Fakes and Falsifications to Expect at the US Presidential Election

Read Time:11 Minute, 4 Second

The presidential election in the United States is scheduled for November 5, and we will provide our forecast on how this epic battle will conclude. We will focus on sociology and the mechanisms that may “adjust” the results, discussing possible falsifications.

The Political Landscape of the “Swing States”

In the US, out of its 50 states, 43 are considered “non-swing states.” That is to say they are definitely “Republican” or “Democratic.” The main forces of the candidates will be concentrated on competing for so-called “swing states,” which number seven: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina, and Georgia. In each such state, pre-election battles will have their unique features that will determine the methods employed by either side. In “decided” states, the current ratio of electoral votes is 226 to 219 in favor of Harris, and the outcome of voting on November 5 will be determined by 93 electoral votes from the “swing regions” of the United States:

Pennsylvania, 19 electoral votes. Here, there is an average advantage of 0.8% in favor of Harris. Considering the administrative resources of Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro and the possibility of transferring additional voters from neighboring liberal states (New York, New Jersey, and Maryland), which we will discuss below, a victory for Harris appears more likely. And we are convinced of this, although Republican political strategists are confident that they have an advantage compared to the 2020 elections.
Michigan, 15 electoral votes. 1.8% in favor of Harris on average. Considering the administrative resources of Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer, a victory for Harris appears more likely.
Wisconsin, 10 electoral votes. 1.5% in favor of Harris on average. Considering the administrative resources of Democratic Governor Tony Evers, a victory for Harris appears more likely.

Nevada, 6 electoral votes. 0.4% in favor of Trump, but the state is unstable. Over the past month, at different times, both Trump and Harris have been leading with a margin of no more than 1%. Considering that the Republican Governor of the State Joe Lombardo has high chances of maintaining his winning result if he receives an advantage.
Arizona, 11 electoral votes. 1.8% in favor of Trump on average. However, considering the administrative resources of Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs and the possibility of transferring additional voters from neighboring liberal states (California and New Mexico), the situation can easily turn in favor of Harris.
North Carolina, 16 electoral votes. 2.4% in favor of Trump on average. However, a sharp rise in his popularity occurred last week due to the Democratic Party’s failure in Washington and at the state level to deal with the consequences of a devastating hurricane that left residents without electricity and drinking water for an extended period. In this case, the state is considered traditionally democratic, and earlier, Trump’s and Harris’ ratings fluctuated between 0.5% and 2.4%. If the negative effects of the hurricane on the Democratic Party’s rating are neutralized, Roy Cooper can use his administrative resources and transfer voters from liberal Virginia to turn the electoral balance in his favor.
Georgia, 16 electoral votes. 2.4% in favor of Trump on average, but the state is unstable, and over the past month, the minimum advantage of Trump reached no more than 0.3%. However, Trump’s position here can be considered stronger because Republican Governor Brian Kemp will act to maintain a Republican candidate’s advantage.

If we consider such a public picture as reliable and it persists until the elections, then Kamala Harris will receive 44 electoral votes from the “swing states” against 49 for Trump, which will give her a total of 270 electoral votes against 268 for her opponent. However, in all these states, the gap between Harris and Trump ranges from 0.8% to 2.4%, within the statistical margin of error. In 2016 and 2020, polls significantly underestimated Trump, especially at the level of individual states.

How Democrats Can Organize Falsifications

Considering the current gap between the two candidates, if we see an error in pollsters’ assessments similar to 2020, Trump may win all 7 swing states. However, a possible opposite situation can also occur. A more realistic scenario is that using the administrative resources of Democratic governors and falsifications, Harris will attempt to maintain her advantage in Pennsylvania and try to regain positions in Arizona and North Carolina, which would guarantee her victory. It will be challenging for Trump’s team to effectively counteract these falsifications.

The falsifications of Harris’ team may have the following character:

Active registration of purchased voters and other clientele who will vote en masse under orders from above. In 2020, Democrats were able to register 700 thousand more voters in the run-up to the elections than Republicans. Currently, they have a gap of only 300 thousand because Republicans have also activated registration, but this is still a significant advantage. For example, in 2020, Biden outpaced Trump by 80 thousand votes in Pennsylvania, and 3-5 thousand votes can decide the issue in this “swing” state in November.
Preventing observers from working at polling stations to make it difficult for them to detect falsifications. As an example, Democrats in Michigan are accused of not wanting to provide equal access to observers on precincts. In Detroit, 2,300 Democratic observers and only 330 Republicans were recruited. Despite lawsuits, the state leadership may regulate the formation of electoral commissions, and similar disparities can be seen in Republican states like Florida or Texas.
Mail-in voting. In the first scenario, managed groups of voters (clientele) are consolidated during this type of voting, who will mass-sending ballots by mail for the desired candidate. Among the voters may be unregistered voters, illegal aliens, and migrants. Also, dead people deliberately not excluded from lists, for whom votes are cast by proxies. In the second scenario, voting is free, but on polling stations envelopes are replaced with new ballots with a mark for Harris. At the same time, Republican observers will be removed from precincts, and the place will be closed to prevent or indicate a violation in the corresponding protocol. Both variants of actions block observers’ ability to influence the situation and can be used jointly. In Republican states over the past few years, electoral norms have been tightened, including those related to mail voting. Each district will investigate any cases of falsifications before certifying election results. However, Democrats have filed lawsuits in advance to freeze and limit the application of these norms. In Democratic states such as Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Arizona, there are no similar restrictions, and mail-in voting remains popular. Moreover, during the COVID-19 pandemic, this type of voting has been actively promoted despite constitutional limitations within states themselves. In 2020, the share of voters who voted by mail was colossal, reaching 43%, which allowed Biden to win. Currently, in order not to attract negative information attention, it may decrease to 20-25%. However, this is still a very significant number, considering that in Pennsylvania or Arizona, results can be overturned with such voting participation at 4-5%.

