to the one time - when the lone wolf, crying in the darkness, turned out to be right ... Only problem with that - is the 99.999% of the time - when those same 'lone voices' are just delusional - or megalomaniacs and narcissists - - - - or, in today's day and age - grifters ....

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[Beck23]

36. This is good.

[DallasNE]

42. Bullet Ballots

This has all the earmarks of the Elon Musk operation, where he handed out $1 million to select people who voted in this manner. That is further reinforced by the fact that Musk was only doing this in swing states. Corruption, yes, but technically legal. Some of these people may have also voted down the ballot, which would explain how the polling was so far off the mark. There is corruption everywhere you turn.

[stopdiggin]

52. wrong. Musk was running a (so called) drawing

based on people who were registered - and agree to sign a 1st and 2nd Amend petition. Happened prior to the election - and therefore many of these 'entrants' had not yet voted. (nor was it required for entry to drawing)

In addition (as has been stated up and down this site numerous times) - the 'shift' away from Harris did NOT only happen in swing states - but was evidenced in a multiplicity of states and demographics. Arguing that the swings states actually mirrored what was happening in the rest of the country. And, again - arguing strongly against the 'stolen' or 'manipulation' claims.

Hard as it is to admit ... The fact is a majority of our neighbors ...
And cries of, "Corruption" ... Isn't going to change the simple basic fact.

[Time for change]

69. I suppose that some of the bullet ballets were do to Musk's operation

But we're talking about 600,000. It seems highly unlikely to me that that could have accounted for more than a small fraction of that.

But maybe it did. We won't know unless it's investigated by recounts .

[King of the sheep]

92. Is there any source for the 600,000 number?

Can anyone link to a source for this 600,000 “bullet ballot” number? Particularly one which compares percentages in different states?

[LilElf70]

43. Now we're talking

I mean, what harm could it cause? If only we could prove voter fraud and turn this around.

[MichMan]

51. Recounts cost millions of dollars; they aren't free

[LilElf70]

60. Kamala made over a billion

I'm sure she has enough left over to flip the bill. The voters gave her the billion. It should be used to prove she won, if necessary. It's all about the country, right?

[totodeinhere]

61. You are totally wrong. The Harris campaign is now in debt.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/14/how-did-kamala-harriss-campaign-rack-up-a-debt-after-record-fundraising

[LilElf70]

77. Get the unlimited funds out of our elections

Citizens United.

[Frank D. Lincoln]

80. The whole point of this thread is that Harris might have actually won.

All of that money might have produced the desired result only for Trump to steal it from her.

[JoeBydun]

50. recount

A recount is a good idea. I don't want the US to look like Hungary in January!

[johnnyfins]

54. How fast some posters seem to

poo poo any effort to recount ballots. Some are doing it on multiple threads.

Just consider the well publicized history of the "winner". Has there ever been a degenerate cheater in this position before?
I would also add that TSF has a team of power hungry degenerates around him resdy to "win at all costs".

If there is even a whiff of fraud, the recount should happen.

[MichMan]

57. Send the Harris campaign a $45,000 check

After the first $41,300 goes to the DNC, they will apply the next $3,300 towards any recount. Once they get enough people to contribute, they can start the recount effort.

Direct from the Harris campaign website.

A portion of donations made to the Harris Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee authorized by the Harris campaign, the Democratic National Committee and state Democratic parties, will be directed towards a recount effort, according to its fundraising page.

The fundraising page says that the “first $41,300/$15,000 from a person/multicandidate committee (“PAC”) will be allocated to the DNC. The next $3,300/$5,000 from a person/PAC will be allocated to Harris for President's Recount Account."

https://kamalaharris.com/

[Autisminsight]

58. From earlier Georgia lawsuit testing equipment

Today, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia permitted the public release of Security Analysis of Georgia’s ImageCast X Ballot Marking Devices, a 96-page report that describes numerous security problems affecting Dominion voting equipment used in Georgia and other states.
I prepared the report two years ago, together with Prof. Drew Springall of Auburn University, as part of a long-running voting-rights lawsuit, Curling v. Raffensperger. Back in September 2020, the Court granted the Curling Plaintiffs access to one of Georgia’s touchscreen ballot marking devices (BMDs) so that they could assess its security. Drew and I extensively tested the machine, and we discovered vulnerabilities in nearly every part of the system that is exposed to potential attackers. The most critical problem we found is an arbitrary-code-execution vulnerability that can be exploited to spread malware from a county’s central election management system (EMS) to every BMD in the jurisdiction. This makes it possible to attack the BMDs at scale, over a wide area, without needing physical access to any of them.

