If we think of voting as a supply chain, we can see that the electoral system was, if not overwhelmed, at least challenged, by an unexpected glut caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused people to mail in their ballots rather than vote in person, risking infecting others (and themselves). In this post, I will focus not on the effects of the pandemic, plus logistical and political issues at the United States Post Office.

Under a recent policy change, the FBI will notify states if local election systems are hacked, but some state officials and lawmakers want the feds to commit to informing a broader range of stakeholders.

So, summarizing the scenario: In the case of a challenged election that turns on precincts using BMDs, we could trust the exit polls, but they may disagree. So far as I can tell, the only authority to turn to would be the DHS — which presents issues for the Constitutional order in and of itself — who have not yet done a forensic audit, and in any case cannot audit BMDS, because that can’t be done. I would imagine IT experts could be hired to dig into the code on the machines, but it’s likely those experts would be party-adjacent and not especially competent. We could, of course, appeal to the Supreme Court, but on what basis would a decision be made, given that the actual intent of the voters with BMDs is fundamentally not knowable? (Bush v. Gore, let us remember, took place when Florida had paper ballots. Not BMDs.) ... ... I really can’t see my way to a scenario with a happy outcome, though I’d welcome a successful reader effort to relieve my angst. ... .. Of course, with hand-marked paper ballots, hand-counted in public, no such problems arise. That would break a lot of rice bowls, though.