*Photo by Tiffany Tertipes / Unsplash.com*

Manipulation with Voter Lists and Ballots For the “undocumented voters” (non-US citizens, dead people, migrants, etc.) to participate in both mail-in and “live” voting, Democratic state authorities will correct voter lists in advance. For example, in 2021-2024, Texas and Florida “cleaned up” their voter lists, removing almost a million people, most of whom were migrants (non-citizens) or dead people. Notably, the share of Democrats among Florida voters immediately fell by 10%, while the share of Republicans decreased only by 3%. However, in Democratic states, such measures are not taken. Additionally, Democrats buy ballots in loyal states for voting in “swing” states to ensure fictitious mail-in voting and “carousels” organized with the participation of clientele brought from neighboring states. Despite Republican attempts at reform over the past few years, voter registration and ballot counting in the US remain excessively “free.”
Influx of Voters from Neighboring States Democrats will bring a “desant” of travelers from neighboring states to participate in falsifications in “swing” states. In addition to working on “factories” for mail-in voting, they will directly participate as “carousel” operators at polling stations, voting for themselves as fictitious residents and other uncounted voters (dead people and non-citizens). Additionally, they may conduct direct stuffing. The US voter registration system remains chaotic, creating various loopholes for such activities. As mentioned earlier, Pennsylvanians will have “desants” from New York, New Jersey, and Maryland, North Carolinians from Virginia, Arizonans from California or New Mexico. Similarly, Nevadans will also be sent from California, and Georgians from New York, but these are not the main promising routes. After 2020, surveys showed that 17% of Americans voted in a state where they did not live, 21% voters filled out ballots for others, and 8% Americans encountered offers to pay for a “correctly” filled-out ballot. Similar figures, which are clearly underestimated, will remain in 2024.

*Photo by Arnaud Jaegers / Unsplash.com*

Falsifications when Voting by American Citizens Abroad Many Americans vote abroad by mail or “in person” at the embassy. Among them are many residents of “swing” states like Pennsylvania, Arizona, North Carolina, and others. Currently, this is a new and promising direction for Democrats, as since 2021 they have created a loyal embassy state through personnel rotation. There are reports that Harris invests millions of dollars in organizing “proper” voting abroad. Many state laws have loopholes allowing voters to vote abroad with little control and verification. The State Department estimates the number of American expats with voting rights at 2.8 million people, but Democrats exaggerate this figure to 9 million, creating a reserve of “undocumented voters” that can be operated on.

Against this backdrop, additional ballot packages are delivered to embassies. Moreover, individual states, including “swing” ones, allow living abroad Americans to vote by fax, sometimes even through electronic or online portals. In addition, they often allow voting at the voter’s parental address in cases where the voter never lived in the state or even in the United States. Checking a citizen’s citizenship or right to vote in a particular state is still more complicated than in cases of citizens from one (Democratic) state voting in another (“swing”). Besides the ease of falsification in controlled Democratic embassies, their strong point lies in submitting data to state electoral commissions last. This allows them to quickly correct it. For example, if in Pennsylvania there are reports that Democrats lack votes, the embassy can create a protocol for voting so as to “add” them by inserting additional Americans who have voted or fictitively in the state.

How Republicans Will Counter Falsifications

Trump’s team is currently studying the areas of falsification that were mostly applied in 2020. However, their toolkit is limited. In states where the election process is managed by a Democratic administration, they rely on a set of numerous observers and lawyers at obviously problematic polling stations. Among them are sites in cities like Philadelphia (Pennsylvania) and Detroit (Michigan), where the largest falsification activity is expected.

In addition, Trump’s supporters have joined electoral commissions in several “swing” states. They were given the task to refuse to certify election results in case of falsifications. However, this is a propagandistic tool, not a legal one, and it will be difficult to block the results in practice. Even if it succeeds on individual sites, the final state-wide totals are within the authority of local authorities, and in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Arizona, these authorities are loyal to Harris. Democrats will falsify “modestly” as much as they need for their victory to minimize public resonance.

*Photo by Natilyn Photography / Unsplash.com*

Republicans have developed a reform that provides for the necessity of showing documents when voting, prohibition on non-citizens voting, limiting scandalous mail-in voting practices, and an annual data verification to remove dead people who continue to vote. However, current electoral rules vary greatly from state to state. In Republican Florida or Texas, they try to stimulate voting transparency, but in Pennsylvania or Michigan, it’s still possible to vote without documents or by mail, and these states decide the US President. De facto, when Democratic governors took over those regions, Harris already had a pre-existing advantage there.

Given the impossibility of a “forceful” judicial block on falsifications there, Trump can only rely on Democrats not being willing to commit grossly illegitimate falsifications. For instance, if the gap in favor of Trump would be within each state from 0.1% to 3%, then falsifications would be harmonious; if from 3% to 5%, they will be problematic but executable; and if more than 5%, Democrats will have to admit their defeat.

However, currently, sociology shows that Harris’ situation is quite comfortable, while Trump’s is equivalent to a loss. What’s important is how these blatant falsifications affect the American society. Currently, 62% of Americans are concerned about the prospect of election falsification, and immediately 28% admit they consider cheating on elections for their candidate’s victory. Therefore, the US electoral system continues to degrade, and America awaits further division and threats of major unrest after the next scandalous elections.