5 ms·
It was done by the election officials in charge of certifying the count. Read the article and it explains the whole thing. They went to great lengths to keep it
by JamesSwift 4y ago
It was done by the election officials in charge of certifying the count. Read the article and it explains the whole thing. They went to great lengths to keep it "within the bounds" of the existing system, to make it harder to detect.
- klyrs 4y agoThe US has a perpetually low rate of voter turnout. Seems like that would give a pretty big margin to play around in.
- yonaguska 4y agoAnd updating voter rolls to capture only active voters is a contentious issue.
- lesuorac 4y agoBecause it doesn't address the problem in the article. These voters were "active voters". They voted in the past like 6 years! Sure, it wasn't them and instead an impersonator but whatever step you want to use to only ensure active voters are on the rolls, one can do as an insider. Need a signature? Grab the one on file. Need something mailed back? Just fill it out and drop it off in outgoing of their post office. Need them to vote? No problem, "they've" been doing that already.
- sct202 4y agoAnd it sounds like he was mostly targeting primary elections which can be half the turnout of a general election.