Electronic Fraud in the 2020 Election: More Likely than Not

 

Cheating in elections is as old as–well, as old as elections. Cheating in elections using paper is as old as the use of paper in elections.  Are we supposed to just assume that cheating in elections using computers is going to be much younger than the use of computers in elections?

I have now come to believe that it is more likely than not that there was electronic cheating in the 2020 election, but this is a defeasible conclusion — meaning that my reasons for thinking this could easily be refuted.

Oh This Is Bad Oh No GIF - Oh This Is Bad Oh No This Is Bad - Discover & Share GIFsDespite its eventual inevitability, it still comes as a jarring paradigm shift for me merely to entertain the idea that such a thing might be true.  I knew America had problems, but I didn’t think one of them was that our elections are so bad as all that. But there is an argument that it is true.

A very simple argument, but also, once again, defeasible: The electronic side of America’s elections is so terribly insecure that it’s difficult to say concerning a close election whether electronic cheating didn’t nudge the winner over the finish line; in this terrible state, it only takes a little evidence to render it more likely than not that this is just what happened; and, unfortunately, we do have a little evidence.

Before Going into Detail, Let’s Outline that Argument Again

The place to begin is not a pleasant one: We have to recognize that we know next to nothing about our elections.  It’s not that we know there was electronic cheating. The tragedy is that we don’t know that there wasn’t.

Ockham’s Razor does not apply here. There’s no default setting here that says, “It didn’t happen.” The default setting is: We’re blind and in the dark with little or nothing to go on. Odds start at about 50/50. And in this situation, even a little bit of comparatively weak evidence nudges things one way or the other.

We may only have a little evidence. But we do have it. So it’s more likely than not that it happened.

So Why Do We Know Nothing?

you don't know anything gifs | WiffleGif

Read my recent post, “The Voting Machines Need To Go,” for a more detailed commentary on the backstory. Briefly, there are three things wrong with the voting machines that destroy trust by destroying trustworthiness. But that’s only the rotten fruit of the problem. The poisoned root is that we don’t know what’s going on in these machines.

They count votes using ratios–56% Trump to 44% Biden with 100 votes . . . or maybe with 113 votes.

They use secret code.

They have online connectivity.

Let’s zoom in on that last one.

A report from a Michigan Senate committee clarifies (see page 22). Many–but not all–of the voting machines do connect to the internet. It’s for reporting results fast, and the modems are supposed to be switched off during the vote count.

Seems safe enough, except for a point made by Father Brown in the writings of G. K. Chesterton: A reliable electronic system needs to be used by an unreliable system–a human being, the most unreliable of all systems.

This, of course, is why we’re supposed to have processes to make unreliable people into reliable people. Courtroom rules and processes. Ways of fact-checking used in history and science and journalism.  In elections, witnesses and transparency and clean, documented chains of custody.

So are there rules in 50 states specifying that the vote count cannot begin until a Republican observer, a Democrat observer, and a government official have all signed on a dotted line specifying that they checked to confirm that the dang modem was switched the heck off?

If there were, would we not have heard about it in every goshdarn fact check since November 2020?

Instead, we heard the myth that the machines don’t connect to the internet at all.

YARN | Socrates. | Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure | Video gifs by quotes | 6d49834b | 紗Without those processes, we know nothing. We begin as Socrates. We stand in a windowless room with the lights off.  We have no evidence that none of the machines were hacked. There are neither rules nor processes to make the system trustworthy.  Our elites and officials tend to be untrustworthy people, but that doesn’t mean they’re lying–they don’t know anything either! Hardly anyone has even a glimmer of clarity except for the ignored bureaucrats at the Election Assistance Commission advising us to get rid of these machines and some people in Michigan who added a footnote on page 22 of a Senate Oversight Committee report explaining the purpose of the modems in the voting machines.

