The 2020 steal of Write-In and Minor Party (WIMP) votes reminds me of kids who steal money from a change jar. Typically, the kids screw up by taking all the quarters and leaving behind just nickels, dimes, and pennies. The parent or change jar owner is oblivious of the theft until they pick up the jar and notice that it is too light. After which, they dump the jar and see all the quarters are missing -- and the theft is confirmed.
In the 2020 election, the (unspecified) vote thieves made the same mistake.
All that was left in the in the WIMP vote jar was nickels, dimes, and pennies (i.e., an incredibly low number of votes).
So, why are WIMP votes targeted for theft?
WIMP votes are the proverbial "change jar" of votes.
As mentioned in prior posts, those votes are automatically set aside for adjudication where an election worker determines the intent of the voter or, alternatively, an election tabulator infected with vote shifting malware will change the WIMP vote to a vote for a major party candidate. The chance of this being detected are slim because everyone's focus is on the major party candidates...see #2.
2. Low Visibility
On election night, the entire world is focused on the contest between the Democrat and the Republican candidates for President. The news media doesn't bother to report minute by minute results for any other of the candidates therefore they are almost invisible to the public. WIMP candidates don't become visible until the full election results are posted -- and even then it is difficult to find out how many votes they got. Reuters news service provides greater detail than any of the U.S. media. With just a few clicks its results map, anyone and everyone who got a vote for President is visible. Meanwhile, at CNN, the NYT, FOX, and ABC all you get is the top two candidates.
The U.S. media television blackout of WIMP candidates not only shielded the public from the incredibly low numbers of WIMP votes in the 2020 election, but it eliminated the possibility that astute observers would see the vote steals as they happened in real time (as they did with Trump to Biden shifts).
Also, because of the media blackout, we only learn how wildly "unpopular" Minor Party presidential candidates are compared to their same party candidates after the election is over.
Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein filed for recounts in 2016 in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan over systemic miscounting of votes by the system.
Stein got her recount in Wisconsin, however her request for a hand recount was rejected. The tabulator recount produced a similar result as the original count -- as would be expected if the tabulator was infected with malware or not. The only ways to detect a machine error is by hand recount or by a forensic audit of the election systems (i.e., machines).
Stein's recount lawsuits were rebuffed in Michigan and Pennsylvania, which brings us to reason #3.
3. Court Inaction
WIMP candidates are unlikely to even get their cases heard because the courts claim that they don't have "standing" or otherwise cannot show "harm" from the wrongful count because they wouldn't have enough votes to win the election.
The Jill Stein case from 2016 is instructive.
Stein's argument in Michigan focused on voting machine failures and the possibility that 87,000 ballots marked for president were read as blank ballots.
Stein stated: "The people of Michigan and all Americans deserve a voting system we can trust. After a presidential election tarnished by the use of outdated and unreliable machines and accusations of irregularities, people of all political persuasions are asking if our election results are reliable. We must recount the votes so we can build trust in our election system. We need to verify the vote in this and every election so that Americans can be sure we have a fair, secure and accurate voting system.”
The Michigan Supreme Court ruled Stein did not have standing, stating: “They (Stein) present speculative claims going to the vulnerability of the voting machinery – but not actual injury,”
Under Michigan law, a candidate must receive 2% of the vote to request a recount.
Stein purportedly received 1%, however, if the voting system isn't counting the vote correctly, then it is impossible to really know if she got 1% or 2%. My down ballot analysis for Michigan revealed that Stein got about 49,000 fewer votes than her Green Party associates in statewide races. Had she done as well as her GP colleagues, she would have been over 2%.
If the system is rigged to steal WIMP votes, then the "rigger" will be smart enough to make sure the aggrieved candidate is under the 2% threshold (the "rigger" will also know to steal enough votes to avoid an automatic recount).
Which brings us to point #4.
4. Lack of Advocacy
In 2016, Jill Stein urged Hillary Clinton to file for recounts in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan because of the razor thin margin in those states. Allegedly, Clinton was "intensely reluctant" to do so because she had blasted Trump for his remarks over the election being rigged.
After Clinton's eventual decision not to file, Stein filed for recounts in those states -- and was chastised for the lateness of her filings by US District Court Judge Paul Diamond. Diamond eventually tossed Stein's case for lack of standing.
Unlike Democrat and Republican candidates, WIMP candidates don't have deep pocketed PACs and Congressional/Senate Party apparatuses behind them who can have an army of legal teams at the ready to contest the election results and fight the necessary legal battles.
In key battleground states, WIMP candidates went up against the GOP and Democrat machines in legal battles to be placed on the ballot. The Democrats consider the Green Party as a threat to siphon off votes. Likewise, the GOP considers the Libertarian party as a potential siphon.
In the battlegrounds, a 5-2 Democrat majority on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court voted along party lines to keep the Green Party off the ballot on a minor technicality.
Three Democrat-aligned justices denied the Green Party ballot access in Wisconsin in a September 2020 court ruling over signature challenges.
The Arizona Green party lost official recognition and ballot access in December 2019 due to its weak performance in the 2018 gubernatorial race. The state’s Republican-controlled legislature also reduced the amount of time that third parties had to collect signatures for nominating petitions. The Greens were ultimately unable to meet the signature requirement to stay on the ballot.
The Libertarian Party made the ballot in all 50 states, but the Green Party was not as fortunate as they were only on the ballot in 29 states and the District of Columbia.
Once off the ballot and relegated to a write-in candidate, those votes can be pilfered just as easily as it is to steal money from a change jar.
-- Ray Blehar, April 23, 2021, 10:51 AM EDT
No comments:
Post a Comment