Friday, November 25, 2016

Plurality take all elections and the 2016 elections

I found this spreadsheet online 

I don't know if this is accurate or not, but I notice that there are 13 states considered swing states. Only one of these states, Iowa, shows a clear majority of the votes for either candidate. Otherwise, no one has a majority. Whoever won those states, won with a plurality. In the non-swing states, very few show the winner with only a plurality. Those are: New Mexico, Utah, Virginia,
In fact, in those states where no one has a majority, we don't know who the majority of the voters would have voted for in a race that only included Clinton and Trump.
This is a problem with plurality take all elections. You can get a winner, who is not supported by the a majority of the voters.
When I lived in France, in 1976, I was impressed that they had two rounds of voting. After the first round, no one had a majority. Then they had a runoff election between the two lead candidates, so they could determine who would really get the majority.
I have a long standing concern about this, because Hitler was elected with a plurality. A majority of Germans never voted for him.

Glad to see Maine adopting ranked voting

This is one way of dealing with a situation where no candidate has a majority.

Wednesday, November 23, 2016

travel pix

I went to Florida to poll watch & canvas for Hillary.

I did do a bit of sightseeing, tho.

I am putting links to my FB photo albums here.  I wanted to embed them, but I originally couldn't figure out how how to do that.  It seems like I can only embed posts and for reasons I don't understand there were no posts for 3 of these albums, so I just reposted the albums so that there would be embeddable posts.

Tuesday, November 15, 2016

Selective hacking?

NB: As I'm discovering new articles on this topic, I'm adding the links at the bottom.  Please scroll down.  This is getting quite long, as more people other than me are getting interested in this topic and writing about it.

According to this article, Pennsylvania and Michigan -- key swing states -- are among the states that do not have proper audits.  I originally understood that they did not have paper ballots to audit, but since then I've heard that Michigan may, but, still, according to this article they aren't doing audits.

article about which states have audits

These states unexpectedly went for Trump. If the machines there were hacked, it would be more difficult to find out than in other states.

It's clear that the Russians intervened in this election by only creating leaks about Clinton and none about Trump, but did they hack voting machines in these insecure states?

Did you see my petition?

my petition has a petition too -- their petition has a lot more signatures than mine. petition

The "change" petition focuses on states that have paper audit trails available. I think that those states which don't have paper audit trails would be the most important to audit, because they would be most likely to be hacked. Their disks would have to be examined at a microscopic level to determine whether they were hacked.

Glad to see that others are taking interest in this topic

NSA says there was hacking

Mother Jones article

Senator Lindsey Graham calls for congressional investigation

dailykos article

Here's a purple map from someone who is not worried about hacking, as I am

USA TODAY is also calling for an audit


Here's an article purporting to see statistical evidence of rigging

An article about allegations of other techniques for rigging elections

Computer scientists at the University of Michigan claim to find evidence of hacking

More about hacking evidence

another petition demanding recounts of WI, MI, PA -- though I think NC also needs counting

NY Magazine article

LA Times calling for election audit

More election statistics from the Washington Post

Jill Stein requesting recount

Another petition

There was this post on FB quoted below

**note please copy+paste, don't share, copy/paste is more effective!
Thank you Karen Kohlhaas URGENT: Everyone, I just got this updated info. Call the Department of Justice about auditing PA, WI, MI, NC, and FL. They are tallying the calls they receive, and the calls must be done by 11/23. Here's the info. Pleas pass it on. I just did this. Took 1 min. to leave a message. Worth a try folks.
The Department of Justice is tallying phone calls regarding those who want the 2016 Vote Audited. A shift of just 55,000 Trump votes to Hillary in PA, MI & WI is all that is Needed to Win.
They are starting to recognize there really is something off about the election results as they come in. Considering everything that is at stake, a vote audit should be done.
Call the DOJ at 202-514-2000 and wait for options then choose 4 for Comment Line. Tell them you want the votes AUDITED! Even if it's busy, keep calling. It takes a few times to get through because of all the calls being made.
But that was followed up by a CNN article saying that the DOJ would not launch an audit based on phone calls, but now I can't find the link to that

Another article about hacking -- thoughtful sounding by J. Alex Halderman

Article about activists demanding recounts

Here's my video message to Hillary Clinton

Washington Post claiming no evidence that the election was hacked.  But how are we to find out without an audit?

Yet another article

MIT and Berkeley professors request audit

Irregularities in vote counting in Wisconsin

Petition to recount Florida

NBC reports on Jill Stein's efforts

Someone arguing that Wisconsin & PA weren't hacked

Russians were involved in spreading fake news.  This makes me feel it's more likely they were involved in hacking the election

NY times article on recount effort

Another article about Clinton being asked to ask for recount

Report on Stein's demand for recount

People shouldn't just focus on online hacking.  When I was on the NYDLC (NY Democratic Lawyer's Committee) examining voting machines in NY, my understanding was that one proposed security method was to keep a clean copy of the code for a voting machine in a secure location -- and reload all the machines from that copy prior to the vote.  I'm not sure if that technique was ever adopted, but, if it was, and if that clean copy was sabotaged, then all the machines would be loaded with sabotaged code.

Yahoo! finance reports on Stein's progress

Chicago Tribune weighs in on the recount effort

Wisconsin recount request goes forward

Wisconsin is also auditing results

More reports of Stein's actions in Wisconsin

Washington Post on Russia manipulating public opinion

Clinton to join recount effort

Trump blasts recount effort

Clinton taking part in the recount

Wisconsin agrees to recount

US formally accuses Russia of hacking to change election results

counter charges of voter suppression

Sanders statement on recount

Trump response to recount

Broken seals found on Wisconsin voting machines

Wisconsin raises recount fees

Jill Stein runs out of money to order recount in PA

States find total errors prior to recount

Jill Stein accused of cynically collecting e-mails and credit cards

Michigan Attorney General  suing to stop recount

Interesting comments by Jill Stein on her recount effort, including allegations of voter suppression of black ballots

individual hand counters in Wisconsin finding machines malfunctioning

3D map of the election results

More stories about the recount

Allegations of fraud during the recount

Snag in Michigan

Trump supporters try to block recount

Florida recount news

Monday, November 7, 2016

Some thoughts about the unpleasantness in the current campaign

On the loss of truth

I feel the Internet has had something to do with this. It's so easy for the widest rumors to gain an international audience here. It's hard to know what is true. Traditional newspapers have systems for checking the reliability of sources, while internet websites often don't. Yet it is still possible for an internet website to discount the New York Times or the Washington Post as "liberal" and people believe it. After a while, nothing seems to be true or reliable. Even "Snopes" and Politifact have been tarred as "liberal." There has to be a mechanism for verifying truth. Yet there is none.


On the alleged unlikability of Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren

For many years, in order for women to succeed in traditional men's jobs they have had to pose as junior men: wear male looking suits, speak in a lower voice, never cry (men's eyes have larger tear ducts, so it's harder for years to escape) Ultimately, though, all this stuff looks fake. The question is whether women can succeed while maintaining female culture and femininity.

I've been working in acting recently. In this field, the word "actress" has become unpopular, because it's viewed as sexist, as saying that women aren't as good; but, to me, having lived in France, where all nouns and adjectives have gender, it seems like the ultimate sexism to say that the female form of a word is unacceptable.

I have come to believe that France is the least sexist country in the world. They have a saying "vive la différence"-- long live the difference.

Is it possible for a woman to drop this defensive shell, be feminine, and succeed? Or do women have to be junior men to succeed? Or, alternatively, can women who have never acted this way succeed?