Local Government TV

▼

Thursday, August 13, 2020

Enid Santiago Now Wants Election She Lost Decertified

State House candidate Enid Santiago lost her bid to unseat incumbent Pete Schweyer in the June 2 primary by a mere 55 votes. On election day, she was quite upset when she discovered an election judge who was darkening ballots so they could be read by a scanner. In another precinct, the election judge got off to a late start because of unfamiliarity with the equipment. At yet a third polling place, pollworkers mistakenly used the wrong provisional ballot. She ranted on Facebook and held press conferences, but failed to complain where it mattered most - she never requested a recount or recanvass. Results were officially certified on June 22. The Elections Board did agree, on July 29, to refer her complaints about an election judge to the District Attorney and Attorney General. Though the election is final, she's now claiming the results must be decertified.

Good luck with that.

This "formal request" comes from JustLaws (no office address) Steve Masters. He contends that the number of voters reported in Lehigh County's canvass (4339) is less than the number of voters reported by the Department of State (4440). He goes on to note that, in two precincts, there were actually 29 more voters than the state reported. Because of this discrepancy, he immediately claims there is fraud and demands the results be decertified.

His argument has several flaws.

The biggest of these is that he has no direct evidence of fraud. None

In addition, he is relying on Vote Builder, a Democratic tool, and not the Department of State.

Third, he asserts that the Elections Board has already found fraud. That's untrue. It has instead referred the matter to prosecutors, and it is up to them to make that determination, and only with respect to one election judge.

Fourth, he cites a 29 vote difference. In one precinct with two extras voters, they are likely voters who cast no vote in that specific race. This is common and is called an undervote. In the precinct with a 27 vote differential, those are Republicans.

Stevens' four-page demand is frivolous. His letter copies his client but there's no indication he bothered to notify Schweyer, the candidate who actually won. Talk about fairness.

Updated 8:10 am: Blogger Chris Casey has also weighed in with more detail. .
at

5 comments:

  1. AnonymousAugust 13, 2020 at 8:59 AM

    no Bernie there are 147 votes in the 3rd district cast by 120 voters, i.e. there are more votes than people who voted.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousAugust 13, 2020 at 9:09 AM

    did you actually read the complaint. It's not that people didn't vote in her race. It's that more people voted in the 22nd district Democratic primary in the 1st and 3rd ward than were recorded as, having voted in the Democratic primary in either district

    ReplyDelete
  3. Chris CaseyAugust 13, 2020 at 9:46 AM

    Neither one of the two people who commented so far have taken the opportunity to read my posting on the results that the State certified. Santiago is basing her claims on incorrect data from a dubious source.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousAugust 13, 2020 at 10:14 AM

    So a democrat candidate is complaining about election fraud in the democrat primary?

    What's laughable is that she probably believed that the election fraud and dirty tricks that her party has been using for years against republican candidates in the city would never be used against HER in a primary.

    Too bad she'll never realize that irony.

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousAugust 14, 2020 at 6:30 AM

    Can't this lady just run a write-in campaign and moved on. As long as her voters can spell her name correctly, she may actually win this if voters felt she was not treated fairly.

    I do not live in her district, but she has gotten to be very annoying now (I would not vote for her for that reason).

    If she goes the write-in route, maybe she can still get the state rep position with the latino base in that district. Just wanted to throw that out there for her and her supporters.

    ReplyDelete

You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.