The long and short of it is this: Trusting the electronic vote count means assuming, with no evidence, that no razor-thin margin in a swing state could have been affected because someone, whether through fraud or incompetence, simply left a modem on.  That’s a weak assumption.  Just as if it were the morning after a one-party machine in Philadelphia announces that ballot boxes opened at 3 AM handed an election to the Democrats with no Republicans or cameras present, Ockham’s Razor tells us nothing.

The odds of an electronically stolen election start at about 50/50, not because we can calculate them to that number but because in this ridiculous state of affairs we just know basically nothing.

So What Evidence Is There?

There are at least two lines of evidence which, as far as I know, are still standing.  You can look up the details in Chapter 9 of the big post here (or, for off-Ricochet, here).  The gist is, simply, this:

There are (at least) still claims from nerds that the computer data show disappearing Trump votes and that statistically impossible vote ratios occurred in the vote updates.

YARN | Nerds! | The Simpsons (1989) - S10E09 Comedy | Video gifs by quotes | 76ffcd71 | 紗(Hey, you want some citations?  The part about disappearing Trump votes is from computer nerds who looked at some information in some computer logs and presented it to the Georgia Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Elections. This Epoch Times piece introduces the topic. A briefer intro here. Scott Adams has some interesting commentary hereHere is a June 2021 video on Gab going over a number of such incidents in multiple states.  This guy comments on other candidates than Trump who also had some disappearing votes. For the part about the statistically impossible vote ratios, see a Rumble video called “Unmasked: The Truth About The 2020 Election”. A blog post from Just a Mom here introduces the same sort of material, focusing on data pertaining to North Dakota.  Or . . . click on the big post linked above, and spend some time in Chapter 9!)

I am incapable of classifying this evidence as decisive in and of itself because I lack the ability even to understand the computer talk and/or to check the data.  So this evidence, at least as far as I know, carries only a little bit of weight in and of itself—maybe just enough to tip the scales.

What carries more weight, and what has for the present persuaded me, is this: Apparently no one has refuted these claims; but if these claims are wrong, then someone probably would have by now.

Accordingly, my working opinion on this topic is: Until such time as someone should refute the claims of the nerds about these phenomena or present some explanation for these phenomena other than electronic election fraud, it is likelier than not that electronic election fraud occurred in the 2020 election, and that it, in coordination with other shenanigans documented elsewhere, flipped swing states.

Lord Of The Rings — “Not with ten thousand men could you do this. It...As I said, very defeasible: Show me the refutation, and I reckon I’ll go back to thinking all that happened was all the other election corruption and folly–rather a lot of it, unfortunately.

This line of reasoning does have one other notable vulnerability. It relies on the premise that someone probably would have refuted these claims by now if they were not true.  That seems likely to me–not least because there are many who are eager to refute such claims, who often try, and who sometimes (as far as I can tell) succeed.

But it might not be true. It might be that the people who are responsible for finding the refutations of these guys are just too unintelligent, uninterested, or lazy to do so.  Given the dismal quality of our journalists, government officials, and experts these days, this certainly seems possible.  Looking past the journalists at the whole country, it’s the same problem. Too many of us are strung out on porn, drugs, internet rage, and video games. Too few of us can read sentences with an advanced grammatical construction, fit a premise to a conclusion, or recognize reality when it stares us in the face–which reminds me, what is a woman?

So I could be wrong. But the logic has changed my views to what they are now, and they can’t change back without better logic or new evidence.

So consider yourself invited to change my mind: Do you know of a refutation I don’t know of?

Published in Elections
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 175 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Waffles are good.

    • #151
  2. DrewInWisconsin, Lower Order Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Lower Order Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Waffles are good.

    I kinda want a waffle right now.

    • #152
  3. Globalitarian Lower Order Misanthropist Coolidge
    Globalitarian Lower Order Misanthropist
    @Flicker

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Waffles are good.

    Is that a value judgment or a statement of fact?

    • #153
  4. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Globalitarian Lower Order Misa… (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Waffles are good.

    Is that a value judgment or a statement of fact?

    All waffles go to heaven.

    • #154
  5. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Globalitarian Lower Order Misa… (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Waffles are good.

