Analysis of the Controversial Tweet on Michigan’s 2020 Election
Recent discussions surrounding a tweet alleging that 38,000 ballots were delivered in Michigan after midnight on Election Night 2020 have reignited scrutiny over mail-in voting processes. The tweet reflects lingering concerns voiced by some voters, citing issues like deceased individuals casting ballots and suspicious voter turnout rates. However, official investigations provide context that challenges these claims.
The tweet points directly to a specific incident on November 4, 2020, when video footage showed election workers delivering absentee ballot containers to the TCF Center in Detroit shortly after 3:30 a.m. Critics seized on this footage, describing it as evidence of potential fraud. Yet, Michigan election officials, including former Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, clarified that these ballots arrived according to established procedures. Delays were attributed to local laws that limit processing absentee ballots before Election Day, not any willful misconduct.
Officials confirmed that ballots returned before the 8 p.m. deadline on Election Day were considered valid as long as they arrived on time. The late-hour deliveries were not out of compliance with the law but resulted from logistical challenges. This highlights a critical distinction between perceived wrongdoing and the actual handling of legal ballots.
Critics of mass mail-in voting have long voiced that such delays could introduce avenues for tampering and could erode public trust in the election process. This sentiment is echoed in the tweet, which states, “Dead people voting, reports of over 100% turnout… This is 3rd world BS! End mail-ins, NOW!” However, extensive investigations conducted post-election have found these claims lacking substantive evidence.
More than 250 audits were performed throughout Michigan after the election, involving bipartisan teams that reviewed everything from ballot counts to absentee processing methods. One notable audit in Antrim County thoroughly examined presidential race ballots, finding that machine tabulators had functioned correctly. The discrepancies noted were attributed to human error in reporting, not to any manipulation of the electoral process. Following the audits, Secretary Benson asserted, “The audits are concrete evidence that November’s election was fair, secure, and accurate.”
The claim that deceased individuals cast ballots also lacks foundation. Investigations revealed these instances often stemmed from shared names or clerical errors rather than intentional dishonesty. The scrutiny often arose from confusion, with ballots cast by living individuals sharing names with the deceased. These findings show how easily misinformation can spread in a charged political atmosphere.
Another notable claim—that voter turnout exceeded 100%—was also found to be unfounded. Review efforts from fact-checkers and the Michigan Bureau of Elections established that these inflated figures resulted from outdated population data, incorrect voter registration figures, or simple reporting mistakes. No credible evidence suggested any county counted more ballots than registered voters.
Concerns about individuals registering to vote before birth stem from database management issues rather than systemic fraud. Mistakes in recording birth dates occasionally defaulted to placeholder dates when official records were lacking. State officials provided explanations to dispel fears, indicating that no fraudulent voting was associated with these irregular birth dates.
Despite the findings of these audits, the perception of vulnerability in mail-in voting persists. The optics of ballots arriving in the early morning hours can raise suspicions among the electorate. Michigan laws that limit pre-Election Day processing contributed to delays that left the counting process open to misinterpretation. Calls for legislative change have emerged, suggesting that enabling earlier processing of absentee ballots might alleviate future concerns about timing and transparency in election results.
The federal Department of Justice and several credible agencies have found no evidence supporting claims of widespread vote manipulation. Courts dismissed about 60 post-election lawsuits due to insufficient evidence, and many alleged irregularities were debunked through detailed reviews of voting records and counts.
However, dissatisfaction regarding the timing and processing of ballots remains palpable. At the TCF Center, tensions mounted as Republican observers expressed frustration over the speed of procedures. Misunderstandings about election laws heightened these tensions, which could easily have been mistaken for illegitimate operations. Officials had previously communicated the procedures surrounding ballot counting, which mitigated many of the grievances raised at the time.
Polling indicates that over half of Republican voters still question the legitimacy of the election outcome. It’s not that there is a belief that every absentee ballot was fraudulent, but rather that the circumstances surrounding late-night votes presented an opportunity for distrust to fester. This combination of uncertainty and skepticism has fueled movements across multiple states aimed at limiting mail-in voting in upcoming elections.
Even though legislation enacted in Michigan post-2022 adjusted some early voting rules, the foundational aspects of mail-in voting have largely remained unchanged. While absentee ballot participation surged during the pandemic, voters still rely on this method to cast their votes in subsequent elections.
With estimates suggesting that over 3.3 million out of Michigan’s 5.5 million voters used absentee ballots in the 2020 election, addressing the logistical bottlenecks and procedural limitations associated with mail-in voting will require substantial legislative reforms. As discussions around the recent tweet highlight, although investigations support the integrity of the election, the visual cues and procedures associated with ballot deliveries continue to undermine confidence, necessitating actions beyond just auditing to mend voter trust.
"*" indicates required fields
