Matt Gaetz running the justice department. Fox hosts in charge of the Pentagon and transportation. Elon Musk as head of layoffs. And Robert F Kennedy Jr and Dr Oz overseeing the nation’s health.
Some have likened Donald Trump’s administrative picks to a clown car; others are calling our incoming leadership a kakistocracy, or “government by the worst people”, as Merriam-Webster puts it.
The word has been trending online, with a burst in search traffic in recent weeks and a new dedicated subreddit. It’s not the first time Trump has (accidentally) made the term famous; many discovered it in his first term. But the kakistocracy of 2016 looks like Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood compared with the president-elect’s new batch of sidekicks.
the article links to two open letters from computer experts and the contents look pretty damning to me.
I don’t know the other names. Just Spoonamore, who is known only for his fake credentials and for crying wolf.
If I’m reading correctly, the evidence is primarily that “the numbers” look too high to Spoonamore. I’m not sure where he gets the “35 billion to 1 probability” from, because he doesn’t show his work anywhere.
Most of these states already hand count samples to verify the machine counts, so it’s weird he says a hand count is needed but hasn’t addressed what supposedly went wrong with the original hand count.
I voted Harris-Walz and have no doubt trump would cheat if he could, but I don’t trust this publication, the author, or the “expert” being interviewed, and the writing style smells like sensationalist drivel cooked up to drive engagement.
i read the open letters linked to in the article which had the info you’re asking about if you’re actually interested in it.
The second letter is just advising re: the leaked software and suggesting an expanded hand count. It doesn’t offer any “damning” evidence. It doesn’t even claim election interference. And the spoonamore letter is more of the same BS from his interviews and doesn’t answer my questions at all. What am I supposed to see?
Here’s my complaint about this. Had trump lost the election, he would be demanding recounts in every possible place as well as launching lawsuits to delay and distract. We KNOW this, since he did it in 2020.
How unreasonable is it, then, that with all the questions raised by both his statements in public (such as “we’ll have it fixed so good you won’t have to vote” regarding 2028) and the statistical anomalies we can’t call for a recount in places where things seem amiss? If nothing is found, great, we elect a fascist; but if there was an attack/hack/fraud, then we find it and expose it. We have nothing to lose (we’re saving money over a trump loss and recounts everywhere) and Democracy to win.
I’m in a swing state and I definitely checked after the election to see that my ballot was counted. However, I can’t see the details as a private citizen, so I can’t verify it was tabulated correctly. I’m in NC, where the republican governor candidate was truly repugnant, but trump won by 3.39 points and Josh Stein won by over 14! In fact, more people voted for Stein than Trump. Maybe we could get Mark Robinson to request a recount…
I’m with you, and I don’t see any problem with demanding a recount.
I just don’t like the idea of doing or saying anything simply because the other side would or did. And conspiracy theories tend to spread rapidly online among those who have the incentive to believe, devolving into unidimensional “for us or against us“ advocacy wars.
It’s sort of like being at a counter-protest and trying to stop someone on your side from assaulting someone on the other side. They look at you in disbelief “whose side are you on anyway?” And the only thing you know is that this isn’t how you want to win.