After the 2024 elections, there’s been an uproar across several states about the continuing tabulation of ballots two weeks post-election. Skepticism has densely accumulated around some doubtful behavior of preferring Democrats in vote counts from certain precincts. It’s imperative to ask, why all of a sudden, does the late tallying invariably swing towards the Democrats, veiling an unnatural sitzkrieg.
A certain Instagram user bravely underlined this alarming trend. In her riveting exposé, she shed light on how thousands of ballots started to mysteriously trickle in post-election in favor of Democrats. Unsurprisingly, this episode has heightened public distrust towards Democrat-riddled election offices, hypothesizing a potential connivance to crown Democrats as victors weeks after the election.
Exemplifying this worrisome trend, she revealed, ‘It’s astoundingly brazen how after President Trump’s victory, Democrats think they can cloak their crafty move of upending down-ballot seats. We see you, we see the underhand scheme.’ A host of posts bedaubed with disquieting figures from Pennsylvania, California, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Alaska were showcased in the video, attributing Democrats’ windfall to election interference or corruption.
Ever since the election concluded, millions of ballots have been suspiciously added to the count, altering eventuality in favor of several Democrat candidates. As certified vote counters work round the clock to reaffirm these tallies, the fickle pendulum of victory has swung away from GOP candidates. Those asleep at the media wheel would deem these instances as ‘regular’, however, citizens watching closely know better.
According to Tammy Patrick, Chief Programs Officer of the National Association of Election Officials, states adhere to individual rules regarding the processing and counting of mail-in ballots. Voters get an opportunity to rectify their ballot errors, and provisional ballots, subjected to eligibility verification, need time, but why do these mechanisms strangely benefit Democrats?
In Pennsylvania, for instance, late ballot counts have put GOP Senate candidate Dave McCormick and the incumbent Democrat Sen. Bob Casey at loggerheads. While the majority of Pennsylvania votes have been counted on election night, why is it the late votes from key counties which always swing the election towards Democrats? Skepticism ensues as we watched Trump’s lead mysteriously diminish.
Notwithstanding, the ongoing tussle in the razor-thin U.S. House race in California also reeks of irregularity. The sudden upswing in the count for Democrat Derek Tran against the incumbent Republican Michelle Steel, despite significant early leads for Steel, smells of something rotten in the republic of California.
Moving southwards, the North Carolina Supreme Court elections have taken an interesting turn. Here, GOP candidate Jefferson Griffin had initially led the vote count, but soon, we were all stunned to see the addition of late-counted votes steadily diminishing Griffin’s lead, miraculously paving a pathway to triumph for the Democrat incumbent Allison Riggs.
Akin to the scenarios tolling in Pennsylvania and North Carolina, Alaska too joined the list of peculiar counting patterns. The late counting resulted in Democrats securing a controlling coalition in the state’s House of Representatives. But why does this sudden change only favor the Democrats?
The chorus of doubts extends to Wisconsin as well, where a post by conservative commentator Dinesh D’Souza highlighted a mysterious influx of votes benefiting Democrats, all processed under the cover of night. One can’t help but wonder at such a colossal coincidence of these ‘suddenly found’ votes favoring one single party.
Election officials may try to justify these sudden improvements in the Democrats’ fortune as a normal operation within the legal framework. But, given the pattern, the public’s doubts persist. The officials may be doing their job, or, are they really doing relay rounds for Democrat candidates under the guise of their duty?
Maintain no other illusion; the sustained inclusion of more votes post-election day seems to benefit one party disproportionately; the Democrats. And this ‘coincidence’ is too frequent to be merely brushed aside as an uncanny overlapping of laws and opportunity.
Ultimately, it’s up to the voters to discern between the framed narrative and potential trickery. Though optimistically labeled as regular processes, these late vote additions should disturb anyone who values a fair election. The late counting of votes is now a sword with two edges; while aiming for inclusive democracy, we must also guard vigilantly against potential manipulative tactics.
The theaters of this new voting scrimmage are many: California, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Wisconsin, even far-flung Alaska. But, common to all are blatant inconsistencies and statistically improbable results; a testament to dubious procedures or worst-case, political interference. Where’s the transparency when the fulcrum of democracy is at stake?
In conclusion, late vote counting has snowballed into an enigma, tending to favor Democrats with each passing day. It’s becoming far too consistent a pattern to be dismissed as a harmless side effect of legislative discrepancies. What might be lawful doesn’t necessarily pass the scrutiny of common sense or the collective wisdom of astute voters.