Image
File
issue 7// vol 47
Return to
sender
>» The real concern
with mail-in fraud
Timothy Easling
Contributor
M2 voting is not the sort of
controversial issue a democratic
society wants to be reading about in the
newspaper. When the integrity of elections
is brought into question it seems all too
reminiscent of the phony elections of the
USSR and its puppet states—the strong
socialist push from the left in recent years
providing an all-too-helpful parallel. Forget
Biden and Harris dodging questions of
“packing the court”—this is the primary
concern for 2020. If voting is compromised
in any way, the actions taken post-election
are irrelevant.
While most are focused on fraud, not
enough pause has been taken simply for
the “why?” of mail-in ballots. Yes, we're
currently in the middle of a declared
pandemic, but that pandemic has not
caused the cessation of all activities. Folks
aren't restricted to their homes or limited
to hazmat suits in their wardrobe selection.
Citizens are seeing friends and family,
getting exercise, and going shopping. As
long as social distancing is maintained
and a mask is worn, many appear to have
no problem with densely populated areas
and events. What's the concern with voting
in-person?
Insider estimated grocery stores
in the USA to average approximately 30
million customers a day in 2018—and each
shopping trip to be around 41 minutes.
Essentially, spread across the USA's
estimated 40,000 grocery stores, the entire
country takes a trip almost every week-and-
a-half. In a grocery store we all handle the
same fruit and veggies that the previous
customer just pawed over—and that are
generally unwashed in the first place. We
all congregate in the same buildings that
often only have one or two entrances. We
all interact with the same employees who
are doing their best to follow regulations.
Now, the point here isn’t to create a
paranoia about shopping but precisely
the opposite. Cases are generally being
traced back to private parties or events—
not essentials like grocery trips. No one
is screaming about the immense dangers
created by hopping in a car and heading
to Safeway with a hundred other folks—so
why is voting in-person drawing such
attention?
Outlets such as CNN are reporting
that it is expected to be a “record-
shattering turnout,” but again, the question
no one is asking is “why?” Why is 2020 set
to be the year that everyone makes sure
they’re checking their ballot? Was 2008,
the first year a black man became president
of the United States not a key date? Was
2012, when that same man ran again, not
a major election? And if neither of those
were important enough, surely 2016 when
Donald Trump first ran, would at least
nudge the needle, right? In chronological
order beginning with 2008, the voter
turnout of the total voting population has
been 58.23 percent, 54.87 percent, and
55-67 percent. Just to prove that Obama
didn't change voting attitudes, the 2004
opinions // no. 21
Illustration by CJ Sommerfeld.
If there is a substantial increase in voters, before running
off to celebrate the end of political apathy in the USA, ask
yourself what is truly different about this election cycle.
George Bush election saw 56.70 percent of
voters hit the polls.
As the numbers show, despite the
continued polarization of American
politics, voting attitudes have generally
remained the same. The “racists” didn’t
suddenly show up and vote Trump in or we
would have seen a jump in those figures
(actually a 2.56 percent decrease from
2008 to 2016). Playing devil’s advocate and
saying that the “racists” were the reason for
Trump's election would mean that those
same people who were keen to vote in
Obama based on his skin colour suddenly
decided that Trump wasn‘ so bad... and
then didn’t even vote. It’s not a strong
argument.
All the facts taken into consideration,
the narrative being pushed by most
mainstream media outlets that this
election will be the one to shatter voter
turnout is suspicious—and I think is the
greatest indicator that something more
sinister is afoot. Lines such as this one from
CNN help to mislead: “Voters in five key
states have already requested more ballots
than pre-Election Day votes were cast in all
of 2016.” The issue with such reporting is
that it tries to draw a false parallel between
two completely different elections. There
was no COVID-19 in 2016. There was no
need to vote early to avoid massive lines
or risk of infection. Of course, there are
more mail-in requests now. However, the
picture many outlets are trying to paint
is that more Americans are voting—not
more Americans are voting safely. The final
voting figures are what’s important; if an
additional 30 million previously apathetic
American voters show up for this election,
regardless of mail-in-figure percentage,
eyebrows should be arched.