    Is that a value judgment or a statement of fact?

    Yes.

    • #155
  6. Globalitarian Lower Order Misanthropist Coolidge
    Globalitarian Lower Order Misanthropist
    @Flicker

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Globalitarian Lower Order Misa… (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Waffles are good.

    Is that a value judgment or a statement of fact?

    Yes.

    How did I know that?  :)

    • #156
  7. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):
    Good to know. Thank you. I will probably need to save some of these urls and consult them later. I would  however, feel much better about Texas if we would also ban all voting machines with online connectivity.

    Just an FYI from the first link:

    • No voting system is ever connected to the internet at any point – either when votes are being cast or when they are being counted. (Section 129.054 Texas Election Code)

    Hope that clarifies things, at least as far as Texas voting machines go.  The problem, of course, is that when other States allow for internet connection, then it calls into question their results, and it doesn’t matter how robust Texas’ protections are.

    • #157
  8. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    Percival (View Comment):
    Physical control of storage media is important. I’d like to see something about media which is in use being keyed to allow it to be recognized by the system. I don’t want Joe Blow walking in from the street with a USB flash drive being able to read or write anything to the system.

    That is mostly controlled by the fact that the memory ports that are used in the machines are sealed (with multiple seals that are verified during the day) and locked.  Part of the opening process is to visually confirm each machine by opening up that sealed door (saving the removed seal), and then visually inspecting the seals that are affixed to the memory units.  This is done by two poll workers (Texas uses an adversarial system with one judge from each of the two major parties).  During the day, the machines are under the constant watch of the poll workers, and the seals are checked during the day, at the end, the process is repeated to ensure that the seals are still intact.  The physically printed ballots are taken to the county elections clerk along with the memory units by the two judges (one from each major party) in the same vehicle and turned into the clerk’s office.

    Is it completely perfect?  No, if you have two corruptible people working the same election there can be shenanigans, but the electronic count is always audited against the physical copies to ensure alignment.

    • #158
  9. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    DrewInWisconsin, Lower Order O… (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Waffles are good.

    I kinda want a waffle right now.

    I had waffles for breakfast…just saying.

    • #159
  10. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):
    Good to know. Thank you. I will probably need to save some of these urls and consult them later. I would however, feel much better about Texas if we would also ban all voting machines with online connectivity.

    Just an FYI from the first link:

    • No voting system is ever connected to the internet at any point – either when votes are being cast or when they are being counted. (Section 129.054 Texas Election Code)

    I want evidence of that. It’s nice that it’s the law, but what’s the enforcement mechanism? What’s the process to make sure no one cheats or even just honestly botches it by being careless?

    • #160
  11. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    That is mostly controlled by the fact that the memory ports that are used in the machines are sealed (with multiple seals that are verified during the day) and locked.  Part of the opening process is to visually confirm each machine by opening up that sealed door (saving the removed seal), and then visually inspecting the seals that are affixed to the memory units.  This is done by two poll workers (Texas uses an adversarial system with one judge from each of the two major parties).  During the day, the machines are under the constant watch of the poll workers, and the seals are checked during the day, at the end, the process is repeated to ensure that the seals are still intact.

    There we go.

    In three years, that is the first statement of fact I have ever heard about any process in place anywhere to ensure the machines are used safely.

    So at least one state has protections against flash-disk-based election cheating.  Good to know.

    • #161
  12. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    That is mostly controlled by the fact that the memory ports that are used in the machines are sealed (with multiple seals that are verified during the day) and locked. Part of the opening process is to visually confirm each machine by opening up that sealed door (saving the removed seal), and then visually inspecting the seals that are affixed to the memory units. This is done by two poll workers (Texas uses an adversarial system with one judge from each of the two major parties). During the day, the machines are under the constant watch of the poll workers, and the seals are checked during the day, at the end, the process is repeated to ensure that the seals are still intact.

    There we go.

    In three years, that is the first statement of fact I have ever heard about any process in place anywhere to ensure the machines are used safely.

