Philadelphia Elections Official Destroys Conservative Conspiracy Theory that National Elections Are "Rigged"
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
In recent weeks, Donald Trump has begun telling supporters that the 2016 election might be “rigged” against him—a conspiracy some observers view as a preemptive, ready-to-go excuse for a potential loss to Hillary Clinton, or an ominous signal that the Republican nominee is preparing to contest November’s results.
Some conservatives, including Fox News host Sean Hannity, have fanned the flames. CNN’s Brian Stelter featured a recent clip of Hannity serving as a mouthpiece for Trump’s claim:
Trump: “Election is going to be rigged.”
Hannity: “Alright, thanks for being with us.”
No followup questions?! https://t.co/d2sm2PY7F3— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter)
On Sunday, Ryan Godfrey, a Philadelphia elections inspector, took the theory to task, calling out Hannity’s suggestion that the 2012 elections were also illegitimate. Godfrey, who Mother Jones confirmed was elected to be an inspector in 2013, explained on Twitter:
1. I’m an inspector of elections for a Philly voting division. Independent but was a Republican as recently as June. https://t.co/pd82mOkEKh
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
2. People like me sign off on election results in every division in Philly. We take job seriously: certifying the accurate will of people.
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
3. Claim that 59 divisions in Philadelphia engaged in electoral fraud in 2012 because no votes for Romney is absurd & personally insulting.
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
4. First, there’s absolutely no way to erase votes from the machines we use in this city.
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
5. I’ve had to tell this to several parents who took kids into booth w/ them & said kids pressed VOTE button too early. Sorry, no do-overs.
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
6. Next, we get a paper tally at the end of the night that we match against physical count of voters who used machines (like an odometer).
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
7. We match that against the count of the individual names of voters who have signed our rolls (and whose names we also recorded in books).
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
8.It’s this paper tally we certify, display publicly & send downtown (along w/ data cartridge w/ same info) to be added to overall results.
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
9. So, where is the opportunity for fraud, if I and my four or five colleagues of different parties are doing our jobs and not colluding?
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
10. (And if we were colluding, we would be colluding to add votes—again, votes can’t be subtracted.)
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
11. Incidentally, poll workers have colluded to get machine count to match voter count, but it’s rare & prosecuted. https://t.co/7fbUzLnTQO
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
12. So, # of votes corresponds with # of voters, & can’t be tampered with after fact, but what about having machines change R votes to D?
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
13. It’s a liability of Philadelphia’s touch-screen voting machines that I can’t say for certain that votes can’t be switched in software.
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
14. It’s theoretically possible the Democrats that for all intents control Philly politics have surreptitiously installed
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
15. sophisticated firmware on some? all? voting machines to change some votes from R to D or whatever.
BUT.BUT:
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
16. Why would they ever change *ALL* R votes to D votes, when anybody who voted R could easily refute the results just by saying they had?
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
17. It would be idiotic to do so! And indeed in 59 divisions with no recorded votes for Romney,
— Ryan Godfrey (@rgodfrey)
See the original post –
