Is this election legitimate, or was it rigged?
If you don’t believe that Trump got enough votes to legitimately win, consider the following caveats:
1) You’re not going to get rid of the Electoral College ,(and besides, the EC has given Democrats victories more often than Republicans) and even if you did, it wouldn’t change the outcome of this election;
2) While the EC technically could take the victory away from Trump, that’s not really a realistic outcome – Electors are chosen by the candidate from people loyal to the candidate, and are not likely to betray that loyalty without good cause;
3) Hints, allegations, rumors, and conspiracy theories make for great conversations, but will not result in any useful action;
4) Like with a sports victory (football, baseball, soccer, etc.), the fact that the winner cheated, even if conclusively proven, will probably not undo the victory;
5) As Trump himself said (probably correctly), he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose any votes – no amount of protest or persuasion will convince his electors to vote for someone else, especially Hillary;
6) If Trump cheated in a way that betrayed the country, and if it could be conclusively proven, then some of his Electors might change their vote, if they had a viable alternative – remember that many of his supporters were motivated by dislike for Hillary as much as or more than by Trump’s appeal;
7) The viable alternative may well be Mike Pence, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, or some other equally unappealing (to you) option.
“The Election is Rigged” – DJT
Trump kept saying “The election is rigged.” People thought he meant, “by the Democrats,” or “by the liberal media,” and was saying it as a way to energize his followers and to explain away his eventual defeat. What if instead, in typical Trump fashion, he was telling the brash truth: the election is rigged, I know it, and that’s how I’m going to win? If the GOP has figured out a way to rig the elections, this could be something that could guarantee GOP presidencies for the foreseeable future, regardless of the will of the American people. We’re about to take a trip to the land of Conspiracy Theories, so buckle up.
Why so many candidates?
The evidence of election-rigging by the Republicans is all speculative at this point, and speculation does not change people’s minds. It starts with the large Republican candidate field. The GOP is known for being able to get its forces marshalled behind a candidate, to choose candidates decisively and to punish those who challenge the establishment. This last year they couldn’t do that, possibly because every one of those candidates knew that the fix was in. Running for President is a calculated risk: you could be dragged through the mud, reducing your future political viability (see Chris Christie); embarrassing details could emerge about your record, your positions, or your mistresses; you could end up being labeled “the loser,” if you don’t put on an impressive showing, which could dampen future campaign contributions. Presuming that the GOP candidates are all about “Return on Investment” and “Managing Risk,” what would change their calculation to make them all so eager/greedy to run? Again, that calculation changes dramatically if the primary winner is guaranteed to win the election. Remember, this is speculation, not proof.
What is cheating? What is proof?
So if you suspect that Trump/the GOP cheated, what can you do about it? First, let’s see what “cheating” means. It’s politics, so lying, distorting, intimidating, threatening (short of criminal threats) are not going to persuade a Trump-minded Elector to change his mind. “Cheating” would have to be something illegal, and large-scale, which destroyed the legitimacy of the election. A few fraudulent votes here and there, a few cases of intimidation, a few fraudulently destroyed/disallowed ballots, etc., are not going to do the trick, especially if they didn’t affect the outcome of the election. For instance, if you could prove that Trump supporters dumped 10,000 pro-Hillary ballots into the trash in Nevada, that difference would still not affect the legitimacy of his election.
Removing Trump’s legitimacy would take something big. Something like thousands of rigged vote-tabulation machines (or corrupt vote tabulators), massive quantities of fabricated ballots, millions of destroyed ballots, etc. If you can’t prove this, and I mean prove beyond a reasonable doubt, then the election will stand and the Electors will cast their votes accordingly.
How could it be done?
So how could Trump and/or his allies orchestrate The Big Cheat? Probably the simplest way would be through rigged voting machines. Most voting equipment is half-way (or more) through its life-expectancy, and uses old and outdated technology, and that’s just to record the votes. As has been frequently touted, these old machines are mostly off-line, not subject to hacking, and not a likely source for corruption (but still possible). CNN just reported that computer science experts, having analyzed the vote counts of various counties in three battleground states, have suggested that counts conducted using paper ballots scored significantly higher – possibly enough to alter the statewide results – for Clinton than for Trump, while computer-counted ballots scored significantly higher for Trump. See the story here . How would this work?
