Fox News host Chris Wallace risked drawing the ire of Donald Trump yet again on Friday after he debunked the president’s false claims on mail-in voter fraud.
Trump has ramped up his rhetoric against mail-in voting in recent weeks, at one point even threatening to withhold federal funds from Nevada and Michigan if they went ahead with sending applications to voters.
That’s despite Trump himself voting by mail in Florida’s GOP primary in March.
Wallace, the host of “Fox News Sunday,” fact-checked the president’s claims on Friday’s broadcast of “America’s Newsroom.”
“Well, you know, I’ve done some deep dive into it, there really is no record of massive fraud or even serious fraud from mail-in voting,” he said.
Check out the video here:
Chris Wallace pours cold water on Trump’s mail-in voting lies
Wallace: “There really is no record of massive fraud, or even serious fraud from mail-in voting … When people get their ballots and mail them in themselves, no history of fraud at all.” pic.twitter.com/4cyYDu26iu
“It’s being carried out in Republican states. It’s being carried out in Democratic states,” Wallace continued. “There’s no indication that mail-in voting, as opposed to in-person voting, tends to favor one party over another.”
Wallace noted how “if anything, it tends to favor Republicans” because “the people, now we’re talking about outside a pandemic, who historically have tended to vote most often by mail are elderly people, people over 65, and they tend to vote more Republican than Democratic.”
“Have there been some cases? Yes,” Wallace acknowledged, also citing the potential problem of vote harvesting. “But when people get their ballots and mail them in themselves, no history of fraud at all,” he said.
Trump has also falsely claimed on multiple occasions that up to 5 million votes were illegally cast in the 2016 presidential election. He lost the popular vote to Democratic rival Hillary Clinton by almost 3 million votes.
Wallace’s fact-checking of Trump came amid an escalation in tensions between the president and Fox News, whose primetime hosts, in particular, have been widely accused of being a propaganda vehicle for the Trump administration.
Trump lashed out at the widely watched conservative network earlier this week after anchor Neil Cavuto slammed the president’s claim about taking the unproven drug hydroxychloroquine as protection against the coronavirus.
“Many will disagree, but @FoxNews is doing nothing to help Republicans, and me, get re-elected on November 3rd,” Trump tweeted Thursday.
Many will disagree, but @FoxNews is doing nothing to help Republicans, and me, get re-elected on November 3rd. Sure, there are some truly GREAT people on Fox, but you also have some real “garbage” littered all over the network, people like Dummy Juan Williams, Schumerite Chris…
….Hahn, Richard Goodstein, Donna Brazile, Niel Cavuto, and many others. They repeat the worst of the Democrat speaking points, and lies. All of the good is totally nullified, and more. Net Result = BAD! CNN & MSDNC are all in for the Do Nothing Democrats! Fox WAS Great!
At the latest Romanian presidential elections, almost one million Romanians voted from abroad, largely by casting their ballots in more than 800 polling stations open from Friday through Sunday. A visual exploration of the data.
At the Romanian presidential elections in 2019, Romanian citizens living abroad could vote for three days for each of the two turns of elections in more than 800 polling stations around the world. This is on top of the possibility to vote by correspondence. Both longer opening times for polling stations and voting by correspondence have been introduced in 2019 after waiting times of many hours – effectively corresponding to voter suppression – marred recent elections.
Romanians living abroad took advantage of the possibility to vote without standing for hours in a queue: an unprecedented 940.000 people voted at the second round of the presidential election on 24 November 2019, corresponding to more than 10 per cent of the total votes cast.
This is more than double the number who took part to the previous presidential elections in 2014 (close to 400.000 voters) and multiple times the less than 150.000 who took part to the 2009 presidential vote. Given that the diaspora overwhelmingly supports one of the sides (an astonishing 94 per cent of votes cast abroad were in favour of incumbent Klaus Iohannis) this is clearly of significance, even if due to the current electoral legislation this impacts mostly presidential elections and referenda, while it has noticeably less impact on parliamentary elections where the diaspora only determines four MPs and two senators .
How many voted, and who are they?
Italy tops the list of countries by number of Romanian voters. However, more than 100.000 people cast their ballot also in the UK, Germany and Spain.
