A grassroots pro-democracy group led by a Republican former state senator is trying to build trust in elections by hosting forums in small towns throughout Wisconsin
Kim Pytleski could barely sleep the night before. She replayed the PowerPoint slides in her head, packed her notebook and took a deep breath.
The clerk from a rural Wisconsin county north of Green Bay was preparing for a public meeting to explain the election process to residents. She didn’t know who she would encounter. Would some deny the results of the last presidential election? Would the conversation get combative? Most importantly, would she get through to anyone?
They were questions Pytleski never expected to ask herself when she started the job in Oconto County more than 14 years ago. But since then, election conspiracy theories have taken root in the rural, heavily Republican county in northeastern Wisconsin. It’s among large swaths of the country where distrust of voting and ballot-counting, fanned by former President Donald Trump’s false claims of a stolen election, maintains a stubborn grasp.
It’s also possible she is just lying. I’d say it It is likely that she is lying. I highly doubt twelve women registered to vote with the same address at the same time for this poll worker to observe.
You can register to vote at the polling place on election day in Wisconsin. You must always provide a Proof of Residence document when registering to vote.
If there was actual voter fraud going on here, in a way for an individual poll observer to notice, the perpetrators would each have had to present their own fraudulent Proof of Residence document at the same polling place, on election day. Which means that someone would have to be both savvy enough to arrange for at least eleven people to commit voter fraud, while at the same time being so stupid as to have them all use the same single family home address, and all commit this fraud at the same place on the same day in front of the same poll observer, to the end of casting only eleven or twelve fraudulent votes.
I was clearly being far too generous in my first comment. It is far more likely that this poll observer is mistaken, insane, or lying - to the point of completely excluding the possibility of any actual voter fraud.