Imagine a binary system, for ease of discussion: the machine reads the ballot or registers the electronic vote, and either adds 1 for Hillary or 1 for Trump. That’s because it has been programmed to increase the vote count by 1 for each vote cast for each candidate. A simple hack would be to program the machine to add 1 for Hillary and 1.1 for Trump. Thus every 10 votes cast for Trump results in 11 votes counted for Trump. This 10% difference, spread over millions of votes, pretty much guarantees a win. (Going for a higher percentage raises too many red flags: the key here is plausible electability. A close race that ends up being decided by 2% is plausible, but a 10-20% lead after a race like this one looks too much like a fix.)
Remember what Volkswagen did: their “clean diesels” couldn’t pass emissions, so they programmed the vehicles to register differently whenever they were being emission-tested. Their deceit was revealed by looking at the programming, and the responsible parties have been (partly) identified and may actually be prosecuted. If the voting machines were tampered with, and if there is proof (whether or not you can prove that that Trump or the GOP was behind it), then you might be able to call the vote counts into dispute, and force some kind of recount to find out the truth. Given the state of technology in the machines, it seems unlikely that they could self-destruct (either the machine itself or the computer code) so the tampering should still be findable.
In order to influence the outcome of the election, it would not be necessary to tamper with all of the voting machines/tabulators. Simply identify sufficient polling places in a few key swing states (and a few states your opponent believes are safe) where the tampering could take place. Deploy “maintenance techs” to install the perverted code or simply provide new, pre-rigged voting equipment to these districts, and sit back and wait.
Did you notice that Republicans were responsible for the new “No Selfies While Voting” laws and rules? This means individual voters are prevented from proving who they voted for. If the official count in a county was 2,400 for Clinton and 3,000 for Trump, but 2,500 people came forward with selfies showing them voting for Clinton, it would be hard for a judge to say “Move along, there’s nothing to see here.”
Where’s the proof?
So far it’s all just speculation: how do you check this? You have to check the machines/code to see if anything was altered. The machines should have an electronic record not only of what votes were cast but also how they were counted. The computer code for the machines should also indicated how the machines were instructed to count the votes. If someone rigged the election, by planting tampered-with voting equipment, you would have to both find the computer code and determine what it told the machines to do. Ideally, you could find out who the tamperer is. Someone had to write the computer code, and most elected officials are not sophisticated enough to program their cell phones. So some outside expert was probably paid to carry out the programming change. If that expert was smart, he or she created some sort of “life insurance” file to protect himself and incriminate others in case of detection. That file contains the incriminating evidence necessary to prove that the tampering took place. Find the expert, or find the evidence. Consider that witnesses may be scattered all across the country, each with one little part of the overall puzzle in their possession. Does the County Recorder in Maricopa County, Arizona, know one piece, and their counterpart in Prince George County Virginia know another? Someone has to collect and connect those pieces. At the very least, someone needs to examine the actual machines and their programming to see if there’s proof of tampering.
Keep in mind that in most states, once the election results are officially certified, it would take a court order to open them up to scrutiny. Not only is that unlikely, but it probably wouldn’t get through the Courts before the EC meets and votes. And a Court decision, even if timely, is not likely to change the minds of enough Electors to change the outcome – most of them are hand-selected “True Believers” who may be distrustful of the courts.
“So what?” – DJT supporters
A more likely outcome is that, even if tampering was discovered, and it was widespread, and it favored Trump, it will be impossible to find evidence conclusively linking Trump to the tampering. An inference, a suggestion, a logical conclusion – none of these will persuade a True Believer to change his vote. There was credible evidence of close ties between the Russians and high-ranked Trump staff like Paul Manafort, and campaign contributions from Ukrainian businesses which might be controlled by Putin or his comrades. In past elections, this would have destroyed even a Democratic candidate, but here it was brushed off. So there has to be proof. The people who tampered with the election probably didn’t write a check and use their real names: it would be the height of foolishness for the tamperers to have used official channels to arrange the tampering. (Not that political criminals aren’t sometimes foolish: the Watergate were caught, in part, because they taped open a door-lock incorrectly.) But they may have left some evidence, perhaps even a paper trail or series of traceable transactions, to show who was responsible.
