Computer scientists urge Clinton campaign to challenge election results

[CrusaderFrank]

If you throw out Hillary's illegal and non-living does Hillary win any EV?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Look, you believe whatever the fuck you want. Whether that's nothing is wrong, or that the Sun revolves around the Earth... whatever.

But these guys believe in it enough that they are putting their reputations on the line to go public and try to get the message to Hillary to get things checked out.

And I'm sure you would approve of it if Trump lost and did the same thing?

 

[Rexx Taylor]

Do it
Make an even bigger ass out of yourselves.

i thought they would also be urging Hillary to change her brain before it shrinks to a wal nut

 

[CowboyTed]

They were anti Trump protests, not pro Clinton protests...

And, my vote wasn't pro Trump, it was anti Clinton

So, are you suggesting, had it been any other Republican
that won the election, none of this would be happening?

Depends who it is....

But I wouldn't foresee if John Kasich won...

Trump ran one of the most divisive, dishonest and vile campaigns in history...

what did you expect?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

True.

How about the investigation on some states that Hillary won? Stats show 5 damn states were stolen by Hillary with illegal voting. Test it?

Also, remember how esteemed "computer scientists" claimed that Trump's email server had a nefarious secret communication with a Russian bank? LMAO, These leftist retards just won't give up.

They never do. Trying to make a Hillary Gore situation here.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

True.

How about the investigation on some states that Hillary won? Stats show 5 damn states were stolen by Hillary with illegal voting. Test it?

Also, remember how esteemed "computer scientists" claimed that Trump's email server had a nefarious secret communication with a Russian bank? LMAO, These leftist retards just won't give up.

They never do. Trying to make a Hillary Gore situation here.

computer scientists? like the scientists who believe that the north pole is melting as we speak?

 

[keepitreal]

Investigate the Clinton Emails... PLEASE.... As we said before and the FBI director agreed there is nothing there...

OMG...would you please keep it real!

Tell me 1 fucking reasonable explanation why Hillary
would instruct Huma to strip the security headers
from classified documents.

Tell me, why it is not absolute poppycock,
that Hillary didn't know what (C) was indicative of,

Then, explain that, in relation to my first question

I'll save the shamton foundation for another day!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

True.

How about the investigation on some states that Hillary won? Stats show 5 damn states were stolen by Hillary with illegal voting. Test it?

Also, remember how esteemed "computer scientists" claimed that Trump's email server had a nefarious secret communication with a Russian bank? LMAO, These leftist retards just won't give up.

They never do. Trying to make a Hillary Gore situation here.

computer scientists? like the scientists who believe that the north pole is melting as we speak?

I think maybe we should just go to punch card ballots again. That would work great until the Democrats lose another election, and then we'll go back to computers again. After all, anytime a Democrat loses, it has to be rigged.

 

[Fueri]

So the computer scientists have found no evidence of hacking. according to the hacks at CNN "top computer scientists" nonetheless, lol.

What they think they see is an irregularity, which it would seem to me would be better analyzed by statisticians for probability.

even then there is no evidence of squat. statistically improbable events happen all the time. people win the lottery, some more than once. in this election I seem to remember hillary winning a highly improbable number of coin tosses 6 of 6, with a probability of less then 2%, but it happened.

Then, of course, there's this:
"election officials and cybersecurity experts said earlier this month that it is virtually impossible for Russia to influence the election outcome"

And while we're calculating probability I'd like to know how these "top computer scientists" voted. lol.

This is going nowhere.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So the computer scientists have found no evidence of hacking. according to the hacks at CNN "top computer scientists" nonetheless, lol.

What they think they see is an irregularity, which it would seem to me would be better analyzed by statisticians for probability.

even then there is no evidence of squat. statistically improbable events happen all the time. people win the lottery, some more than once. in this election I seem to remember hillary winning a highly improbable number of coin tosses 6 of 6, with a probability of less then 2%, but it happened.