It’s a similar argument as to why voter
fraud has not been rampant in federal
elections before. Mail-in voting has never
existed at this level in the past—there is
no parallel to draw. However, this is not
to say there aren't examples. Tales of voter
fraud stemming from mail-in ballots have
received little mainstream coverage but are
on the rise. Paterson, New Jersey’s third-
largest city, was rocked by a municipal
election scandal that resulted in four men
running for office being charged with
varying levels of fraud. Paterson Mayor
Andre Sayegh, a Democrat, was painfully
aware of the implications of the situation—
his words suggesting in an interview
that he didn’t want the story to get broad
coverage: “We don’t want Donald Trump to
tweet about us.”
Texas saw a mayoral candidate attempt
to secure 84 additional ballots by himself.
His sloppy execution fortunately resulted
in his arrest, but authorities are not always
so vigilant, nor are criminals always so
obvious. Another case from Texas has
unearthed a scheme from a 2018 primary
in which many Americans were completely
unaware they were being used.
Ohio reported a massive error that
saw 50,000 invalid ballots go out. The
mistake was ultimately caught but shows
the massive scale on which something can
go wrong with mail-in ballots. What if the
issue hadn’t been spotted? Fifty-thousand
Americans (their voting preferences are
unknown) could have quietly slipped under
the rug.
These are just a few of the recent
highlights, but if using a search engine
other than Google, there are many more
instances of mail-in fraud to be found.
The claim that mail-in fraud is not a major
issue and has no supporting evidence is a
blatant lie. And while many outlets such
as the Washington Post write lines such as
“officials identified just 372 possible cases
of double voting or voting on behalf of
deceased people out of about 14.6 million
votes cast by mail in the 2016 and 2018
general elections, or 0.0025 percent,” in an
attempt to quell suspicions, such “facts”
only raise more questions such as how did
they arrive at this figure?—and if there was
successful fraud, how would they know?
Regardless of mail-in, advance, or day-
of ballots, the figure to watch is the total
number of voters. If there is a substantial
increase in voters, before running off to
celebrate the end of political apathy in the
USA, ask yourself what is truly different
about this election cycle. What has 2020
brought that recent decades of elections
haven't? The USA has been rocked by
war and disease before—this is nothing
new. And if there is no good answer, then
perhaps it’s the one many have been trying
to deny all along.
Edited Text
issue 7// vol 47
Return to
sender
>» The real concern
with mail-in fraud
Timothy Easling
Contributor
M2 voting is not the sort of
controversial issue a democratic
society wants to be reading about in the
newspaper. When the integrity of elections
is brought into question it seems all too
reminiscent of the phony elections of the
USSR and its puppet states—the strong
socialist push from the left in recent years
providing an all-too-helpful parallel. Forget
Biden and Harris dodging questions of
“packing the court”—this is the primary
concern for 2020. If voting is compromised
in any way, the actions taken post-election
are irrelevant.
While most are focused on fraud, not
enough pause has been taken simply for
the “why?” of mail-in ballots. Yes, we're
currently in the middle of a declared
pandemic, but that pandemic has not
caused the cessation of all activities. Folks
aren't restricted to their homes or limited
to hazmat suits in their wardrobe selection.
Citizens are seeing friends and family,
getting exercise, and going shopping. As
long as social distancing is maintained
and a mask is worn, many appear to have
no problem with densely populated areas
and events. What's the concern with voting
in-person?
Insider estimated grocery stores
in the USA to average approximately 30
million customers a day in 2018—and each
shopping trip to be around 41 minutes.
Essentially, spread across the USA's
estimated 40,000 grocery stores, the entire
country takes a trip almost every week-and-
a-half. In a grocery store we all handle the
same fruit and veggies that the previous
customer just pawed over—and that are
generally unwashed in the first place. We
all congregate in the same buildings that
often only have one or two entrances. We
all interact with the same employees who
are doing their best to follow regulations.
Now, the point here isn’t to create a
paranoia about shopping but precisely
the opposite. Cases are generally being
traced back to private parties or events—
not essentials like grocery trips. No one
is screaming about the immense dangers
created by hopping in a car and heading
to Safeway with a hundred other folks—so
why is voting in-person drawing such
attention?