So let’s say the proof is out there: a computer/tampering expert was clever, and made a life-insurance file of evidence, which could conclusively prove that Trump’s people (or the GOP, or the Russians) were behind the tampering. Two problems exist: (1) evidence can be fabricated, witnesses can be corrupted, and proof can become a “mere” accusation, and (2) impartial juries have been known to acquit people who are clearly (even admittedly) guilty – the partial, pledged Electors would likely be willing to ignore the “evidence” and stay the course. The stakes are enormous, so the incentive to fake it is high. It would practically take a confession from the people responsible, or Trump himself, to meet the level of proof necessary.
Many people are unfamiliar with the idea of “standard of proof,” beyond what’s distorted on tv and in the movies. “Beyond a reasonable doubt,” is probably what most people have heard. Different states define BARD differently, but it usually means “proof that leaves you firmly convinced that something is true.” It’s more than conjecture or speculation or inference. It has to be something that even the most ardent Trump supporter could see and have no choice but to agree with. During the election, supporters of numerous candidates claimed to have “proof” of wrongdoing by the other(s), only to fail to show valid, reliable evidence. Wikipedia is never a valid source, nor are the various websites run by the various campaigns. Proof has to be able to stand up to valid attacks, and it has to be understandable and convincing. Something like a tweeted confession from Trump himself.
Hijack Trump’s Twitter Account
This would be a fun little hack: hijack Trump’s twitter account and send out tweets in which he confesses to the rigging, even boasts about it. Anything published in the untrustworthy, biased, liberal media (according to some) would automatically be discounted, but Trump’s 15 million Twitter followers are accustomed to getting their new straight from the horse’s mouth. If @realDonaldTrump started sending out 3 a.m. tweets bragging about how he stole the election, his followers might just believe it. Of course, some of them would simply say – ala not paying taxes – “That just makes him smart.” Some people are willing to say “All’s fair in love and war (and politics),” and ignore the fact that someone committed treason, and there’s nothing that can sway such people. Others, however, who take the idea of representative democracy seriously, might start to seriously consider whether destroying the power of the vote is worth the short-term gains of a Trump presidency.
As a neat twist, load a series of confessional-type tweets into his account, to be sent out whenever he tries to tweet something. That way he can’t deny tweeting it, because the bogus tweet would come out at the same time he was tweeting. And every time he tried to deny it via social media, another damning admission would go out. But seriously: someone hack into Trump’s account and post a confession to rigging the election, and let’s see what happens.
“So what now?” – HRC supporter
I am not advocating giving up in the face of seemingly insurmountable obstacles: after all, Trump did not give up despite most people (even most Republicans, in the primaries) giving him a snowball’s chance of winning. Everyone reading this has their own set of skills, knowledge, and contacts. If you are concerned about the legitimacy of the election, look into it. Even if you supported Donald Trump, you should be concerned if the election was not legitimate, because if someone other than the voters is deciding who will be President, then we’re really not a Democracy anymore. Recruit others into the search. Search the deep/dark web. If the evidence is out there, it can be found. And searching for the truth is often much more fruitful than merely rioting and screaming in the streets. It may not be as cathartic, but it can ultimately lead to better outcomes.
And remember, even if (as seems likely), the Electoral College goes forward and elects Donald Trump, it’s not the end of the world. If you opposed his candidacy, you represent approximately one-half of the country who agrees with you. You still have a voice, you still have power, and you still have ways to exercise that power. Don’t give up. Don’t despair. Making the world a better place isn’t easy, but it’s worthy striving for. Click this link for some ideas how: Trump Won. What now?
Election 2016 and its Aftermath 