Republican and conservative politicians have voiced concerns about election fraud for years, citing numerous cases in which minimal, though still alarming, irregularities took place in various elections. In order to combat instances of fraud, Republicans in many states have pushed for stricter voter identification laws.
Democrats routinely dismiss the notion of fraud, and fight against the institution of more expansive voter ID laws, claiming such laws are simply a stealth voter-suppression campaign being executed by Republicans. According to Democrats, voter fraud doesn't exist (until you need it to).
New York Magazine reported Tuesday that the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, J. Alex Halderman, voting-rights attorney John Bonifaz, as well as several others, believe the elections in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin may have been manipulated:
Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots. Based on this statistical analysis, Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000.
While it’s important to note the group has not found proof of hacking or manipulation, they are arguing to the campaign that the suspicious pattern merits an independent review — especially in light of the fact that the Obama White House has accused the Russian government of hacking the Democratic National Committee.
In an article published on Medium, Halderman clarified his argument, citing Russian cyber attacks on Ukraine, as well as attempts to "breach state voter registration databases" in Arizona and Illinois, according to NBC News. However, he concedes that the results in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania were "probably not" the product of hacking.
Additionally, FiveThirtyEight published a piece on Wednesday, titled: "Demographics, Not Hacking, Explain The Election Results," in which Carl Bialik and Rob Arthur state that Halderman's claim "doesn't check out."
Regardless of the fact that no tangible evidence of hacking has been revealed, Green Party candidate, Jill Stein, started a fundraiser in order to have recounts conducted in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. In just four days, Stein has received $6.1 million. According to the official fundraising website, over 130,000 people have donated to the cause.
Now, the Clinton camp has joined ranks with Stein in the recount effort, according to CNN. The campaign's council, Marc Elias, said Clinton isn't participating in the recount in order to contest the election, but to "ensure that it is fair to all sides." Sure.
As of Sunday, Donald Trump leads Hillary Clinton by approximately 10,700 votes in Michigan, 22,500 votes in Wisconsin, and 68,000 votes in Pennsylvania. Over 100,000 votes would need to be deemed fraudulent or miscounted for Clinton to have even a chance at turning all three states--which is what she would need to win the election. Such an outcome is nearly impossible.
Despite this, 130,000 people--the majority of whom are likely Democrats--seem to believe such an outcome is indeed possible. Democrats all across social media suddenly believe that fraud is not only a reality, but occurring on a massive scale. The Clinton campaign appears to believe this as well. Fraud is suddenly the progressive cause célèbre.
In order to avoid contradicting themselves, it's not voter fraud progressives are worried about--that would be an insane right-wing conspiracy theory--but hacking fraud for which no evidence has been found. That's a more reasonable position--and there's no place like home. There's no place like home. There's no place like home.