Outlets such as CNN are reporting
that it is expected to be a “record-
shattering turnout,” but again, the question
no one is asking is “why?” Why is 2020 set
to be the year that everyone makes sure
they’re checking their ballot? Was 2008,
the first year a black man became president
of the United States not a key date? Was
2012, when that same man ran again, not
a major election? And if neither of those
were important enough, surely 2016 when
Donald Trump first ran, would at least
nudge the needle, right? In chronological
order beginning with 2008, the voter
turnout of the total voting population has
been 58.23 percent, 54.87 percent, and
55-67 percent. Just to prove that Obama
didn't change voting attitudes, the 2004
opinions // no. 21
Illustration by CJ Sommerfeld.
If there is a substantial increase in voters, before running
off to celebrate the end of political apathy in the USA, ask
yourself what is truly different about this election cycle.
George Bush election saw 56.70 percent of
voters hit the polls.
As the numbers show, despite the
continued polarization of American
politics, voting attitudes have generally
remained the same. The “racists” didn’t
suddenly show up and vote Trump in or we
would have seen a jump in those figures
(actually a 2.56 percent decrease from
2008 to 2016). Playing devil’s advocate and
saying that the “racists” were the reason for
Trump's election would mean that those
same people who were keen to vote in
Obama based on his skin colour suddenly
decided that Trump wasn‘ so bad... and
then didn’t even vote. It’s not a strong
argument.
All the facts taken into consideration,
the narrative being pushed by most
mainstream media outlets that this
election will be the one to shatter voter
turnout is suspicious—and I think is the
greatest indicator that something more
sinister is afoot. Lines such as this one from
CNN help to mislead: “Voters in five key
states have already requested more ballots
than pre-Election Day votes were cast in all
of 2016.” The issue with such reporting is
that it tries to draw a false parallel between
two completely different elections. There
was no COVID-19 in 2016. There was no
need to vote early to avoid massive lines
or risk of infection. Of course, there are
more mail-in requests now. However, the
picture many outlets are trying to paint
is that more Americans are voting—not
more Americans are voting safely. The final
voting figures are what’s important; if an
additional 30 million previously apathetic
American voters show up for this election,
regardless of mail-in-figure percentage,
eyebrows should be arched.
It’s a similar argument as to why voter
fraud has not been rampant in federal
elections before. Mail-in voting has never
existed at this level in the past—there is
no parallel to draw. However, this is not
to say there aren't examples. Tales of voter
fraud stemming from mail-in ballots have
received little mainstream coverage but are
on the rise. Paterson, New Jersey’s third-
largest city, was rocked by a municipal
election scandal that resulted in four men
running for office being charged with
varying levels of fraud. Paterson Mayor
Andre Sayegh, a Democrat, was painfully
aware of the implications of the situation—
his words suggesting in an interview
that he didn’t want the story to get broad
coverage: “We don’t want Donald Trump to
tweet about us.”
Texas saw a mayoral candidate attempt
to secure 84 additional ballots by himself.
His sloppy execution fortunately resulted
in his arrest, but authorities are not always
so vigilant, nor are criminals always so
obvious. Another case from Texas has
unearthed a scheme from a 2018 primary
in which many Americans were completely
unaware they were being used.
Ohio reported a massive error that
saw 50,000 invalid ballots go out. The
mistake was ultimately caught but shows
the massive scale on which something can
go wrong with mail-in ballots. What if the
issue hadn’t been spotted? Fifty-thousand
Americans (their voting preferences are
unknown) could have quietly slipped under
the rug.
These are just a few of the recent
highlights, but if using a search engine
other than Google, there are many more
instances of mail-in fraud to be found.
The claim that mail-in fraud is not a major
issue and has no supporting evidence is a
blatant lie. And while many outlets such
as the Washington Post write lines such as
“officials identified just 372 possible cases
of double voting or voting on behalf of
deceased people out of about 14.6 million
votes cast by mail in the 2016 and 2018
general elections, or 0.0025 percent,” in an
attempt to quell suspicions, such “facts”
only raise more questions such as how did
they arrive at this figure?—and if there was
successful fraud, how would they know?
