Pleasant Politics

211 readers

212 users here now

Politics without the jerks.

This community is watched over by a ruthless robot moderator to keep out bad actors. I don't know if it will work. Read !santabot@slrpnk.net for a full explanation. The short version is don't be a net negative to the community and you can post here.

Rules

Post political news, your own opinions, or discussion. Anything goes.

All posts must follow the slrpnk sitewide rules.

No personal attacks, no bigotry, no spam. Those will get a manual temporary ban.

founded 4 months ago

MODERATORS

auk@slrpnk.net

santa@slrpnk.net

Duty to Warn Letter (substack.com)

submitted 2 days ago by SerotoninSwells@lemmy.world to c/pleasantpolitics@slrpnk.net

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hello everyone, I felt like this was a safe place to post this and garner discussion. I haven't seen a lot of talk about the two groups that are pushing for hand recounts in swing states.

The tl;dr of the letter is that there were an abnormal amount of "bullet ballots." These are ballots where an individual only casts a vote for one person without any down ballot votes. In this case, only for Donald Trump. The marked increase is only present in seven swing states.

Thoughts?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This seems fishy in a couple of different ways.

I looked at https://results.arizona.vote/#/federal/47/0 and compared with what this guy is saying, and:

He says 123K would have switched the results to Harris, but Trump won AZ by 186K votes.
He says there were 123K bullet ballots for Trump, but I see 3,367,122 votes for president, and 3,326,283 votes for US senator, a difference of only 41k, around 1%.

There are other sketchy things about it. He lists his qualifications as "I have worked as the CEO or CTO at seven high technology firms including two which specialized in hacking and counter-hacking operations." That, to me, is a suspiciously high number, and it's weird that he doesn't name them, and hasn't talked with his presumably extensive contacts from running those companies to get some other people on board to co-sign the letter. Usually that's how these things run if they are not BS. Not just listing the number of companies he's been CEO of.

His speculation about how the hack could have happened, and its connection with Elon Musk's lottery and the bomb threats, is wildly sketchy to me. Usually in my experience, serious security people are very cautious about laying out too many details when they talk about how it "could have been done" and they try to keep irrelevant speculation out of it, even if it's in their mind, until they have some reasonable confirmation for it. If anomalies in the numbers of votes were enough, he'd have stuck with the numbers and linked to his sources for them. Likewise his speculation about how law enforcement could nab the programmers involved and compel them to testify is totally wrong, I think.

I don't know for sure, since I'm just reading it and reacting to it, but it seems to raise multiple types of red flags to me.

[–] SerotoninSwells@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Hey thank you for chiming in to share your thoughts. I think it's right to question his numbers and the veracity of what he is laying out. I'm not entirely sure how many bullet ballots there actually are. He mentions that the numbers would push certain states into a margin that would require recounts. If true, there could possibly be more fake ballots.

I would like him to lay out the numbers a bit better than he has.

Fair points regarding the speculation too.

[–] barkingspiders@infosec.pub 1 points 2 days ago

Critical reading skills here, thank you for sharing