That’s what I meant. The “Here We Go Again” part.
As was the case in Michigan in 2020, the state’s secretary of state said on Sunday’s episode of CBS’ “Face the Nation” that she does not expect the 2024 election results to be certified in the Wolverine State until Nov. 6, the day after the election . Why not, you ask? “High voter turnout.” Yes.
As New York Yankee Hall-of-Famer Yogi Berra would say, “It’s like déjà vu all over again.”
Michigan SOS Jocelyn Benson explained:
In 2020, we had the results of our highest voter turnout election in Michigan history within 24 hours of the polls closing. The unofficial results were announced on Wednesday at 8 p.m., so we’ll be following them again this year.
I don’t mean to be nitpicking, but it seems reasonable to me that a key swing state like Michigan would have found a reliable way to speed up its vote-counting process four years after the 2020 election fiasco – valid or not – especially in featherlight of that more voters cast their votes before election day.
While Benson also said she was confident that this year’s results could be confirmed sooner than in 2020, she stressed: “Nevertheless, we always will.” Prioritize accuracy and safety over efficiency.”
The Michigan SOS said without hesitation that it would certify the results of the presidential election regardless of who wins. While current survey suggests the key state couldn’t be closer, Monday’s RCP average shows Trump with one slight lead in all seven swing states.
As I’ve written before, I’m not into predictions, but I believe the former president has an excellent chance of winning the Electoral College vote if the race remains as close through November 5 as he did in 2016, though Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by around 3 million votes.
Since there are always accusations and counter-accusations from both sides warning that the other side will try to interfere in the election results, here are two perfect examples.
As RedState reported last Tuesday, Stuart Stevens of the infamous Lincoln Project and former campaign strategist for Mitt Romney’s failed 2012 presidential campaign suggested that Trump Republicans might “burn down” voting centers to disenfranchise black voters. No, really.
And I think what’s really the fear here is: Get into the mindset that the Trump campaign really doesn’t believe they can win, either in the popular vote or in the Electoral College. Check out this campaign. It makes no sense. “He’s not trying to win voters,” Stevens said.
[…]
And if they can break into and violently destroy these counting centers, how will states be able to certify elections? They burn down a county center in Arizona. How does the governor certify these elections?
TDS on steroids.
READ MORE:
Former Romney strategist warns Republicans against burning down voting centers to prevent black votes
On the other hand, how reported From Military Times In early October, Trump posted on Truth Social that the Uniformed and Foreign Nationals Absentee Voting ActA law designed to ensure military members and Americans abroad can vote by mail is being used by Democrats to “cheat.”
In fact, they are preparing to CHEAT! To receive ballots, you will operate UOCAVA, a program that emails ballots abroad without any citizenship or identity verification. [They] I want to dilute the TRUE voice of our wonderful military men and women and their families.
Experts familiar with the process told Military Times that fraud would be very complex, if not impossible, given the nature of the system.
The conclusion
Regardless of the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, in just 15 days as I write this, one side or the other will likely be rattled after the final results are announced.
I say this only as a messenger, but given the reaction to the 2020 election and its aftermath, which culminated with the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, this breakthrough will not surprise me either.
Editor’s note: This article was updated after publication to clarify that Benson is Michigan’s secretary of state, not attorney general. We apologize to our readers for the oversight.
