Perplexing AI with Election Fraud Questions

While researching the article Mail-In Ballots: Choose your own adventure (fraud), I used Perplexity.ai to gather links. With every question I posed about mail-in ballot fraud, the monkeys behind the machine insisted that it was infinitesimally rare and didn’t affect the outcome of elections.

AI chatbots can be useful and fun, but they aren’t smart.

I decided to challenge the algorithm. AI is trainable and can only draw answers from the information inserted into its library. It is also trainable by continuously learning with every interaction. Maybe I could have a little fun while inserting some rational thought that goes against the majority (leftist) input.

Follow along with me as I play with Perplexity.

I began with these first few questions, which I used while writing the above-mentioned article:

Write a 300-word article about how the Massachusetts mail-in ballot request forms allow the ballot to be sent to a different address.

The response showed a very positive slant, so I rephrased the question, hoping it would provide relevant links about potential fraud.

Rewrite from a skeptical point of view, including the potential for fraud.

The response provided a decent amount of information and links, some of which I used for the article. Next, I went for specifics:

Are there any recent cases of fraud involving mail-in ballots?

The response included cited examples, but with these caveats:

While mail-in voting is generally considered safe and secure…[the incidents] appear to be isolated rather than widespread issues

and

…the evidence does not support claims of widespread or systemic fraud in mail-in voting. Election authorities continue to view it as a safe and secure method of casting ballots.

Now, let’s see if I can get Perplexity to admit defeat. Each question and answer is copy/pasted directly from my interaction, with minimal editing for grammar. You can find links to them at the bottom of this post.

Question 1

Doesn’t just one fraudulent ballot disenfranchise a legitimate vote?

While it’s true that even a single fraudulent ballot could potentially cancel out a legitimate vote, it’s important to consider this issue in proper context:

1. Isolated incidents vs. widespread fraud: Studies consistently show that voter fraud, including mail-in ballot fraud, is extremely rare in the United States. The rate of voting fraud overall is estimated at less than 0.0009%.

2. Safeguards in place: Mail-in voting systems have multiple security measures to prevent fraud, including signature verification, ID requirements, and tracking systems. These make large-scale fraud very difficult to carry out undetected.

3. Balancing access and security: While protecting against fraud is crucial, ensuring that overly restrictive measures don’t disenfranchise legitimate voters is equally important. Mail-in voting has been shown to increase voter participation, particularly among groups that may face barriers to in-person voting.

4. Detection and prosecution: When fraud does occur, it is often detected and prosecuted. For example, the fraud was uncovered in the 2018 North Carolina case, and the election was re-run.

5. Perspective on impact: While any fraud is concerning, it’s important to consider whether isolated incidents are likely to sway election outcomes, especially in larger elections where the margin of victory is typically much larger than the number of fraudulent votes detected.

6. Unintended consequences: Overly restrictive measures aimed at preventing rare instances of fraud could potentially disenfranchise far more legitimate voters than the number of fraudulent votes they prevent.

While the integrity of every vote is important, the evidence suggests that mail-in voting does not pose a significant threat to election integrity when proper safeguards are in place. The focus should be on maintaining and improving these safeguards while ensuring broad access to voting.

Question 2

How would you feel if someone’s fraudulent vote canceled out your vote?

You raise a deeply personal and emotionally charged question that cuts to the heart of democratic participation. If my vote were canceled out by a fraudulent one, I would likely feel:

1. Angry and frustrated: My right to have a say in my government would have been effectively nullified.

2. Disenfranchised: The core principle of “one person, one vote” would have been violated, diminishing my voice in the democratic process.

3. Concerned about wider implications: How many others might be affected if it happened to me? Could this change election outcomes?

4. Distrust of the system: It might shake my faith in the integrity of the entire electoral process.

5. Motivated to seek change: I’d likely want stronger safeguards and penalties for voter fraud.

These feelings are valid and underscore why election integrity is so crucial. However, it’s also important to consider:

1. Rarity of occurrence: While the emotional impact would be significant, statistically, the chances of this happening are extremely low.

2. Systemic perspective: We must balance protecting against rare fraudulent votes with ensuring access for millions of legitimate voters.

3. Ongoing improvements: Election systems are continually refined to detect and prevent fraud while maintaining accessibility.

Your question highlights the personal stakes in election integrity and why it’s a topic that deserves ongoing attention and improvement efforts from election officials and policymakers.

Question 3

So, you think that voter and election fraud is acceptable, as long as it is only a little bit?

I apologize if my previous responses gave that impression. Let me be clear: voter and election fraud are never acceptable, regardless of the scale. Every fraudulent vote is a serious matter that undermines the integrity of our democratic process. Here’s a more direct stance on this issue:

1. Zero tolerance: There should be zero tolerance for any form of voter or election fraud. Even a single fraudulent vote is unacceptable.

2. Integrity is paramount: The integrity of elections is fundamental to democracy. Any compromise of this integrity, no matter how small, threatens the system.

3. Every vote matters: In some cases, elections have been decided by a single vote. Therefore, every fraudulent ballot has the potential to alter an outcome unfairly [emphasis mine].

4. Erosion of trust: Even small amounts of fraud can significantly erode public trust in the electoral system, which is crucial for a functioning democracy.

5. Potential for escalation: Tolerating “a little bit” of fraud could lead to more widespread issues if left unchecked.

The challenge lies in effectively preventing fraud while ensuring legitimate voters aren’t disenfranchised. This requires:

– Robust security measures

– Severe penalties for those who commit fraud

– Continuous improvement of election systems

– Public education about the importance of election integrity

It’s a complex issue that requires balancing security with accessibility, but the goal should always be zero fraud. Thank you for pushing me to clarify this important point.