I still remember that scene in 1941’s classic movie, Citizen Kane. Kane is running for Governor of New York. And on election day the New York newspaper he owned was ready with two front pages, depending on the results: “KANE ELECTED” AND “FRAUD AT POLLS”.
That, of course, was meant to suggest the newspaper had no idea of whether such fraud existed, only that it would claim fraud if Kane lost.
But, in the real world, election did exist then and still exists today – with the opportunities for fraud made far more complex due in large part to the opportunities presented by mail-in and absentee ballots…plus, of course, potential hacking of the computerized results.
In this regard, and especially given that Donald Trump is on trial in Georgia for what appears to be a wholly spurious charge that he demanded to win the state via fraudulently inflating election results (more on this in the next blog), Issues and Insights (issuesinsights.com) has put out a very worthwhile editorial on the subject.
Here is how it begins:
If you are like us, you’re sick and tired of being labeled a “denier” any time you challenge the left’s agenda. Don’t believe the earth will be destroyed unless we all live like cavemen? You are a climate denier! You worry about side effects from an experimental new vaccine. Vaccine denier!
And if you suspect that election fraud is a real problem, you’re an election denier!
The problem is that the “deniers” keep turning out to be right.
The latest example came out of Bridgeport, Connecticut, earlier this month, when a judge overturned the primary election for mayor because of an “unprecedented” volume of evidence showing ballot fraud, including surveillance footage exposing supporters of the incumbent stuffing stacks of absentee ballots into drop boxes.
Even CNN, which can always be relied on to dismiss election fraud as a myth, was forced to admit that “the Connecticut case does highlight the potential vulnerabilities with mail-in voting.”
Just as a reminder, this is exactly what “election deniers” have been saying since 2020, when Democrats used COVID as an excuse to implement widespread mail-in voting schemes across the country.
This is hardly the only recent case of election fraud involving mail-in ballots.
In October, Paterson, New Jersey, the city council president was charged with personally collecting large numbers of mail-in ballots in his district and replacing the ones that didn’t vote for him with ones that did.
In Iowa earlier this year, the wife of a candidate was hit with 52 counts of fraud for allegedly filling out and casting absentee ballots on behalf of her husband, who was running in the Republican congressional primaries.
A search of the Heritage Foundation’s election fraud database finds 127 convictions for election fraud since the 2020 elections, almost half of which involved absentee ballots. Heritage is quick to point out that these numbers wildly undercount actual instances of fraud because the database doesn’t include cases that went unreported or that prosecutors decided not to pursue — which happens all too often.
Does that give you a reason to believe there is such a thing as election fraud?
And, if so, is one political party more invested in preventing fraud (e.g. a voter ID requirement, shorter early voting periods, much stricter controls on absentee and offsite ballot box voting, etc.) than the other?
And if one party is more invested in preventing fraud, is the other party more invested in keeping the opportunity for fraud as wide open as possible?
And if that is the case, which party is which?
Now, there’s something to think about. But I doubt the thought process will take much effort.
