The Democrats stress that the failure of their Iowa Caucus app was not due to a "hack or intrusion". This is a purely arbitrary statement. I means they want people to believe that there's no hack or intrusion.
I mean, there probably was no hack. What I'm describing here is how people treat anomalies. We saw in the "Saudis hack Bezos" story how anything unexplained was explained by their predetermined theory, and thus, was "evidence" of that theory.
The same thing is going on here. They want not to have been hacked, so anomalies are explained as programmer failure.
I'm not disputing their conclusion here. Overwhelmingly, most computer problems are programmer failure instead of hacks. I'm just pointing out the principle for the next story claiming falsely that there was a hack.
