In the aftermath of Election Day on April 18, 2024, officials from Allegheny County were still meticulously sifting through all the mail-in and absentee ballots, demonstrating a committed effort to ensure every voice was heard, contrary to allegations of irregularities. It’s essential to note that the counting of ballots post-election is not indicative of electoral theft but is rather a manifestation of diverse state laws on the timing and method for counting ballots. What may seem like ‘late changes’ to vote totals are instead proof of a system in progress, with local and state election authorities diligently upholding the law rather than undermining it.
The ongoing count of votes, which extended to two weeks post-election, stirred groundless conspiracy theories and accusations of interference on social media platforms such as Instagram. Here, some users pointed to states and districts where the delayed counting of votes allegedly favored Democrats, asserting without proof that this was due to illicit manipulation by election officials. One user boldly claimed, accusing some authorities of ‘massive ballot dumps’ taking place even 11 days after the election.
In an attempt to discredit the 2024 election results, one user boldly viewed the win of President Donald Trump and the subsequent conversions of down-ballot seats as indicative of fraud. Ringing false alarm bells, the focus was primarily on California, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Alaska. Certain posts insinuated corruption or interference as reasons behind the shifting vote totals. It’s worth noting however, that this is not the norm, rather a narrow and misleading perception epidemic in today’s highly politicized climate.
It is completely expected and entirely normal for millions of ballots to be counted in the aftermath of an election day as officials strive to verify the vote totals. However, such normalcy is often manipulated by critics as a mark of foul play. Should the results of close races change due to this counting, it is not a cause for alarm but merely an indication of a functional democratic process. As pointed out by Tammy Patrick, from the National Association of Election Officials, states all have different rules about when they can start processing and counting mail-in ballots, and when such ballots can be accepted.
The opportunity for voters to rectify errors on their ballots and the necessity to verify provisional ballots extended beyond Election Day are not unusual developments. These are a part of standard procedures followed by all states. Some states even prohibit election officials from beginning to count mail-in ballots until Election Day. The accusations of fraud disregard the simple fact that both parties’ poll watchers and neutral entities generally oversee the counting and certification of all ballots, making it quite the transparent process.
In Pennsylvania, the original video mistakenly portrayed late additions of ballots in some counties as suspicious and fraudulent. It singled out a tussle between Senate candidates Republican Dave McCormick and Democrat incumbent Sen. Bob Casey over the eligibility conditions for different ballots, but this is a normal part of any intense electoral battle. Pennsylvania processed most votes on the night of the election, handling thousands of absentee ballots and an estimated 60,000 provisional ballots after election day.
In Bucks County, the video insinuates foul play as President-elect Donald Trump’s lead dwindled due to ongoing ballot counting. Yet it conveniently ignores the fact that late additions of votes or changes in lead aren’t inherently fraudulent and certainly don’t indicate a stolen election. Similarly, the video misleadingly hints at corruption in Montgomery County as McCormick’s lead over Casey diminishes following the addition of about 5000 ballots to the count.
The narrative then proceeds to bash California with an unfounded claim that there is no conceivable way Derek Tran, a Democrat, could have edged out in the 45th Congressional District race. The assertion that California is corrupt for its late counting of ballots overlooks the state’s notoriously slow-but-steady voting process. The turnaround in this razor-thin race, where Tran led by a slim margin of 397 votes over incumbent Republican Michelle Steel, is not an anomaly but a result of legal and established proceedings.
The accusatory video does not spare North Carolina either. Here, Republican Supreme Court candidate Jefferson Griffin requested a recount after his initial lead shrunk resulting in Democratic incumbent Allison Riggs taking the lead. Yet, the assertion that this is indicative of election theft is far from the truth. The changed results were due to the rightful counting of absentee ballots that arrived on Election Day, military and overseas absentee ballots received by Nov 14, all of which are legally admissible.
An additional layer to the North Carolina counting process involved special provisions for Hurricane Helene-affected areas where voters could submit their absentee ballots to any county board of elections office, with such votes also likely to be counted after Election Day. While Griffin did challenge more than 60,000 ballots, such proceedings are not unusual in tight races, nor do they indicate irregularities.
A similar story unfolded in Wisconsin, where an overzealous commentator wrongfully claimed that an unexpected 3 a.m. influx of votes cost Republicans the Senate race. Despite these fallacious cries of fraud, the early morning arrival of absentee ballots was instead a display of diligent clerical work, rather than a conspiracy. The addition merely signified the reporting of ballots hailing from Milwaukee and were certainly within the expected range.
The video also indulges in an analysis of Alaska’s House of Representatives, depicting a tardy Democrat victory as an outcome of dubious late ballot counts. This overlooks Alaska’s unique geographical challenges and ranked-choice voting system, which understandably cause a lag in vote counting. A change in party control being known a week after the election in Alaska is an expected occurrence, not a sign of interference.
Overall, allegations of fraudulent ‘ballot dumps’ and unfounded claims regarding election officials swaying results favoring Democrats utterly neglect the inherent complexities and variations of the electoral process across states. Regardless of the narrative spun by such misinformed posts on social media, the painstaking counting process post-Election Day is a reassuring sign of democracy at work.