Election integrity impacts us all. It doesn’t hinge on which candidate wins 2020. Everyone knows the winning party in one election can easily be the loser in the next. For too long, we’ve taken the view that if there is fraud, cheating, or crimes committed in an election where our home-team wins, it’s time to move on. Historically both sides have ignored dealing with election integrity issues after the fact. It’s time we think beyond a single race and decide if election integrity is worth the fight. If you still believe that this is a game of Rs vs. Ds, you’ve lost the plot. This is about the people standing up, taking responsibility, and fighting against the ruling class.
Post Election: Day Eight
The election results are not decided. The election routine we’re accustomed to goes like this: On Election Day votes are counted, the media announces preliminary results as they come in, and the winner is named sometime after all the polls are closed. The process of certifying election results happens without fanfare behind the scenes well after one side pops the champers and the other dries their tears. Everyone moves on.
However, in this election, the typical order of operations was upended. It started with Fox News calling Arizona’s preliminary results intentionally too early. This kicked off a chain of the media announcing results in other states before challenges, irregular vote patterns, and anomalies could be addressed. Some claims were flagged before Election Day. Now, there are so many legal challenges happening across several states, it’s not just irresponsible, but in many cases would be illegal to certify results. Pay attention to counties, states, and people rushing to certify. Once certification happens, the range of legal options to challenge election integrity narrows meaning audits, reviews, recounts and other actions can be eliminated.
“Count every vote”… Al Gore 2000
Are we witnessing Bush v. Gore 2.0? Al Gore famously said, “count every vote”. Let’s assume he understood election law and meant count every legal vote. Today this statement is being aggressively repeated by those fighting for election integrity. Recall that in 2000, the national election results came down to Florida. The state certified the election results for Bush. After the certification, the Gore team sued, but due to the law their only recourse was a recount (not an audit). The case went to the Supreme Court. This process took around thirty days to resolve. Bush prevailed and we never had a President Gore. This case brings up the point that challenging the legality of votes is only effective pre-certification. In 2000, it was Ds challenging the Rs. That’s exactly what is happening in this election – potentially times fifty. Except now, it’s Rs challenging the Ds and the Rs, which signals its the people challenging the establishment.
A combination of events caused this election’s chaos. Some examples include: States using mass-mailed ballots, sending ballots to everyone on voter rolls without verifying data accuracy. States that have historically run either exclusively or a hybrid model of mail and in-person expanded their mail-in voting programs often by loosening election security standards. Several states ushered in arbitrary rule changes mid-election. And, there was a historic voter turnout that stressed the system as the U.S. was still dealing with the impact of SARS2 Covid-19. It appears the dam burst like Violet Beauregarde’s belt in Wonka’s Factory. It allowed for a flood of blatant fraud cases that have yet to be adjudicated.
Today, it’s fair to say that half of the country believes there’s no fraud in this election, including The New York Times. The media continues to position The President as the sore loser who lost fair and square in order to justify the idea that there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in U.S. elections. It’s time to debunk this ridiculous trope for good, because it hides the truth from all voters. There is fraud now, and it has been going on for a long time – we just didn’t pay attention, know for how long, to what extent, who has been responsible, and who has benefitted.
Voter Fraud vs. Election Fraud
There is a difference between the two, yet the terms are used interchangeably. Voter fraud is a subset of election fraud. Voter fraud has to do with the voter committing the act. Some examples: voting twice, falsifying registrations, or falsifying absentee ballots. It’s about shifting the responsibility of the violations to the individual, not the system. It’s an especially dirty move for the media to keep hammering voter fraud because it insulates the real criminals using the election system from owning the criminal deeds. There’s a valid argument when it comes to the notion that voter fraud isn’t widespread. To illustrate, how many individuals would be motivated enough to risk a felony by voting twice in an election, knowing full-well a single vote is highly unlikely to change any results? Think of voter fraud as the retail version of election fraud.
Election fraud is the fraud that is committed during the whole of the election process. It’s the fraud that either uses or abuses the mechanics, equipment or operations of the system to change election outcomes. It can be executed by a single individual, for example a poll worker who changes records in a voter database. It can be election judges coordinating a scam, like counting invalid ballots. Or, it could be a systemic operation for instance, using voting machines that have been intentionally set to add or delete votes as ballots are counted. Election fraud is the wholesale version of fraud used to rig elections. The media has and continues to hide this from us by not investigating and reporting on these cases.
Breaking Down the Assumption: There is no Evidence
It’s the idea that if it isn’t seen, it isn’t happening. This is what we’re led to believe with election fraud. On its face is so ridiculous it’s laughable. When it comes to election fraud, the media is asking us to believe they are the arbiters of whether or not it’s happening based on their reporting. There’s two problems here. First, the whole objective of committing a successful crime is to do it in a way that goes unnoticed. How many criminals openly flaunt their heist? The one example off the top of my head is The Joker. Oh wait… That’s a movie character. And how many people are willing to take the risk of becoming a whistleblower? To paraphrase Snowden – it’s no biggie. The second problem is how provable any given voter or election fraud case is. Because of how elections are set up, the process has vulnerabilities that can be exploited. As a ballot moves through the system there are choke points where the proof is automatically obfuscated. This is where the sexiest term in election terminology enters the chat: the naked ballot. This is just one proof point showing why election fraud evidence is so hard to obtain and prove cases.
The incredibly positive thing that’s happening in the fight for election integrity is the number of sworn affidavits that are being collected. Across several states and jurisdictions the numbers are well into the hundreds of accounts. A sworn affidavit is a powerful legal document that is the equivalent to someone taking the stand in court, under oath, and delivering a live testimony. In fact, there are many currently serving time for crimes proven by a single affidavit. The consequences for submitting a false affidavit are steep, it means jail time. What this means is the affidavits are going to be the backbone of proving election fraud. Finally these systemic crimes will be able to be adjudicated in court.
Definitions Matter: “Widespread”
When the term “widespread” is used, ** NOTE: Any references to Kamala Harris will be flagged as inappropriate and violate this blog’s terms of service** Let’s start again, when the term widespread is used in reference to voter fraud, what does it mean? How is the term widespread defined and what does it take for fraud to rise to the level of being official? Is it the number of documents involved? What about the number of cases – exactly how many does it take? Four, eight, twenty? Or, does it take a certain number of episodes in a certain area within a specific timeframe? The point is, the term widespread is completely subjective. It’s intentionally used against the public to distract us from legitimately scrutinizing our election processes.
“Elections belong to the people.”
A friend who has taught me a lot about the election process said this during the election. We have outsourced our election responsibilities. Judging by state of 2020, we’re scrambling to claw back our ownership of the election process. Hopefully it’s not too late. No matter the outcome, it’s time to get back in the game and make our government reflect the best parts of ourselves, not the ruling elite who have the most to gain by keeping the status quo. It starts with making some decisions and entertaining tough questions. Are we ready to take the chance of entertaining new ideas and information? Are we ready to pursue the truth, which means confronting and dealing with unpleasant and uncomfortable facts that can challenge our belief system? Can we muster the courage to dig into problems that appear to be unsolvable? And, do we have the grit to stick with the clean-up that will not go quickly?
If you believe participating in the process, or a single vote doesn’t matter, you’re wrong. A single vote standing alone cannot change an election outcome. A single vote acting as a contribution to a pool of votes does make a difference. It’s about working together so that we set the rules of the game, we enforce the rules, we make sure everyone can and does play fair, and we determine the winner of ideas prevails.
Get an update when new articles go live