[Kaleva]

62. I don't see where he says the machines were indeed hacked

[Time for change]

70. He says with regard to the Bullet ballots

"These are either inserted “bullet ballots” for the Presidential race or manipulated data fields. They are surgically added to totals..."

He may not use the word "hacked", but the above means the same thing.

[Kaleva]

84. The post I replied to doesn't mention bullet ballots

[Jeebo]

86. I'm not against trying something like this ...

... but we have to be aware that at this point it is a real Hail Mary.

— Ron

[lees1975]

88. We'll debate and argue about this, but that won't change any facts.

There's nothing wrong with doing this and I hope they pay attention, instead of just accepting this as it appears. There are some inexplicable discrepancies that need to be pointed out and addressed. If there is a legitimate explanation, great, if there was some tampering and playing games with the machines that do the counting, then that needs to be addressed.

All of the whining and caterwauling that Trump did over the past eight years was to make it even more difficult for Democrats to charge him with election fraud if he were able to commit it. I think it points to the fact that there was some cheating somewhere, and it may be a lot of voter suppression and gaslighting, or it may be fixing the ballot count his way. I have no objection to anyone who wants to look into it.

[Foolacious]

94. Were the bullet ballots ONLY in favor of Trump?

It's not clear to me from Spoonamore's letter that they were; I don't think he explicitly states it, but it is implied.

[SpankMe]

95. The election is over

The orange cocksucker (OC) and his band of merry Nazi's won. The vote counting is too distributed and de-centralized to have been hacked in all 7 battleground states. Disinformation, eroding moral standards among Americans, and voter apathy lost us this election.

I do hope for detailed audits as a method to keep the system in calibration. Audits would find issues that could be fixed for the next time around. But a re-count with the goal of changing a national election outcome is a bridge too far. It would cost tens of millions. It would take months. It would be chaotic and inconclusive. It would set us up as being poor losers and hypocrites. We touted the integrity of the system when OC lost. It wouldn't be a good look for us to say the election was stolen when he won.

I don't discount the possibility that there was fraud, and I wouldn't be opposed to recounts in certain down-ballot races (i.e., in tight races where we could take the House).

But, Kamala has conceded. Vote counts have been certified. Our battle posture must now change. The campaign for 2028 starts on 21-Jan-2025. We need to up our own information campaign (something to counter the right's disinformation juggernaut); we need to recruit and condition Democratic national leaders and identify someone we could elevate to Democratic standard bearer and throw our support behind that person.

These mathematicians and computer experts should release their analyses for peer review and public awareness. But Kamala herself asking for a 7-state re-count would be a huge tactical mistake.

[Time for change]

101. Concessions have no legal status. They can be retracted

I doubt very much that the elections have been certified yet.

It's far better to find out the true vote count at a time when it is still possible to save our democracy and prevent myriad terrible things from happening - than to wait for a time when we can no longer do anything about it.

[SpankMe]

104. There's a time to be right, and there's a time to act strategically

Strategy is called for in this case. For Kamala to retract her concession would be a disaster for Democrats. The chaos of a retracted concession and a demanded recount of 7 states would delay a return to democracy significantly longer than if we acted tactically with an eye on '26 and '28.

We can blow it for a decade or more by demanding a recount now, or we can save '26 and '28 by eating a little near-term shit and putting our noses to the grindstone and winning in the next 4 years.

I get it and agree that something may be wrong with the count in several battleground states. But I'm merely stating an opinion here that sometimes you might have to throw a little near-term democracy under the bus to save big and real democracy for the long term.

We're smarter than Republicans. We should be able to adapt and pull this off.

[Time for change]

107. I strongly disagree that a request for recounts and retraction of her concession would delay a return to Democracy at al

I see no reason to believe that. Recounts should be routine in close elections, or at the very least audits, with recounts to follow when the audits indicate the need.

On the other hand, the absence of recounts in this case may delay a return to Democracy of several decades or for the remaining history of our country.

[Initech]

102. Forget 28, we should be focusing on 26.

We can't rely on a Blue Wave to take things over. We need to be out there, even in solid red districts. We can't let MAGA loons like Marjorie Shit For Brains keep getting away with it. The path to taking back the White House starts with taking back local elections.

I pointed out that the Dems keep running the same candidates too. It's time for some fresh blood and people who can stand up to Fox and megachurch bullshit. The Dems' priority right now should be making Fuckface a lame duck president. Then we can focus on taking back the White House from these fascist thugs.

[4catsmom]

96. forget a recount

Joe should step down and give over to Kamala who can then declare the election void. Cause, you know, presidents can do anything now.

[Time for change]

103. That's a great idea

Or better yet, Joe can call the election void himself. Due to the myriad bobm threat that Trump has to be considered complicit with, given his numerous illegal talks with Putin.

And then recounts can and should be done.