President Donald Trump’s call for volunteer poll watchers during Tuesday’s debate has spooked many leftist ballot-padding operations that were relying on corrupt vote counters to proceed with impunity.
…Importantly, we also won on the Ballot Cure Provision. Waiting for the BIG Federal decisions in Pennsylvania, Nevada, and elsewhere! https://t.co/UQp0MjXYqT
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 17, 2020
Several Democrat states have used the cover of the coronavirus to loosen their absentee voting rules.
With some sending out unsolicited ballots to everyone on their outdated voter rolls, the potential for ballot mishandling is a major concern.
Already, reports have arisen about voters receiving incorrect ballots or multiple ballots. Federal investigators are also looking into ballots getting suspiciously discarded en route to their destination.
But even if the absentee ballots make it to the right place, unlike in-person voting that automatically tallies a voter’s selection, the decisions on which ones are admissible will then be cast to sometimes shadowy assemblies of vote processors and certifiers at the local level.
“I’m urging my supporters to go into the polls and watch very carefully, because that’s what has to happen,” Trump said.
A legion of left-wing lawyers is on hand to challenge the decisions in conservative districts.
However, GOP leaders may have less infrastructure and resources available for doing the same in left-wing states like Pennsylvania, where corrupt judges on the state Supreme Court already have made clear they intend to side with Democrats in undermining vote integrity.
Thus, challenging questionable ballots or procedures at the point of initial processing adds an extra layer of scrutiny.
While many states do allow citizen poll-watchers, the process for approving and certifying them may vary by state and often needs to be done in advance, with approval from the local boards.
But some Democrat-run boards have hoped to conduct their vote counting behind closed doors, once again using the coronavirus and other arbitrary policies as their pretense for keeping the process in the dark.
Left-leaning media outlets reacted to Trump’s call for poll watchers by trying to stoke fear that allowing the process to be open and transparent could undermine election integrity and subject it to undue partisan influence.
“Anytime that anybody is suggesting that people go to the polls for any other reason other than encouraging people to be part of the process or whether they are there for a candidate, it’s problematic,” Philadelphia City Commissioner Lisa Deeley, the top election official in the city, told Politico.
The leftists ironically claimed that Trump’s intention was voter-intimidation even as they engaged in fearmongering themselves.
Without any evidence, Deeley and others speciously claimed that the presence of poll watchers would be a deterrent for minority voters and suppress the vote.
“To all our voters in Philadelphia, but in particular the [b]lack and brown community, when there is confusion, that typically leads to people not wanting to participate in the process,” claimed Philadelphia City Commissioner Omar Sabir, a Democrat.
The city was singled-out for criticism by Trump after it forcibly ejected James Fitzpatrick, Trump’s Pennsylvania director of Election Day operations, from a satellite election office at Philadelphia City Hall.
The authorities claimed he was being “disruptive” by recording video on his cellphone.
“He was taking pictures and photos while inside the booth, being irate,” said Teresa Lundy, communications chief for the Sheriff’s Office. “He was also being disruptive. … He wasn’t there to be a poll watcher because poll watcher certificates weren’t issued.”
Despite states’ having already sent out some 2 million vote-by-mail ballots, according to debate moderator Chris Wallace, some are panicking now that a distrust of the mail system will result in greater numbers turning out on Election Day.
An NPR report found that only half of the initially projected 70 percent of voters indicated that it intended to vote by mail.
That has led some Democrats and their mainstream media allies to shift tactics and press for more Election Day turnout.
As a result, many local precincts fear they may be understaffed and unprepared for the mass turnout.
“This is swinging the pendulum back too far,” said Tammy Patrick, a left-wing activist with the Democracy Fund—one of the leading national advocates for expanding mail voting. “It breaks my heart, but it does not surprise me.”
Activists like Patric continued to issue dire forecasts of polling-place bedlam that would be ripe for a new COVID spike.
“If we flood our in-person voting facilities in the middle of a global pandemic,” she said, “that is the recipe for some true chaos.”
The increase in Democrats who plan to participate in Election Day voting does offer a safeguard, at least, against the possibility that left-wing county officials might intentionally restrict access to polling places on Election Day by claiming COVID concerns forced them to do so.
Ironically, Democrats have long levied similar accusations against their GOP opponents, insisting that they had interfered with polling access.
But the constantly changing dynamics of the virus and the political turmoil surrounding the election have left them with an unclear path forward and the hope—if not likelihood—that their best-laid plans to introduce chaos and confusion on Election Day may ultimately backfire.
