[dmfdmf]

I forget the statistical term but after the fact, you can't go back and say "look at this, only 107K votes determined the outcome" because you can always find such explanations post hoc. I tried to search but couldn't find the discussion but one example is how couples use this type of fallacy to "prove" their love was fated. Typically on the day the fated couple met there were a number of unusual events or circumstances (a missed bus, sick grandma, a power outage, etc.) that played a key role in their meeting and the probability of all these coincidences occurring together must mean they were fated to meet.

Moreover, you have to ask; How could the Simon Bar Sinister have known prior to the election that these three states (and probably one or two counties in each state) would be the decisive counties to hack to manipulate votes and win the election? He can't.

[plaguuuuuu]

So perhaps one can only practicably rig close elections.

[parent5446]

Indeed, but the real fix would be a voting method that has defenses against it, as opposed to the electoral college, which is a lot easier to affect than more advanced systems that have been developed in more recent years.

[ThomPete]

You would still have to know where it was close.

[pvaldes]

A lot of online companies classify millions of people by lots of variables each day. You can pay for this information.

[ThomPete]

Thats not what we are talking about at all. You need access to these machines somehow it's not about classifying people it's about getting access to the ballot machines and altering them or their results. Quite a different task.

[grzm]

I think your parent was implying that some sort of classification would be used to predict where the vote would likely be close, so you would know which precincts to target. As I'm not the poster, this is just speculation of course, and can be worth the electrons used to transmit the comment :)

[pvaldes]

Yep, that was the idea.

[vehementi]

I mean, the swing states were known beforehand. A concerted effort to fix the elections there would decide the election, surely?

[arcanus]

> WI, MI, and PA

Wisconsin was not considered to be a battleground state. HRC didn't even campaign in the state after the convention.

[tajen]

I'm not an expert of swing/fling states, but FiveThirtyEight listed 22 states as potentially competitive; Trump also won 194 of the 207 counties that voted for Obama either in 2008 or 2012; and finally I count 8 states that shifted to Trump after voting Obama [1]. Therefore all hands are required to win an election, even for the first 49.9%, even if a few fling states make the difference at the end.

Of course, although it's not possible to earn an election purely by fraud, it could still alter it.

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/09/us/elections/s...