Regardless of mail-in, advance, or day-
of ballots, the figure to watch is the total
number of voters. If there is a substantial
increase in voters, before running off to
celebrate the end of political apathy in the
USA, ask yourself what is truly different
about this election cycle. What has 2020
brought that recent decades of elections
haven't? The USA has been rocked by
war and disease before—this is nothing
new. And if there is no good answer, then
perhaps it’s the one many have been trying
to deny all along.
issue 7// vol 47
Return to
sender
>» The real concern
with mail-in fraud
Timothy Easling
Contributor
M2 voting is not the sort of
controversial issue a democratic
society wants to be reading about in the
newspaper. When the integrity of elections
is brought into question it seems all too
reminiscent of the phony elections of the
USSR and its puppet states—the strong
socialist push from the left in recent years
providing an all-too-helpful parallel. Forget
Biden and Harris dodging questions of
“packing the court”—this is the primary
concern for 2020. If voting is compromised
in any way, the actions taken post-election
are irrelevant.
While most are focused on fraud, not
enough pause has been taken simply for
the “why?” of mail-in ballots. Yes, we're
currently in the middle of a declared
pandemic, but that pandemic has not
caused the cessation of all activities. Folks
aren't restricted to their homes or limited
to hazmat suits in their wardrobe selection.
Citizens are seeing friends and family,
getting exercise, and going shopping. As
long as social distancing is maintained
and a mask is worn, many appear to have
no problem with densely populated areas
and events. What's the concern with voting
in-person?
Insider estimated grocery stores
in the USA to average approximately 30
million customers a day in 2018—and each
shopping trip to be around 41 minutes.
Essentially, spread across the USA's
estimated 40,000 grocery stores, the entire
country takes a trip almost every week-and-
a-half. In a grocery store we all handle the
same fruit and veggies that the previous
customer just pawed over—and that are
generally unwashed in the first place. We
all congregate in the same buildings that
often only have one or two entrances. We
all interact with the same employees who
are doing their best to follow regulations.
Now, the point here isn’t to create a
paranoia about shopping but precisely
the opposite. Cases are generally being
traced back to private parties or events—
not essentials like grocery trips. No one
is screaming about the immense dangers
created by hopping in a car and heading
to Safeway with a hundred other folks—so
why is voting in-person drawing such
attention?
Outlets such as CNN are reporting
that it is expected to be a “record-
shattering turnout,” but again, the question
no one is asking is “why?” Why is 2020 set
to be the year that everyone makes sure
they’re checking their ballot? Was 2008,
the first year a black man became president
of the United States not a key date? Was
2012, when that same man ran again, not
a major election? And if neither of those
were important enough, surely 2016 when
Donald Trump first ran, would at least
nudge the needle, right? In chronological
order beginning with 2008, the voter
turnout of the total voting population has
been 58.23 percent, 54.87 percent, and
55-67 percent. Just to prove that Obama
didn't change voting attitudes, the 2004
opinions // no. 21
Illustration by CJ Sommerfeld.
If there is a substantial increase in voters, before running
off to celebrate the end of political apathy in the USA, ask
yourself what is truly different about this election cycle.
George Bush election saw 56.70 percent of
voters hit the polls.
As the numbers show, despite the
continued polarization of American
politics, voting attitudes have generally
remained the same. The “racists” didn’t
suddenly show up and vote Trump in or we
would have seen a jump in those figures
(actually a 2.56 percent decrease from
2008 to 2016). Playing devil’s advocate and
saying that the “racists” were the reason for
Trump's election would mean that those
same people who were keen to vote in
Obama based on his skin colour suddenly
decided that Trump wasn‘ so bad... and
then didn’t even vote. It’s not a strong
argument.
All the facts taken into consideration,
the narrative being pushed by most
mainstream media outlets that this
election will be the one to shatter voter
turnout is suspicious—and I think is the
greatest indicator that something more
sinister is afoot. Lines such as this one from
CNN help to mislead: “Voters in five key
states have already requested more ballots
than pre-Election Day votes were cast in all
of 2016.” The issue with such reporting is
that it tries to draw a false parallel between
two completely different elections. There
was no COVID-19 in 2016. There was no
need to vote early to avoid massive lines
or risk of infection. Of course, there are
more mail-in requests now. However, the
picture many outlets are trying to paint
is that more Americans are voting—not
more Americans are voting safely. The final
voting figures are what’s important; if an
additional 30 million previously apathetic
American voters show up for this election,
regardless of mail-in-figure percentage,
eyebrows should be arched.