Then, of course, there's this:
"election officials and cybersecurity experts said earlier this month that it is virtually impossible for Russia to influence the election outcome"

And while we're calculating probability I'd like to know how these "top computer scientists" voted. lol.

This is going nowhere.

I don't know much about that field of work, but would't you think in order to suspect something is wrong, you would have to see some data first? I mean, you would have to go into those computer systems to see if anything was amiss, and then go to the ballots and see if there is evidence that something did go wrong.

It's kind of like a mechanic telling you your car is going to break down next month without looking under the car or under the hood.

 

[Fueri]

So the computer scientists have found no evidence of hacking. according to the hacks at CNN "top computer scientists" nonetheless, lol.

What they think they see is an irregularity, which it would seem to me would be better analyzed by statisticians for probability.

even then there is no evidence of squat. statistically improbable events happen all the time. people win the lottery, some more than once. in this election I seem to remember hillary winning a highly improbable number of coin tosses 6 of 6, with a probability of less then 2%, but it happened.

Then, of course, there's this:
"election officials and cybersecurity experts said earlier this month that it is virtually impossible for Russia to influence the election outcome"

And while we're calculating probability I'd like to know how these "top computer scientists" voted. lol.

This is going nowhere.

I don't know much about that field of work, but would't you think in order to suspect something is wrong, you would have to see some data first? I mean, you would have to go into those computer systems to see if anything was amiss, and then go to the ballots and see if there is evidence that something did go wrong.

It's kind of like a mechanic telling you your car is going to break down next month without looking under the car or under the hood.

Yep, the machines themselves would have to be foresically analyzed. even if they were hacked there would likely be no trace of it.

These guys have apparently identified what they think is a statistical anomaly. thing is they understand probability also, so where is that coefficient of probability in their "findings".

They have no evidence of anything. if they did, they'd be showing it and this would be a whole different matter.

this looks to me like a clever way to undermine trump in the long term. if we start forensic and statistical analysis here, now we've got to do it everywhere. And, no matter what, now there will be nutters running around claiming he won because of hacking until the day they die.

If they've got something solid, let's see it, as to this point they've shown bupkis. There are triggers for recounts, and they haven't been tripped. game over.

 

[CowboyTed]

So the computer scientists have found no evidence of hacking. according to the hacks at CNN "top computer scientists" nonetheless, lol.

What they think they see is an irregularity, which it would seem to me would be better analyzed by statisticians for probability.

even then there is no evidence of squat. statistically improbable events happen all the time. people win the lottery, some more than once. in this election I seem to remember hillary winning a highly improbable number of coin tosses 6 of 6, with a probability of less then 2%, but it happened.

Then, of course, there's this:
"election officials and cybersecurity experts said earlier this month that it is virtually impossible for Russia to influence the election outcome"

And while we're calculating probability I'd like to know how these "top computer scientists" voted. lol.

This is going nowhere.

Again irregularities in the election...

Should this be investigated, if not why....

There is evidence, does that not merit an investigation...

 

[owebo]

So the computer scientists have found no evidence of hacking. according to the hacks at CNN "top computer scientists" nonetheless, lol.

What they think they see is an irregularity, which it would seem to me would be better analyzed by statisticians for probability.

even then there is no evidence of squat. statistically improbable events happen all the time. people win the lottery, some more than once. in this election I seem to remember hillary winning a highly improbable number of coin tosses 6 of 6, with a probability of less then 2%, but it happened.

Then, of course, there's this:
"election officials and cybersecurity experts said earlier this month that it is virtually impossible for Russia to influence the election outcome"

And while we're calculating probability I'd like to know how these "top computer scientists" voted. lol.

This is going nowhere.

Again irregularities in the election...

Should this be investigated, if not why....

There is evidence, does that not merit an investigation...

Democrats won't allow it...

 

[CowboyTed]

So the computer scientists have found no evidence of hacking. according to the hacks at CNN "top computer scientists" nonetheless, lol.

