A crowdfunding campaign argues that "data suggests a significant need to verify machine-counted vote totals"
Jill Stein - the Green Party candidate in the recent US election campaign - has launched a crowdfunding campaign to fund recounts in a number of states.
The Stein campaign is calling for recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania - all key battleground states in which President-elect Donald Trump is estimated to have won by less than 1% (the final official tallies have yet to be declared in a majority of states).
It's official: Jill Stein announces plans to file for a recount in PA, MI & WI. From her release: pic.twitter.com/Yh0gcVBPOR— Alexandra Jaffe (@ajjaffe) November 23, 2016
On the Stein crowdfunding page, the description suggests they are "three states where the data suggests a significant need to verify machine-counted vote totals".
The campaign is looking to raise $2.5m by this coming Friday to meet deadlines for applying for recounts.
In a statement, Dr Stein said: "After a divisive and painful presidential race, in which foreign agents hacked into party databases, private email servers, and voter databases in certain states, many Americans are wondering if our election results are reliable.
"That's why the unexpected results of the election and reported anomalies need to be investigated before the 2016 presidential election is certified. We deserve elections we can trust."
As of writing, the campaign had raised more than $400,000.
Stein herself is estimated to have won just over 1% of the popular vote in the election.
The crowdfunding effort follows media reports over the last 24 hours suggesting that Hillary Clinton's campaign is being lobbied to call for a recount.
New York Magazine last night reported that a team of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers "believes they’ve found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked".
J Alex Halderman - Professor of Computer Science at the University of Michigan - suggested that some of the information in the New York article "incorrectly describes the reasons manually checking ballots is an essential security safeguard (and includes some incorrect numbers, to boot)".
He wrote in a blog post: "Examining the physical evidence in these states - even if it finds nothing amiss - will help allay doubt and give voters justified confidence that the results are accurate.
"It will also set a precedent for routinely examining paper ballots, which will provide an important deterrent against cyberattacks on future elections. Recounting the ballots now can only lead to strengthened electoral integrity, but the window for candidates to act is closing fast," he adds.
An analysis on polling site FiveThirtyEight, however, suggests that "demographics, not hacking, explain the election results".