The age distribution of voters is quite telling of Romania’s migration patterns, with Romanian citizens voting in the UK and Germany being much younger than those who vote in Italy and Spain.
Besides these broad trends, careful readers will have noticed anomalies in the above age distributions (in particular, the sharp drop in the number of voters older than 52). They are, however, not related to migration patterns and instead mostly reflect the unusually sudden demographic changes brought about by the demographic policies promoted by the Ceaușescu regime .
It is worth noticing that Italy is the only country where there are have been more female than male voters.
Romanian polling stations easy to reach across Europe
One of the factors that made it possible for so many Romanian citizens to cast their ballot from abroad was the impressive number of polling stations that were open from Friday to Sunday for both turns of the presidential election. The fact that polling stations are open across a large number of countries is not, by itself astonishing: many countries open polling stations at their embassies or consulates. What is staggering, is the density of polling stations opened around Europe.
There is an exceptional density of polling stations not only in the Republic of Moldova, where many local residents have obtained Romanian citizenship, but also in the most densely populated parts of England, in Belgium, in some parts of Spain, and across Italy, which has long been a major destination for Romanians leaving their native
Most Italians live half an hour or less from a Romanian polling station
Locating Romanian polling stations on a population density map of Italy, it soon appears that polling stations have not been opened only in major cities, but also in relatively sparsely populated areas.
In order to gauge how close the average resident of Italy lives from a Romanian polling stations, we have calculated the distance between each polling station and each inhabited location of Italy, weighting the result according to the number of residents of each location (Eurostat publishes a dataset with figures on how many people live in each square kilometer of the continent: there are about 172.000 cells in Italy’s population grid).
After a computing-intensive process (the details are outlined here ), it emerged that Italians live on average about 18 km – as the crow flies – from a Romanian polling station; more than 50 per cent of Italians live less than 13 km from one. Even considering the actual estimated driving distance and time, the result is quite impressive: on average, Italians would need to drive about 40 minutes to reach a Romanian polling stations.
Half of Italians could reach one in less than 35 minutes, and an overwhelming majority in less than one hour. Considering that migrants are more likely to live in urban centres rather than in remote locations, the actual figures for the average Romanian citizen living in Italy are likely significantly lower. It is true that some Romanian citizens likely live in locations that are more than two hours by car from a polling station, but, after all, this time voting by correspondence was also available to Romanian citizens living abroad.
Overall, the high number of polling stations is certainly one of the factors that made it possible for about 190.000 Romanians to cast a ballot in a polling stations in Italy, and for almost one million of them to do the
Clarisse Yeung believes the road to full democracy in Hong Kong will pass through a dog park. Specifically a dog park that she has promised to build if her coalition sweeps local elections today.
The district council elections held in Hong Kong every four years are normally a sleepy affair, with low turnout, mostly because councillors have very limited powers and budget, as well as a reputation for graft.
But this year’s poll has come to be seen as a de-facto referendum on the nearly six-month-old protest movement, sparked by opposition to an extradition law that would have destroyed Hong Kong’s legal protections, but which has morphed into a broader pro-democracy campaign.
Yeung, an energetic young artist, says she spent a dispiriting four years as the sole opposition member of a 13-strong council controlled by pro-Beijing representatives in central Wan Chai, battling inertia and outright opposition to even modest plans for the neighbourhood, from pet-friendly gardens to better buses.
Now she hopes a wave of protest-driven outrage, which has mobilised both voters and candidates, combined with her track record of commitment to local issues, could swing control of the council.
“I had been questioning if I should run again. It’s been so heavy, being the only pro-democracy representative in Wan Chai,” she said, as she campaigned on a street corner with a band of supporters, handing out leaflets, stroking dogs and chatting to toddlers. “I’m glad all these friends are coming out after the [protest] movement: they are my hope.”
While Hong Kong enjoys civil rights such as freedom of assembly and the press, its residents do not choose their leader, or all members of its mini-parliament, the legislative council. The district council poll is the only direct election.
