'Scanning' Local Election Results; What 'Diseases' Are Revealed? If the results I discovered are typical nation-wide, registered but illegitimate voters number in the tens of millions. By P. C. Poppycock CAT Scans and MRI's are two incredible advances in medical technology that have become common-place diagnostic tools in the last half-century. They provide detailed image “slices” of the human body that can reveal even the smallest irregularities and disease. My own kidney cancer was diagnosed 35 years ago, with sufficient detail for my Urologist to plan the surgery to deal with it.
In the same way, it could be that examining the results and related details of your local election of November 3, 2020 may very well reveal undiscovered chronic pathologies in your local governance, and by extension, rampant irregularities in the overall conduct of local, state, and national elections.
I live in a small town in New England. The population level is amazingly stable, as is the state's population. A day or two after the recent election, I went in search of town results, normally posted on the Town Clerk's page of the Town website. Let me describe what I found.
In addition to a spreadsheet showing detailed results for each town district and each item on the ballots (candidates and initiatives, etc), there was a summary table with these turnout figures:
· Eligible Voters: 20,700 (as of Oct 24, 2020) · Voter Turnout: 14,061 · % of Voters: 67.93%
I have followed things pretty closely in town for at least 20 years. In particular, I have tracked annual school system enrollment, and town population, especially as they affect property taxes, which I consider to be very high. Anytime I have seen a population for the town published, the first two digits have been 21 – meaning 21 thousand something; the highest I can remember is 21,700 or so.
Because of this, the “eligible voter” total of 20,700 seemed completely unrealistic. So I contacted the Town Clerk and asked what the latest town population count is; she responded “I think around 21,000.”
I followed up by asking if that doesn't make the registered voter total look unrealistic. She replied, “Yes – don’t even get me on that one – we never get notified by other states when people vote there so we often don’t get people off and I can’t do purges as they (sic) only can be done at the state level.” I've looked at the history of election law in my state over the years, and found it to be systematically neutered in such a way as to remove most of the provisions that protected the integrity of the registration and election process, all in the name of reducing “voter intimidation and suppression.”
One wonders why Driver's License law hasn't been similarly diluted to reduce “driver intimidation and suppression.” The answer is obvious, of course, at least to me. We certainly don't want a private citizen to tell the Clerk that a neighbor has moved or died, and expect removal from the list without some form of “official” confirmation. But that is a very poor reason to allow lists to swell beyond clearly legitimate levels. One can imagine several logical ways to keep lists better maintained, without stepping on anyone's rights.
So let's get back to the numbers. The town lists 20,700 eligible voters. I know for a fact that the Town's school system enrolls 2400 plus students. Counting those younger than school age, and those in a local private school, we can safely say that 3,000 or so residents are below voting age. Out of a population of 21,000, that leaves 18,000 of voting age. I know from experience collecting petition signatures that a substantial number of adults never bother to register to vote for reasons ranging from principled to don't care to irresponsibility. Then there are non-citizens and felons. I feel confident this eliminates another 1,500 or so current residents from eligible voter status in the current population.
That takes us down to 16,500 out of a population of 21,000, or just shy of 79% of the current population, some number of which are undoubtedly transient, but no matter. Compared to the 20,700 shown as “eligible voters,” this means the rolls contain 4,200 entries that are invalid, for an error rate of 25% in excess eligible voter entries. If I extrapolate that rate as typical statewide, (I can think of no reason not to), in the aggregate, my state has 260,000 invalid entries on voter registration rolls. In a state of roughly 1.3 million, that is inexcusable, and catastrophically compromises the integrity of elections at local, state, and federal levels.
Want to really scare yourself? If this invalid registered voter rate is extrapolated nation-wide, nearly 70 million invalid voter entries are contained in the national voter base. This is clearly due to dereliction of duty, coupled with intentional rigging of election law. Consequently, documentation of the legal voter base is completely lacking in integrity, and on this basis alone, the election process is incredibly vulnerable. This is without even considering blanketing of “vote by mail” packets; hacked or otherwise compromised electronics; incompetent or intentionally unlawful behavior by election officials; and all the other known and unknown ways of corrupting election outcomes whether it be for personal gain or other reasons. This is a national crisis, yet those who should be held responsible are sitting with their feet on their desks, smoking a stogie, and blowing smoke rings in the air. A few comments on my local election conduct. I am not aware that “voting by mail” was instituted in my state, other than the normal absentee ballot process, in which you must personally request a ballot, and signatures and other details are checked as part of ballot security. So that angle did not come into play locally. On the other hand, more than 4,000 illegitimate entries on the voter rolls are a perfect vulnerability for devious actors to exploit. Local elections in particular can turn on just a few votes, so blowing off such realities as “acceptable” error rates is entirely unethical. You might say, “no worries, poll-workers on election day will ensure that no one who should not vote sneaks by.” To which I reply poppycock. I have worked as a poll watcher in the past. Our poll-workers are typically retired folk, kindly and intent on seeing that “everyone should be able to vote.” In other words, their DNA biases them to side with an incoming “voter” rather than seeing themselves as at the polls to see that the law is upheld and elections are fair and honest. I can recall actually debating on the subject with workers who accused me of “not wanting everyone to vote.” I explained that I wanted everyone legally entitled to vote to do so, but the distinction was completely lost on these kind and lovely workers, who had the instincts of elderly grandparents. So, you might ask, what did I do with the worrisome data I discovered. The answer is that within hours, I forwarded it to the Executive Director of the State GOP, who responded that he had forwarded it to appropriate individuals working on this issue in Washington. I have no idea what became of it once it arrived there, but we all know that virtually every legal action that has been filed has met with summary rejection without even an evidentiary hearing. Which only makes the hard facts all the more discouraging and disheartening. If solid proof of election vulnerabilities doesn't elicit a response, how can the America we were given survive? Clearly, larger states, and in particular, large older cities, have much more refined strategies and proven illusions for rigging election outcomes, because the stakes are much higher there. “Political machines” are in fact a long-standing reality. As for each of you readers, please visit your Town Clerk's (or equivalent) web page and look for the same basic data I did. Repeat the simple analysis I outlined above, and find out just how serious a problem exists in your “home town.” Each of you who does this simple “scan” of the election system on which our governance is based will add another “slice” to the overall detailed image of the body politic, for all to see. Even if they do ignore the facts and just keep on keeping on. Sooner or later, the body will be devoured from the inside out, and we will at least know the reasons why.
| 
No comments:
Post a Comment