Politics
For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.
Rule 1: Posts have the following requirements:
▪️ Post articles about the US only
▪️ Title must match the article headline
▪️ Recent (Past 30 Days)
▪️ No Screenshots/links to other social media sites or link shorteners
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. One or two small paragraphs are okay.
Rule 3: Articles based on opinion (unless clearly marked and from a serious publication), misinformation or propaganda will be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Media owners, CEOs and/or board members
view the rest of the comments
also, Trump might not have won according to computer security experts: they have court documented fact-based evidence that indicates the US presidential election was likely hacked via voting software.
The numbers Trump achieved are non-credible.
https://www.planetcritical.com/p/cyber-security-experts-warn-election-hacked
This sounds like misinformation to me.
Your link makes reference to two open letters to substantiate its claims:
The first doesn't allege any particular wrongdoing, in this election, but makes the very valid case that considering that election software was definitely compromised by the Republicans in 2022, we should out of an abundance of caution do some recounts. That makes perfect sense to me. Some amount of recounting and auditing are part of every election, but sure, doing more sounds like a really good idea.
I looked at the second already, which makes much stronger claims, and it looks like its numbers are completely wrong or made-up, and there are other reasons to think it's pure hogwash. I touched on it here: https://ponder.cat/comment/951779
The more substantial weight of expert consensus behind the first open letter does not apply to the second, and most of what's in your link seems to be drawing the conclusion of the second, saying that the election "was likely hacked" and constructing a pretty extensive theory for how based on, as far as I can tell, nothing that is true.
It feels to me like someone is trying to spread a particular narrative that this election was stolen by Trump, for reasons that aren't clear to me.
The reasons are so when trump does actually steal the election after 4 years of rat fucking our democracy from the inside, it will look like political gamesmanship from the democrats.