    So at least one state has protections for flash-disk-based election cheating. Good to know.

    Well, at least until they plug in their official flash drives that might be compromised.

    • #162
  13. Matt Bartle Member
    Matt Bartle
    @MattBartle

    Scott Adams said something like, “unless a system is designed to be audited, it should be assumed to be corrupt.”

     

    • #163
  14. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):
    Good to know. Thank you. I will probably need to save some of these urls and consult them later. I would however, feel much better about Texas if we would also ban all voting machines with online connectivity.

    Just an FYI from the first link:

    • No voting system is ever connected to the internet at any point – either when votes are being cast or when they are being counted. (Section 129.054 Texas Election Code)

    I want evidence of that. It’s nice that it’s the law, but what’s the enforcement mechanism? What’s the process to make sure no one cheats or even just honestly botches it by being careless?

    Hmm.  Well, I suppose it would help if the machines being used did not have internal modems or even network connectors.  If the only way for them to be updated was via memory card it makes it difficult to connect them to the internet.  Since they have a USB drive, it is possible to use one of those as a network connection, but that would happen at the warehouse by the election clerk’s staff, and frankly, if we cannot trust them then we cannot trust any election.  

    • #164
  15. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    Matt Bartle (View Comment):

    Scott Adams said something like, “unless a system is designed to be audited, it should be assumed to be corrupt.”

     

    Which is a major problem with any anonymous election.  I can only speak for Guadalupe County, Texas (and to an extent for all of Texas because the laws are the same) but, yes, we can validate who comes to the polling station.  Yes, we can get a list of ballots issues and tabulated and compare those counts to the check-ins (and we do).  Yes, we can take the physically printed ballots that the voter has reviewed to match their selections with the automated count (and we do).  Yes, we can ensure that the person who is handed the ballot fills it out themselves without any outside assistance (and we do). But all of that is for in-person voting.  The minute we go to mail ballots we can cross-check the ones sent out with what was returned (unless they send out one to everyone on the rolls (even if they shouldn’t be on the rolls).  We can validate the signature against the application, or better yet the signature from the voter registration, or better yet against the Drivers License or other official signature, unless we send out ballots to everyone regardless of their request.  We have no idea who fills out the ballot because there is no way to audit or check on it, unlike in-person voting.

    • #165
  16. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):
    Good to know. Thank you. I will probably need to save some of these urls and consult them later. I would however, feel much better about Texas if we would also ban all voting machines with online connectivity.

    Just an FYI from the first link:

    • No voting system is ever connected to the internet at any point – either when votes are being cast or when they are being counted. (Section 129.054 Texas Election Code)

    I want evidence of that. It’s nice that it’s the law, but what’s the enforcement mechanism? What’s the process to make sure no one cheats or even just honestly botches it by being careless?

    Hmm. Well, I suppose it would help if the machines being used did not have internal modems or even network connectors. If the only way for them to be updated was via memory card it makes it difficult to connect them to the internet. Since they have a USB drive, it is possible to use one of those as a network connection, but that would happen at the warehouse by the election clerk’s staff, and frankly, if we cannot trust them then we cannot trust any election.

    What if the election supervisor – i.e., the Secretary of State – is one of the candidates in a hotly-contested election?  e.g., Arizona Governor.

    • #166
  17. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    kedavis (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):
    Good to know. Thank you. I will probably need to save some of these urls and consult them later. I would however, feel much better about Texas if we would also ban all voting machines with online connectivity.

    Just an FYI from the first link:

    • No voting system is ever connected to the internet at any point – either when votes are being cast or when they are being counted. (Section 129.054 Texas Election Code)

    I want evidence of that. It’s nice that it’s the law, but what’s the enforcement mechanism? What’s the process to make sure no one cheats or even just honestly botches it by being careless?

