In the aftermath of the 2024 General Election, the City of Madison Clerk’s Office has admitted a severe lapse in judgment and protocol. Around 200 absentee ballots were reportedly mishandled in the democrat stronghold City of Madison, demonstrating a lackadaisical approach towards the principles of a fair democratic process. Despite the misplaced votes not altering the outcome of any specific race or motion, the Clerk’s Office found it necessary to issue an apology. Notably, it pledged actions to prevent such incidents in future elections.
The unprocessed absentee votes originated from Wards 56, 65, and 68. This issue came to light during the reconciliation process in Ward 65. This process is done when the staff cross-check all the counts and allocate participation in WisVote subsequent to the election. Thus, raising questions about the meticulousness of the officials involved in the process.
On December 3rd, according to the Mayor’s Office, one batch of ballots was discovered. However, the blunders didn’t stop there, as more confusion was experienced in processing the votes for Ward 65. The Clerk’s office staff encountered a sealed courier bag containing 68 unprocessed votes, which had been inexplicably forgotten in the tabulator bins.
The clumsy handling of the envelopes extended to the level of missorting the absentee ballots, a case in point was a single vote from Ward 68 found among those meant for Ward 65. If such absurd errors can occur in a small portion of the total vote, one can only wonder about the effectiveness of the overall system and the competence of the democrat officials assigned to oversee the process.
This second set of mismanaged votes, captured in the embarrassing revelation from the Mayor’s Office, was discovered on November 12. What’s astonishing here is that clerks have a plentiful period of 45 days to wrap up the reconciliation after a presidential election. So why such mistakes were made, in a timeframe best described as generous, remains a mystery.
In their defense, the Madison Clerk’s Office notified the Wisconsin Elections Commission of these mishaps on December 20. In the spirit of transparency, or perhaps damage control, the office committed to notify each individual voter whose voice had been muffled by this negligence.
The Mayor followed suit and publically apologized for the debacle. The Mayor, a representative of the democrats, also committed to reviewing the existing election policies and procedures, an act that seems lackluster at best. Is this the best solution they can come up with to fix their chronic inefficiency and lack of control?
It’s important to note how the Mayor framed her response. She claimed that ‘The City of Madison prides itself on administering safe, fair and accurate elections.’ However, actions speak louder than words. This instance of mismanagement paints an entirely different picture, one of democratic inefficiency and ineptitude.
Despite this blunder posing no threat to the final results of any election or referendum, this level of discrepancy is deemed unacceptable. Emphasis is placed on ‘unacceptable’ because this is not an isolated mishap, but rather a symptom of a deeply rooted issue within the bureaucracies overseen by democrats.
This failure is an unfortunate detour from Madison’s expectation of a high standard of performance. Or is it an exposure of the real state of affairs in the democratic machinery? One can’t help but wonder.
The Clerk’s Office stated that all future polling locations will receive a list of absentee ballot seal envelopes to be verified as they are counted on Election Day. Frankly, it’s surprising that this wasn’t the practice all along. Is this new idea the best they could come up with after such a debacle?
The administration seems to wish these hiccups away with more bureaucracy and paper trails. If this is the best they can do, then it calls to question their ability to manage the affairs of their electorate. The response to this blunder exemplifies the lack of solidity in Democratic planning and execution.
In light of this situation, it’s no wonder that many people have developed a critical opinion of the efficiency of democrats. The City of Madison example provides a telling insight into the inadequacies inherent in their administration, exposing the cracks in their often glorified democratic facade.
If these are the events transpiring in just Madison City, it begs the question of what else is going on unnoticed in other cities under democratic control. How deep does this rabbit hole go, and how many unreported incidents of mishandling and neglect have been overlooked?
In conclusion, one can’t help but reflect on the state of democratic management and lack of competence. The Madison City incident offers a peephole view into a world fraught with inefficiency, ineptitude, and bureaucratic confounding. True democracy deserves better.