What they think they see is an irregularity, which it would seem to me would be better analyzed by statisticians for probability.

even then there is no evidence of squat. statistically improbable events happen all the time. people win the lottery, some more than once. in this election I seem to remember hillary winning a highly improbable number of coin tosses 6 of 6, with a probability of less then 2%, but it happened.

Then, of course, there's this:
"election officials and cybersecurity experts said earlier this month that it is virtually impossible for Russia to influence the election outcome"

And while we're calculating probability I'd like to know how these "top computer scientists" voted. lol.

This is going nowhere.

I don't know much about that field of work, but would't you think in order to suspect something is wrong, you would have to see some data first? I mean, you would have to go into those computer systems to see if anything was amiss, and then go to the ballots and see if there is evidence that something did go wrong.

It's kind of like a mechanic telling you your car is going to break down next month without looking under the car or under the hood.

Yep, the machines themselves would have to be foresically analyzed. even if they were hacked there would likely be no trace of it.

These guys have apparently identified what they think is a statistical anomaly. thing is they understand probability also, so where is that coefficient of probability in their "findings".

They have no evidence of anything. if they did, they'd be showing it and this would be a whole different matter.

this looks to me like a clever way to undermine trump in the long term. if we start forensic and statistical analysis here, now we've got to do it everywhere. And, no matter what, now there will be nutters running around claiming he won because of hacking until the day they die.

If they've got something solid, let's see it, as to this point they've shown bupkis. There are triggers for recounts, and they haven't been tripped. game over.

No one asking about recount... But shouldn't the FBI investigate if they believe a crime could have been committed?

 

[owebo]

So the computer scientists have found no evidence of hacking. according to the hacks at CNN "top computer scientists" nonetheless, lol.

What they think they see is an irregularity, which it would seem to me would be better analyzed by statisticians for probability.

even then there is no evidence of squat. statistically improbable events happen all the time. people win the lottery, some more than once. in this election I seem to remember hillary winning a highly improbable number of coin tosses 6 of 6, with a probability of less then 2%, but it happened.

Then, of course, there's this:
"election officials and cybersecurity experts said earlier this month that it is virtually impossible for Russia to influence the election outcome"

And while we're calculating probability I'd like to know how these "top computer scientists" voted. lol.

This is going nowhere.

I don't know much about that field of work, but would't you think in order to suspect something is wrong, you would have to see some data first? I mean, you would have to go into those computer systems to see if anything was amiss, and then go to the ballots and see if there is evidence that something did go wrong.

It's kind of like a mechanic telling you your car is going to break down next month without looking under the car or under the hood.

Yep, the machines themselves would have to be foresically analyzed. even if they were hacked there would likely be no trace of it.

These guys have apparently identified what they think is a statistical anomaly. thing is they understand probability also, so where is that coefficient of probability in their "findings".

They have no evidence of anything. if they did, they'd be showing it and this would be a whole different matter.

this looks to me like a clever way to undermine trump in the long term. if we start forensic and statistical analysis here, now we've got to do it everywhere. And, no matter what, now there will be nutters running around claiming he won because of hacking until the day they die.

If they've got something solid, let's see it, as to this point they've shown bupkis. There are triggers for recounts, and they haven't been tripped. game over.

No one asking about recount... But shouldn't the FBI investigate if they believe a crime could have been committed?

Perhaps under Trump they will...

 

[Fueri]

So the computer scientists have found no evidence of hacking. according to the hacks at CNN "top computer scientists" nonetheless, lol.

What they think they see is an irregularity, which it would seem to me would be better analyzed by statisticians for probability.

even then there is no evidence of squat. statistically improbable events happen all the time. people win the lottery, some more than once. in this election I seem to remember hillary winning a highly improbable number of coin tosses 6 of 6, with a probability of less then 2%, but it happened.

Then, of course, there's this:
"election officials and cybersecurity experts said earlier this month that it is virtually impossible for Russia to influence the election outcome"

And while we're calculating probability I'd like to know how these "top computer scientists" voted. lol.

This is going nowhere.

Again irregularities in the election...

Should this be investigated, if not why....

There is evidence, does that not merit an investigation...