    Hmm. Well, I suppose it would help if the machines being used did not have internal modems or even network connectors. If the only way for them to be updated was via memory card it makes it difficult to connect them to the internet. Since they have a USB drive, it is possible to use one of those as a network connection, but that would happen at the warehouse by the election clerk’s staff, and frankly, if we cannot trust them then we cannot trust any election.

    What if the election supervisor – i.e., the Secretary of State – is one of the candidates in a hotly-contested election? e.g., Arizona Governor.

    Well, the SOS sets policy, but not the law itself.  What they could do is not enforce the laws or let it be known that they aren’t going to enforce them strictly and then the Clerks that want to could violate the rules with impunity.

    As I said earlier, if we cannot trust the people who count the votes, then we cannot have ANY election and we might as well give it up.

    • #167
  18. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    Well, the SOS sets policy, but not the law itself.  What they could do is not enforce the laws or let it be known that they aren’t going to enforce them strictly and then the Clerks that want to could violate the rules with impunity.

    Which seems to be exactly the issue with former Secretary of State Katie Hobbs.

    • #168
  19. She Member
    She
    @She

    Percival (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    As I said in another post, anyone selling such software and equipment should have a record of each and every security audit they have passed. Their reticence in doing so makes one wonder why that should be. This should be child’s play.

    They should…and Texas does a decent job of ensuring that level of auditing. Each election cycle the Secretary of State selects four counties to do a full audit on. One county selected was Harris County (site of massive issues in the ’20 election, and another was Guadalupe, where I reside and worked both the ’20 and ’22 elections. In the ’22 election, an auditor from the Secretary of State’s office showed up at my polling location. She thoroughly reviewed our paperwork, processes, and procedures to ensure compliance with the law. It was not pleasant, but having run a Vote center for 7 election cycles (14 elections as I worked the primaries and the general) we handled it as best as we could.

    Some of the ways that Texas tries and secure the elections are detailed here: 2020 Texas Election Security Update

    The report on Harris County and the ’20 election can be found here: Executive Summary Audit 2020 General Election in Texas

    The Audit program (linked from the Election Security Update page is: Election Audit Program (texas.gov)

    It’s not perfect, but many of the issues that have plagued other states are dealt with in Texas and cannot happen. I would be much more confident in our elections if every state made the effort that Texas does. I suspect that some do, but many do not.

    Pretty good. I’d ignore anything the DHS has to say about security. Once they’ve got the rest of the government squared away (there have been some real howlers when it comes to servicemen and employees having their data jacked) then we can talk.

    Physical control of storage media is important. I’d like to see something about media which is in use being keyed to allow it to be recognized by the system. I don’t want Joe Blow walking in from the street with a USB flash drive being able to read or write anything to the system.

    Agree with just about everything here.  As I said in a previous comment, healthcare IT has been living exactly these sorts of scenarios for decades.  Apparently, it’s too hard for most of the federal government to follow through, though.

    • #169
  20. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    She (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    As I said in another post, anyone selling such software and equipment should have a record of each and every security audit they have passed. Their reticence in doing so makes one wonder why that should be. This should be child’s play.

    They should…and Texas does a decent job of ensuring that level of auditing. Each election cycle the Secretary of State selects four counties to do a full audit on. One county selected was Harris County (site of massive issues in the ’20 election, and another was Guadalupe, where I reside and worked both the ’20 and ’22 elections. In the ’22 election, an auditor from the Secretary of State’s office showed up at my polling location. She thoroughly reviewed our paperwork, processes, and procedures to ensure compliance with the law. It was not pleasant, but having run a Vote center for 7 election cycles (14 elections as I worked the primaries and the general) we handled it as best as we could.

    Some of the ways that Texas tries and secure the elections are detailed here: 2020 Texas Election Security Update

    The report on Harris County and the ’20 election can be found here: Executive Summary Audit 2020 General Election in Texas

    The Audit program (linked from the Election Security Update page is: Election Audit Program (texas.gov)

    It’s not perfect, but many of the issues that have plagued other states are dealt with in Texas and cannot happen. I would be much more confident in our elections if every state made the effort that Texas does. I suspect that some do, but many do not.

