Last Updated on April 17, 2020
In yet another example of mainstream media malfeasance, The New York Times has reversed course in its stance on voting by mail.
“Error and Fraud at Issue as Absentee Voting Rises,” said a Times headline from October 6, 2012, just one month before former President Barack Obama faced re-election against challenger Mitt Romney.
The paper lamented a significant steep increase in absentee voting since 1980, noting that 20% of ballots are now cast remotely.
“Yet votes cast by mail are less likely to be counted, more likely to be compromised and more likely to be contested than those cast in a voting booth, statistics show,” according to the piece. “Election officials reject almost 2 percent of ballots cast by mail, double the rate for in-person voting.”
Author Adam Liptak sounded downright Trump-esque in his 2012 piece.
“Election experts say the challenges created by mailed ballots could well affect outcomes this fall and beyond,” he said.
But now that President Trump is opposing a COVID-19 driven nationwide “Vote by Mail” push, led by Speaker of the House and “Russian collusion” conspiracy theorist Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), The New York Times has done an about face, abandoning its 2012 position on absentee voting.
“Republicans should fight very hard when it comes to state wide mail-in voting,” Trump said on Twitter. “Democrats are clamoring for it. Tremendous potential for voter fraud, and for whatever reason, doesn’t work out well for Republicans.”
That sparked a response from The Times, which called Trump’s narrative “fake.”
“All voter fraud is extremely rare,” said a sub-headline in an April 11 piece published in the paper.
Just eight years after claiming that fraud is an issue with mail-in ballots, The Times seems to have forgotten its concerns.
“Five states, including the Republican bastion of Utah, now conduct all elections almost entirely by mail. They report very little fraud,” the paper said.
Though The Times conceded that voter fraud occurs more often in absentee voting, rather than in-person voting, the paper doesn’t seem nearly as concerned as it did when its Democrat ally Obama’s presidency as at stake.