Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Return to Fordham Law School
    X (Twitter) Facebook LinkedIn Instagram RSS
    Fordham Law News
    • Home
    • Law School News
    • In the News
    • Fordham Lawyer
    • Insider
      • Announcements
      • Class Notes
      • In Memoriam
    • For the Media
      • Media Contacts
    • News by Topic
      • Business and Financial Law
      • Clinics
      • Intellectual Property and Information Law
      • International and Human Rights Law
      • Legal Ethics and Professional Practice
      • National Security
      • Public Interest and Service
    Return to Fordham Law School
    X (Twitter) Facebook LinkedIn Instagram RSS
    Fordham Law News
    You are at:Home»Faculty»Vote Recounts and Audits

    Vote Recounts and Audits

    0
    By on November 23, 2016 Faculty, Transition to Trump

    Fordham Law Professor Jed Shugerman weighs in on recent reports about the call for vote recounts in certain states.


    Social media of the left has been buzzing over the past few days about whether the election was stolen or hacked. The mainstream media is starting to pick up on the story, focusing on a claim by Alex Halderman and John Bonifaz about electronic voting machines in key states. Halderman, the highly respected computer science professor asking the Clinton campaign to seek recounts, posted an explanation early this morning. His explanation is persuasive as a general condemnation of electronic voting in any election, especially a close one. He shows how frighteningly easy it is to hack voting machines. But he does not offer specific statistical claims about the 2016 presidential race, other than noting the Russian email hacking. He is right that we should audit and verify as a matter of public policy. Why not? But there is still no specific anecdotal or statistical evidence suggesting an actual hack or vote-rigging in this election. He does not mention the “7%” statistical shift in electronic voting towards Trump, and that’s the factual claim that seems to be generating media interest. Nate Cohn of the New York Times confirmed today what I’d been posting yesterday: the general pro-GOP correlation with electronic voting is probably attributable to race and class by precinct, rather than hacking. White precincts are slightly more likely to have electronic voting.

    Here is my main problem with focusing on electronic voting as the way the 2016 election was stolen: the key battleground states used different voting systems. Yes, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania use electronic voting, as do many other battleground states. But Michigan (and Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Iowa) use only optical scan paper ballots, not electronic/computerized voting. Michigan’s margin and demographics were very similar to Wisconsin’s and Pennsylvania’s, and the three states’ histories of presidential voting and 2016 polling were roughly similar. In fact, Michigan had been more blue than Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, so if anything, Michigan reflects an even bigger shift to the GOP in the Midwest, regardless of voting technology. Other states with paper ballots show a consistent pattern: the state-by-state polling was inaccurately pro-Clinton, underestimating the white turnout. Minnesota (a paper ballot state) had been a deep blue state for two decades, but was razor thin this year (about 1% for Clinton, a dramatic shift to the GOP). New Hampshire (paper) was closer on election day than the polling averages. This election seems not to be a story of a failure of voting technology, but a failure of polling technology.

    One more point: for a recount to make a difference, Clinton would have to overcome a total of 115,000 votes in those three states (70,000 in Pennsylvania alone!). And to be fair, Trump would be entitled to his own recount of New Hampshire and Minnesota. The evidence of hacking would have to be overwhelming to make any difference, and in the end, the House of Representatives would resolve such a contested election… for Trump. Let’s have an audit to verify the security of our elections. Let’s fight for voting rights and fight to get rid of insecure electronic voting. But let’s not circulate conspiracy theories of how this election was stolen, until we see detailed, hard statistical evidence suggesting otherwise. Let’s not lose focus on the new administration’s all-too-real problems.

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email

    Related Posts

    Bloomberg Law: Prof. Bruce Green on Whether Judges Can Face Sanctions for the Kind of Errors They Find in Lawyers’ Work

    The New York Times: Prof. Bruce Green on Conflict of Interest in Epstein Scandal

    NBC New York: Prof. Martin S. Flaherty Provides Legal Opinion on Whether President Can Take Over New York City

    Comments are closed.

    • The Big Idea
    March 31, 2025

    The Big Idea: Local Politics, Reform Prosecutors, and Reshaping Mass Incarceration

    March 3, 2025

    The Big Idea: Forced Labor, Global Supply Chains, and Workers’ Rights

    November 6, 2024

    The Big Idea: Partisanship, Perception, and Prosecutorial Power

    October 3, 2024

    The Big Idea: How a Franchising Model Can Transform Worker Cooperatives

    READ MORE

    About

    Fordham University - The Jesuit University of New York

    Founded in 1841, Fordham is the Jesuit University of New York, offering exceptional education distinguished by the Jesuit tradition to more than 15,100 students in its four undergraduate colleges and its six graduate and professional schools.
    Connect With Fordham
    © 2025 ThemeSphere. Designed by ThemeSphere.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.