It’s a similar argument as to why voter
fraud has not been rampant in federal
elections before. Mail-in voting has never
existed at this level in the past—there is
no parallel to draw. However, this is not
to say there aren't examples. Tales of voter
fraud stemming from mail-in ballots have
received little mainstream coverage but are
on the rise. Paterson, New Jersey’s third-
largest city, was rocked by a municipal
election scandal that resulted in four men
running for office being charged with
varying levels of fraud. Paterson Mayor
Andre Sayegh, a Democrat, was painfully
aware of the implications of the situation—
his words suggesting in an interview
that he didn’t want the story to get broad
coverage: “We don’t want Donald Trump to
tweet about us.”
Texas saw a mayoral candidate attempt
to secure 84 additional ballots by himself.
His sloppy execution fortunately resulted
in his arrest, but authorities are not always
so vigilant, nor are criminals always so
obvious. Another case from Texas has
unearthed a scheme from a 2018 primary
in which many Americans were completely
unaware they were being used.
Ohio reported a massive error that
saw 50,000 invalid ballots go out. The
mistake was ultimately caught but shows
the massive scale on which something can
go wrong with mail-in ballots. What if the
issue hadn’t been spotted? Fifty-thousand
Americans (their voting preferences are
unknown) could have quietly slipped under
the rug.
These are just a few of the recent
highlights, but if using a search engine
other than Google, there are many more
instances of mail-in fraud to be found.
The claim that mail-in fraud is not a major
issue and has no supporting evidence is a
blatant lie. And while many outlets such
as the Washington Post write lines such as
“officials identified just 372 possible cases
of double voting or voting on behalf of
deceased people out of about 14.6 million
votes cast by mail in the 2016 and 2018
general elections, or 0.0025 percent,” in an
attempt to quell suspicions, such “facts”
only raise more questions such as how did
they arrive at this figure?—and if there was
successful fraud, how would they know?
Regardless of mail-in, advance, or day-
of ballots, the figure to watch is the total
number of voters. If there is a substantial
increase in voters, before running off to
celebrate the end of political apathy in the
USA, ask yourself what is truly different
about this election cycle. What has 2020
brought that recent decades of elections
haven't? The USA has been rocked by
war and disease before—this is nothing
new. And if there is no good answer, then
perhaps it’s the one many have been trying
to deny all along.
issue 7// vol 47
Return to
sender
>» The real concern
with mail-in fraud
Timothy Easling
Contributor
M2 voting is not the sort of
controversial issue a democratic
society wants to be reading about in the
newspaper. When the integrity of elections
is brought into question it seems all too
reminiscent of the phony elections of the
USSR and its puppet states—the strong
socialist push from the left in recent years
providing an all-too-helpful parallel. Forget
Biden and Harris dodging questions of
“packing the court”—this is the primary
concern for 2020. If voting is compromised
in any way, the actions taken post-election
are irrelevant.
While most are focused on fraud, not
enough pause has been taken simply for
the “why?” of mail-in ballots. Yes, we're
currently in the middle of a declared
pandemic, but that pandemic has not
caused the cessation of all activities. Folks
aren't restricted to their homes or limited
to hazmat suits in their wardrobe selection.
Citizens are seeing friends and family,
getting exercise, and going shopping. As
long as social distancing is maintained
and a mask is worn, many appear to have
no problem with densely populated areas
and events. What's the concern with voting
in-person?
Insider estimated grocery stores
in the USA to average approximately 30
million customers a day in 2018—and each
shopping trip to be around 41 minutes.
Essentially, spread across the USA's
estimated 40,000 grocery stores, the entire
country takes a trip almost every week-and-
a-half. In a grocery store we all handle the
same fruit and veggies that the previous
customer just pawed over—and that are
generally unwashed in the first place. We
all congregate in the same buildings that
often only have one or two entrances. We
all interact with the same employees who
are doing their best to follow regulations.
Now, the point here isn’t to create a
paranoia about shopping but precisely
the opposite. Cases are generally being
traced back to private parties or events—
not essentials like grocery trips. No one
is screaming about the immense dangers
created by hopping in a car and heading
to Safeway with a hundred other folks—so
why is voting in-person drawing such
attention?
