Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

No, Joe Biden did not mysteriously gain 138,000 Michigan votes all at once

False claims, retweeted by the president, about the Michigan vote tabulation exploited a counting error that’s been resolved.

Joe Biden speaking from a podium.
Joe Biden speaking from a podium.
A typo in the data collected by Decision Desk has been resolved and votes in Michigan are still being counted.
Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images
Rebecca Heilweil
Rebecca Heilweil covered emerging technology, artificial intelligence, and the supply chain.
Open Sourced logo

While votes are still being counted in Michigan, President Trump retweeted a claim that an update in Michigan’s vote count yielded 138,339 votes for Joe Biden and 0 for Trump. The tweet that the president amplified — which was later deleted — included side-by-side screenshots from the Decision Desk election map that appeared to show an unusual jump. In reality, though, there was no conspiracy: A data glitch had momentarily caused the count to change.

Decision Desk HQ, a firm that collects and quickly reports election results, explained the brief confusion related to the viral maps. Nevertheless, the incident is a reminder that small technical hiccups in the electoral process have the capacity to devolve quickly into misinformation.

Here’s the backstory: The screenshots came from Decision Desk HQ. They appeared to represent a before-and-after glimpse at the results in Michigan, one that showed Biden receiving all of the votes in one update while Trump’s votes remained the same. The misleading post implies that Biden’s votes had grown from 1,992,356 votes in Michigan to 2,130,695 votes while Trump’s remained constant at 2,200,902 votes.

Related

Decision Desk headquarters, which has partnered with Vox for election results, told Recode that the apparent result was a “simple error from a file created by the state that we ingested” — in other words, a numerical typo.

“DDHQ does not correct/amend/adjust any state provided file. The state noticed the error and produced an updated count,” Decision Desk said in a statement. “This happens quite a bit on election night, and we expect other vote tabulators in MI experienced this error and corrected in real-time like we did.”

In fact, data shows that the uneven jump in favor of Biden did not actually happen:

Still, images of the glitch have already gone viral among influential, pro-Trump accounts, which attempted to frame them as evidence that there’s something fishy happening with Michigan’s vote counts and that the screenshots could potentially be proof of voter fraud.

An image of a tweet from the Geller Report account that says, “Suddenly 138,000 Michigan ballots appear this morning all for Biden, zero for Trump. Smelly A. F. C’mon, man!”
Despite Twitter putting a label on some of these posts directing readers to “Learn about US 2020 election security efforts,” plenty have no annotation from the platform and are racking up thousands of “Likes.”
Twitter

Some of the tweets sharing the same images do not have warning labels or any other notices from Twitter. And despite being labeled and hidden, Trump’s post had been “Liked” more than 129,000 times and shared more than 59,000 times by Wednesday afternoon. The same misleading narrative is also showing up on Facebook, and only some of the posts carry a label directing people to election information.

Twitter took action against Trump’s retweet, adding a label that hides the content, and the person who posted the original tweet has since deleted it. Notably, the tweet about Michigan vote counts was just one of several Trump posts that aimed to question the integrity of the vote-counting process following Election Day.

This incident and others like it serve as a reminder that small snags in the electoral process can be quickly twisted into misinformation that can proliferate at a startling rate. In any case, the president’s tacit endorsement of such misinformation stands to cast doubt on the results of the election. And once they’ve been exploited by those hoping to shift a particular narrative, these false claims can be difficult for the social media platform to contain.

Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network. All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh