Fox News printed a story today that said (essentially) that Al Franken won by over 300 votes, and that over 300 felons voted illegally.
The story implies that all 300+ felons voted for Al Franken, and that’s the only reason he won – but it never actually states that they all voted for him, it just says that over 300 felons voted illegally. But the assumption is that because he won by near the same number that they all must have voted for him.
Did they though? It is my understanding, and I could be wrong, that it is illegal for non-officials to see who voted for what candidates in any US election.
From The People’s Tribune in MO: “Here it is in print, no one can find out how you (or anyone else) voted in any election unless you tell them. If someone is telling you that they know how you voted, it is not true. They may be trying to intimidate you into not voting or trying to get you to tell them how you voted. Frankly, it is no one’s business how you vote.
Secret ballots are a sacred promise belonging to the American citizens. Many Americans have fought and died for our freedoms, one of those freedoms being the right to vote without anyone knowing how we voted. My staff and I work very hard to train our poll workers to protect this right. We can determine that you voted, but not how you voted.”
I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t know how the rules change when illegal activity occurs in the voting process. But saying A + A = C, just doesn’t make any sense. If you read the article carefully, it never actually says that the felons all voted for Al Franken – just that they ‘may have.’
Of course the article never suggests that they all could have voted for the other guy just as easily and how he may still have lost.
We just don’t know – and we certainly don’t know enough to start believing rumors.
Reading through some of the 600+ comments, it seems to me that many people are generally just fine with taking the two facts and linking them together even if there is no proof to support it.
‘May’ is not ‘Did.’ This kind of thing, where something the media says is implied, but never outright says, shows exactly how powerful the media is and how one should never assume that just because something is in print or on tv, that it is automatically right. It’s mindboggling that anyone can read stories that are mere speculation and innuendo (especially from a news source many expect to be unbiased, although, like most news sources, it isn’t), and make assumptions or judgments knowing only incomplete facts.
Frankly (pun intended), without knowing how the felons actually voted, this is nothing more than a barely interesting rumor.