Outlets such as CNN are reporting
that it is expected to be a “record-
shattering turnout,” but again, the question
no one is asking is “why?” Why is 2020 set
to be the year that everyone makes sure
they’re checking their ballot? Was 2008,
the first year a black man became president
of the United States not a key date? Was
2012, when that same man ran again, not
a major election? And if neither of those
were important enough, surely 2016 when
Donald Trump first ran, would at least
nudge the needle, right? In chronological
order beginning with 2008, the voter
turnout of the total voting population has
been 58.23 percent, 54.87 percent, and
55-67 percent. Just to prove that Obama
didn't change voting attitudes, the 2004
opinions // no. 21
Illustration by CJ Sommerfeld.
If there is a substantial increase in voters, before running
off to celebrate the end of political apathy in the USA, ask
yourself what is truly different about this election cycle.
George Bush election saw 56.70 percent of
voters hit the polls.
As the numbers show, despite the
continued polarization of American
politics, voting attitudes have generally
remained the same. The “racists” didn’t
suddenly show up and vote Trump in or we
would have seen a jump in those figures
(actually a 2.56 percent decrease from
2008 to 2016). Playing devil’s advocate and
saying that the “racists” were the reason for
Trump's election would mean that those
same people who were keen to vote in
Obama based on his skin colour suddenly
decided that Trump wasn‘ so bad... and
then didn’t even vote. It’s not a strong
argument.
All the facts taken into consideration,
the narrative being pushed by most
mainstream media outlets that this
election will be the one to shatter voter
turnout is suspicious—and I think is the
greatest indicator that something more
sinister is afoot. Lines such as this one from
CNN help to mislead: “Voters in five key
states have already requested more ballots
than pre-Election Day votes were cast in all
of 2016.” The issue with such reporting is
that it tries to draw a false parallel between
two completely different elections. There
was no COVID-19 in 2016. There was no
need to vote early to avoid massive lines
or risk of infection. Of course, there are
more mail-in requests now. However, the
picture many outlets are trying to paint
is that more Americans are voting—not
more Americans are voting safely. The final
voting figures are what’s important; if an
additional 30 million previously apathetic
American voters show up for this election,
regardless of mail-in-figure percentage,
eyebrows should be arched.
It’s a similar argument as to why voter
fraud has not been rampant in federal
elections before. Mail-in voting has never
existed at this level in the past—there is
no parallel to draw. However, this is not
to say there aren't examples. Tales of voter
fraud stemming from mail-in ballots have
received little mainstream coverage but are
on the rise. Paterson, New Jersey’s third-
largest city, was rocked by a municipal
election scandal that resulted in four men
running for office being charged with
varying levels of fraud. Paterson Mayor
Andre Sayegh, a Democrat, was painfully
aware of the implications of the situation—
his words suggesting in an interview
that he didn’t want the story to get broad
coverage: “We don’t want Donald Trump to
tweet about us.”
Texas saw a mayoral candidate attempt
to secure 84 additional ballots by himself.
His sloppy execution fortunately resulted
in his arrest, but authorities are not always
so vigilant, nor are criminals always so
obvious. Another case from Texas has
unearthed a scheme from a 2018 primary
in which many Americans were completely
unaware they were being used.
Ohio reported a massive error that
saw 50,000 invalid ballots go out. The
mistake was ultimately caught but shows
the massive scale on which something can
go wrong with mail-in ballots. What if the
issue hadn’t been spotted? Fifty-thousand
Americans (their voting preferences are
unknown) could have quietly slipped under
the rug.
These are just a few of the recent
highlights, but if using a search engine
other than Google, there are many more
instances of mail-in fraud to be found.
The claim that mail-in fraud is not a major
issue and has no supporting evidence is a
blatant lie. And while many outlets such
as the Washington Post write lines such as
“officials identified just 372 possible cases
of double voting or voting on behalf of
deceased people out of about 14.6 million
votes cast by mail in the 2016 and 2018
general elections, or 0.0025 percent,” in an
attempt to quell suspicions, such “facts”
only raise more questions such as how did
they arrive at this figure?—and if there was
successful fraud, how would they know?
Regardless of mail-in, advance, or day-
of ballots, the figure to watch is the total
number of voters. If there is a substantial
increase in voters, before running off to
celebrate the end of political apathy in the
USA, ask yourself what is truly different
about this election cycle. What has 2020
brought that recent decades of elections
haven't? The USA has been rocked by
war and disease before—this is nothing
new. And if there is no good answer, then
perhaps it’s the one many have been trying
to deny all along.