As the 2024 election approaches, America’s faith in the electoral process hangs in the balance. Concerns over prolonged vote counting reminiscent of 2020 have reemerged, with media outlets seemingly bracing the public for another drawn-out election week, revealing deeply rooted fears regarding election integrity. This situation centers around the notion that Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign struggles and the subsequent preparation for extended ballot counting may lead to public distrust in the electoral outcome.
Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, a prominent conservative watchdog organization, has highlighted how recent narratives in outlets like the Washington Post and CBS News seem to pave the way for delayed election results. This prospect, Fitton argues, undermines traditional voting norms and invites questions about the integrity of the electoral system. He emphasizes that the expectation of not knowing the election outcome for days is not only abnormal but also detrimental to voter confidence, echoing concerns dating back to the 2020 elections.
The irregularities seen in 2020, where states altered election procedures under the guise of COVID-19, have not been merely transient anomalies. Instead, they have taken root, enabling states to extend vote counting beyond Election Day. As these practices resurface, they echo a pattern that many conservatives believe creates fertile ground for electoral fraud and manipulation. Fitton recalls the shift in election outcomes in 2020, as what seemed a certain victory for then-President Donald Trump on election night morphed into defeat in the days that followed, embroiling the process in controversy and doubt.
The Judicial Watch leader continues to stress the perils of such electoral uncertainty, underlining a broader struggle to uphold transparency and accountability. His efforts to return to a more straightforward Election Day process mirror a collective yearning within conservative circles for electoral reforms that prioritize efficiency and trust. Nevertheless, the status quo persists, with ballot counting delays again on the horizon, fueling apprehension about the fairness of the upcoming elections.
Fitton’s advocacy for electoral integrity has not been without challenges. His discussions on platforms like YouTube, where he addressed issues surrounding unsolicited ballot distributions, have faced censorship, raising critical questions about free speech. His warnings about electoral malpractice were removed, pointing to a growing concern about the suppression of discourse surrounding election integrity.
These reflections on the state of American elections paint a somber picture. The readiness to accept prolonged ballot counts and procedural deviations as normal is troubling, and it deeply resonates with constituencies wary of potential electoral fraud. In seeking to understand how America reached this point, it is imperative to confront these recurring themes and question the mechanisms manipulating electoral processes. As Fitton aptly notes, efforts to muzzle inquiry into these issues only amplify concerns, underscoring the need for transparency and reform to restore electoral confidence and ensure that citizens’ voices are genuinely reflected at the ballot box.
