In late September, the US attorney for central Pennsylvania, David Freed, released details of an investigation into nine discarded mail-in ballots. Freed’s announcement directly violated Justice Department (DoJ) policy that prohibited initiating a voter fraud investigation just before an election (much less publicizing it). The purpose of the policy had been to avoid “chilling legitimate voting and campaign activities” or “interjecting the investigation itself as an issue” for voters.
Although Attorney General William Barr had himself reiterated the policy just last spring, reversed himself last week and lifted those restrictions. On the same day, the DoJ announced charges against a New Jersey postman for dumping 1,875 pieces of mail that included 98 blank mail-in ballots ready for delivery; there was no evidence of fraud.
Both President Trump and Attorney General Barr have continually hyped the danger of mail-in balloting (as Trump did again in his first debate with Biden.) Although there is virtually no evidence of absentee ballot fraud or any other electoral fraud, the announcements of even a few such DOJ investigations (especially when reported repeatedly on Fox and other right-wing media) can make it appear to the general public that electoral fraud is rampant … even if, eventually, no actual fraud is found in the investigations.
Already the President has contended that the only way he will lose the election will be through voter fraud; he has also said he will not accept the results of a fraudulent election. It doesn’t take a degree in logic to know that, when defeated, he will claim electoral fraud and attempt to throw the election results into chaos. Despite straightforward questioning, he has refused to commit himself to accept the results of the election.
For those of us with highly limited logics capacity, former U.S. attorney in Alabama Joyce Vance makes it explicit that Barr and the Justice Department could “build a narrative — despite the absence of any evidence — of fraud in mail-in voting so Trump can challenge the election results if he loses.”
Legal challenges and their appeals, along with the expected delays in counting mail-in ballots, may delay verification of some states’ election results for weeks or even months. The confusion and dismay following the disputed Florida results in the 2000 presidential election are only a pale reflection of the events and responses we are likely to see next month. In 2000, there were certainly confusion and anger, charges and counter-charges, court challenges. In 2000, however, the recount process was not exactly orderly, but there were few serious accusations of bad faith toward the other candidate; neither candidate attacked the other personally and there were certainly no accusations of criminal behavior; we could be confident that the losing side would ultimately accept the election results as legitimate. Even after a final Supreme Court decision (that many accused of partisan bias), the losing candidate Al Gore accepted the result, graciously conceded and immediately called for national unity under a new President-elect Bush. Whatever their ideology, the vast majority of Americans could be confident in a peaceful transition of power.
This year, our extraordinary American partisanship will create a much greater challenge for the losing side to maintain confidence in our election process, threatening a fundamental structure of our democracy.
I have never been concerned that the Secret Service will have to physically remove the President from the White House. Despite the statistical probability giving Trump a 10% chance of winning, I am no longer concerned that he might pull off an electoral college, much less a popular, victory. Trump will not win re-election, yet in the midst of his re-election campaign’s train-wreck, he does have the power to destabilize our country’s election process and shatter the country’s trust in it.
What can we do? How can we prepare ourselves for what is coming?
The answer to those questions will get more complicated after the election depending on the possible combinations of results: Biden landslide, simple Biden win; closely contested results for either candidate, Trump win, etc. The results of the Senate re-election will also create alternative strategies. But for the next three weeks, the answer is clear: Work like hell to get Biden and Democratic Senators elected. For the next three weeks, it will be just the old hard work of writing and calling to get out the vote and to campaign for Biden.
One of the blessings of the pandemic is that even those of us who live in places like Washington DC (where a Democratic victory is guaranteed) can work via Zoom “in” Pennsylvania or Wisconsin or South Carolina. Even though we know that the odds of Biden winning are overwhelming, working to attain a Biden landslide will make it more difficult for Trump’s claims of fraud to hold up.
We must also work to assure a Democratic Senate. This is obviously more difficult and much less certain than defeating Trump, but polls are beginning to favor a Democratic majority. Again, between now and November 3, the traditional political tools are available to us. You can choose to work from home in whatever Senate campaign that seems most important to you.
There are lots of groups we can join. Google out “get out the vote” or “campaign for Biden” or your favorite political organization and you’ll find more possibilities than you can use. All proceed only after a training session.
- Weekly Biden phone banks : (you pick your state): training: https://joebiden.com/call/
- Women’s March has multiple texting and phoning efforts here.
- North Carolina is doing great non-partisan work: https://www.youcanvote.org/
- From Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN). Lots of possibilities.