    Pretty good. I’d ignore anything the DHS has to say about security. Once they’ve got the rest of the government squared away (there have been some real howlers when it comes to servicemen and employees having their data jacked) then we can talk.

    Physical control of storage media is important. I’d like to see something about media which is in use being keyed to allow it to be recognized by the system. I don’t want Joe Blow walking in from the street with a USB flash drive being able to read or write anything to the system.

    Agree with just about everything here. As I said in a previous comment, healthcare IT has been living exactly these sorts of scenarios for decades. Apparently, it’s too hard for most of the federal government to follow through, though.

    Well they seem to be okay with criticizing other countries doing those things, but not here.

    • #170
  21. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    Well, I suppose it would help if the machines being used did not have internal modems or even network connectors.

    Hence the advice of the Elections Assistance Commission.

    • #171
  22. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    She (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    As I said in another post, anyone selling such software and equipment should have a record of each and every security audit they have passed. Their reticence in doing so makes one wonder why that should be. This should be child’s play.

    They should…and Texas does a decent job of ensuring that level of auditing. Each election cycle the Secretary of State selects four counties to do a full audit on. One county selected was Harris County (site of massive issues in the ’20 election, and another was Guadalupe, where I reside and worked both the ’20 and ’22 elections. In the ’22 election, an auditor from the Secretary of State’s office showed up at my polling location. She thoroughly reviewed our paperwork, processes, and procedures to ensure compliance with the law. It was not pleasant, but having run a Vote center for 7 election cycles (14 elections as I worked the primaries and the general) we handled it as best as we could.

    Some of the ways that Texas tries and secure the elections are detailed here: 2020 Texas Election Security Update

    The report on Harris County and the ’20 election can be found here: Executive Summary Audit 2020 General Election in Texas

    The Audit program (linked from the Election Security Update page is: Election Audit Program (texas.gov)

    It’s not perfect, but many of the issues that have plagued other states are dealt with in Texas and cannot happen. I would be much more confident in our elections if every state made the effort that Texas does. I suspect that some do, but many do not.

    Pretty good. I’d ignore anything the DHS has to say about security. Once they’ve got the rest of the government squared away (there have been some real howlers when it comes to servicemen and employees having their data jacked) then we can talk.

    Physical control of storage media is important. I’d like to see something about media which is in use being keyed to allow it to be recognized by the system. I don’t want Joe Blow walking in from the street with a USB flash drive being able to read or write anything to the system.

    Agree with just about everything here. As I said in a previous comment, healthcare IT has been living exactly these sorts of scenarios for decades. Apparently, it’s too hard for most of the federal government to follow through, though.

    Defense contractors take it pretty seriously too. I had to have a specially keyed USB flash drive to be able to access anything on a lab PC. When I proposed installing Wireshark, you’d have thought I was asking to bring in a homemade atomic pile.

    • #172
  23. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    kedavis (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    Well, the SOS sets policy, but not the law itself. What they could do is not enforce the laws or let it be known that they aren’t going to enforce them strictly and then the Clerks that want to could violate the rules with impunity.

    Which seems to be exactly the issue with former Secretary of State Katie Hobbs.

    Well, as they say, elections have consequences. So do the hiring practices of the various counties that hire the clerks to administer the elections. 

    • #173
  24. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    Well, the SOS sets policy, but not the law itself. What they could do is not enforce the laws or let it be known that they aren’t going to enforce them strictly and then the Clerks that want to could violate the rules with impunity.

    Which seems to be exactly the issue with former Secretary of State Katie Hobbs.

    Well, as they say, elections have consequences. So do the hiring practices of the various counties that hire the clerks to administer the elections.

    If you refer to the election of Katie Hobbs to SoS in the first place, that’s understandable.  People made the mistake of electing a Democrat.  But her apparent corruption of elections following her own, is a different story.

    • #174
  25. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Election 2020 Top-Ten Question Countdown

    • #175
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.