Yeah, I'd been following it on the Secretary of State page (tho' hadn't seen a final tally yet, I've been busy), and also, this paper provided a rational possibility for why there would be a non-demographically-visible difference. (Picosummary: Boston exurbs were more likely to vote for Clinton than Obama. They're also (for unknown reasons) more likely to have machine-counted ballots.) So that's good.

What's new since I lived there is the rest of the state having demographics comparable to the Boston-exurb areas. (Which, apparently, it does.) Either I was wrong about that at the time, or that's a significant shift.