Researcher Hans von Spakovsky reported this week on the wide-open risk of error and fraud resulting from the Democrat Party plan to rig the 2020 election by carpet-bombing their states with bulk-mail ballots. He notes, “Election integrity is something the public takes seriously, and prosecutors and election officials should, too. Unfortunately, too many in the media, in academia, and in the political halls of Washington and state capitols aren’t serious about clean and fair elections.”

The Left never lets a “good crisis go to waste,” and is, thus, using the CV19 pandemic to “augment” legal absentee balloting procedures already in place nationwide by bulk-mailing ballots to every registered voter. In other words, leftists are augmenting the election results for their candidates.

Recall that The New York Times strongly criticized the increasing trend of using legal absentee balloting, noting the rising “error and fraud.” As you know, absentee balloting allows individuals who are registered to vote to request a ballot be sent to their legal address. On the other hand, voter rolls in general are notoriously outdated, and there is little or no assurance that ballots being bulk-mailed to registered voters will actually be received and returned by the intended recipients.

According to the Times: “The trend will probably result in more uncounted votes, and it increases the potential for fraud. [Fraud] is vastly more prevalent than the in-person voting fraud that has attracted far more attention, election administrators say. … The flaws of absentee voting raise questions about the most elementary promises of democracy. ‘The right to have one’s vote counted is as important as the act of voting itself,’ Justice Paul H. Anderson of the Minnesota Supreme Court wrote while considering disputed absentee ballots. … Voting by mail is now common enough and problematic enough that election experts say there have been multiple elections in which no one can say with confidence which candidate was the deserved winner. … Almost nothing has been done about the distinctive challenges posed by absentee ballots.”

Making the case that “fraud is easier via mail,” the Times concludes: “Election law experts say that pulling off in-person voter fraud on a scale large enough to swing an election, with scores if not hundreds of people committing a felony in public by pretending to be someone else, is hard to imagine, to say nothing of exceptionally risky. There are much simpler and more effective alternatives to commit fraud on such a scale, said Heather Gerken, a law professor at Yale. ‘You could steal some absentee ballots or stuff a ballot box or bribe an election administrator or fiddle with an electronic voting machine,’ she said. That explains, she said, ‘why all the evidence of stolen elections involves absentee ballots and the like.’”

By the way, that article appeared just ahead of Barack Obama’s reelection in 2012. But now that it seems bulk-mailing ballots is the best assurance of a Biden-Harris win, the Times has changed its tune. Last month the paper ran this headline: “Trump Is Pushing a False Argument on Vote-by-Mail Fraud.”

Make no mistake, the opportunity for fraud is exponentially higher with bulk-mail ballots than it is with legal absentee balloting.