There is no evidence, that's the whole point. if they've got it, present it, but to this point they havent.

 

[Fueri]

So the computer scientists have found no evidence of hacking. according to the hacks at CNN "top computer scientists" nonetheless, lol.

What they think they see is an irregularity, which it would seem to me would be better analyzed by statisticians for probability.

even then there is no evidence of squat. statistically improbable events happen all the time. people win the lottery, some more than once. in this election I seem to remember hillary winning a highly improbable number of coin tosses 6 of 6, with a probability of less then 2%, but it happened.

Then, of course, there's this:
"election officials and cybersecurity experts said earlier this month that it is virtually impossible for Russia to influence the election outcome"

And while we're calculating probability I'd like to know how these "top computer scientists" voted. lol.

This is going nowhere.

I don't know much about that field of work, but would't you think in order to suspect something is wrong, you would have to see some data first? I mean, you would have to go into those computer systems to see if anything was amiss, and then go to the ballots and see if there is evidence that something did go wrong.

It's kind of like a mechanic telling you your car is going to break down next month without looking under the car or under the hood.

Yep, the machines themselves would have to be foresically analyzed. even if they were hacked there would likely be no trace of it.

These guys have apparently identified what they think is a statistical anomaly. thing is they understand probability also, so where is that coefficient of probability in their "findings".

They have no evidence of anything. if they did, they'd be showing it and this would be a whole different matter.

this looks to me like a clever way to undermine trump in the long term. if we start forensic and statistical analysis here, now we've got to do it everywhere. And, no matter what, now there will be nutters running around claiming he won because of hacking until the day they die.

If they've got something solid, let's see it, as to this point they've shown bupkis. There are triggers for recounts, and they haven't been tripped. game over.

No one asking about recount... But shouldn't the FBI investigate if they believe a crime could have been committed?

This would be a recount. again, if there's evidence, present it. "smells funny to us" isn't evidence.

 

[easyt65]

It's 'Florida' all over again...

That election F*ed them up for YEARS... JUST when they started getting over it, they create another one.

Like Gore and Democrats THEN, Hillary and the Snowflakes now can't accept defeat NOW.

1. Oh yeah?! Well we won the Popular Vote!

2. We're going to bully and threaten the Electoral College Reps/Voters until they agree to help steal the election by voting for Hillary even though she LOST

3. 'Remember Florida! Demand nation-wide recounts!'

I wonder what desperate ploy will be next.

 

[easyt65]

"Group seeks to overturn voting results in three states on the basis of unfounded Russian hacking claims"

'A group of computer scientists and lawyers is trying to convince the Hillary Clinton campaign to challenge the election results in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and possibly Michigan, based on an analysis that purports to claim that voting machines in these states may have been hacked by Russians or other parties. The group has provided absolutely no evidence to back up the claim that the voting machines were actually hacked.'


Hillary LOST - that's enough evidence for Snowflakes to believe the election was STOLEN from her because they can't fathom the possibility that America REJECTED her....AGAIN!





Group seeks to overturn voting results in three states on the basis of unfounded Russian hacking claims

 

[Rustic]

Computer scientists urge Clinton campaign to challenge election results - CNNPolitics.com

This isn't a crackpot story, multiple sources and the basis is science...

Considering the numerous hacking going on before hand this should be investigated.. Considering Comey practically tried to gift wrap the Election to Trump for Emails which Trump now admits aren't even worth investigating any more...

The current rules are what they are. We should have changed them while we had the chance, after having survived the disaster that was the Bush administration, but we didn't.

Now we need to play our cards right over the next 4 years, and abolish the electoral college when we get the chance. The overwhelming majority of the country is on our side. We mustn't forget that.

Well, you have to change the amendment and that takes a lot of cooperation which is not going to happen.
Small rural states might as will not even participate in the popular vote if there's no electoral college... fact

Sounds like a personal problem. You all should figure out how to contribute a little more since your vote is worth more than people who live in parts of the country that actually fund and support the country.

Bless your heart...