For the first time, pro-democracy candidates are challenging every one of the 452 wards up for grabs, and have coordinated campaigns so they don’t split the vote. Former one-person campaigns are newly flush with volunteers. Young people in particular have raced to register to vote, to volunteer on campaigns and even to run for office themselves.
Yeung has taken advantage of this city-wide political awakening to recruit nine other candidates to stand in neighbouring wards on a “kickstart Wan Chai” platform. They range from a graphic designer to the veteran former policewoman Cathy Yau, who resigned her post in June as the protest movement kicked off, shocked by colleagues’ brutality.
All are novice candidates, and many decided to stand only in the past few months, despite the very real threat of physical violence; several pro-democratic candidates have been attacked, with one losing his ear after an attacker bit him and stabbed others. A pro-Beijing candidate was also stabbed. The attacks have led to fears about voter intimidation or fraud, particularly after authorities announced riot police would guard all polling stations. In a hint at the febrile atmosphere, the government sent out an official press release stating “the ballot is secret”, apparently to counter rumours that facial recognition software might be used, and voters would be filmed.
“I always wanted to go into politics eventually, after becoming expert in my field. But I was inspired by the protests, and realised I can’t wait any longer,” said Louis Mak, a data analyst who has given up his job to campaign full time for the Canal Road ward.
“Maybe in four years or eight years, we won’t have real elections any more. China may take actions against our civil society. And so that’s why I have stood in this election.”
Deep pockets, a powerful electoral machine, lack of voter interest and a fractured opposition have meant pro-Beijing parties control all but one of the city’s 18 district councils.
In Wan Chai, the battlegrounds are tiny, densely populated areas, and the margins small. Mak says his district is just a couple of blocks, where the winner in 2015 claimed victory with 1,000 votes and a margin of 200.
Mak put his chance of winning office at “around 50-50”, and is campaigning more than 10 hours a day. “We have to pull voting rates up to historical levels so we can take over Wan Chai.”
Pro-Beijing politicians have been open about concerns they might be swept from power. One of the most prominent, the lawmaker Regina Ip, warned against voting for pro-democracy candidates in a column in the South China Morning Post. “Hong Kong’s story doesn’t have to end in tragedy”, she told readers.
An opposition landslide would have little immediate political effect, as the councils are fairly toothless. But longer term, it could slightly shift the balance of power, because district councils have a role in arcane, complex elections to choose the city’s leader and part of its legislature.
Another well-known establishment politician defending a seat in Wan Chai said he remained optimistic, but admitted that a loss would be devastating.
“The people here are the pillars, the ones who uphold the establishment. If we lose this constituency that means something is really, really wrong and troubled in HK,” said the lawyer Paul Tse, who also holds a seat in the city’s legislative council. “It sounds very serious, but it’s very difficult to have so many people against the government.”
At one point there were widespread fears that the poll would be delayed amid unrest and unprecedented disruption. But China appears to have decided that would be so inflammatory in a city already on edge,that a possible drubbing at the ballot box is the lesser of two evils.
“Its not the right sort of atmosphere for a fair election, but in a way we are constrained,” Tse said. “If we don’t do the election they will blame us for being afraid.”
But where Tse sees a canker at the heart of Hong Kong, his challenger in the prosperous Broadwood district – part of the “Kickstart Wan Chai’” slate – sees hope.
Arthur Yeung, who is no relation to Clarisse, turned 24 the day before the poll. He spent his birthday at a campaign stand on the main road, waving to drivers, thrusting leaflets through windows and chatting to any who stopped.
Dawn and her dog Chicco, his collar bearing a rosette supporting Yeung, campaigned beside him for hours. “I want to support youth, and passion for change,” she said.
Yeung always hoped to run for office and spent much of the last year in Broadwood organising against an unpopular development, canvassing support for Clarisse’s dog park plans – easy in an area famous for dog lovers – and running other grassroots projects.
But until the protests kicked off, most of his friends thought he was crazy. Councils were widely seen as irrelevant, incompetent, self-serving political machines. There is even a Cantonese shorthand for the corruption, a list of the local delicacies that candidates ply supporters with to secure votes.
“Half a year ago, people would say to me: ‘Why don’t you get a normal job,’” he says with a wry smile. “Now they say: ‘You are very inspiring to our generation. Your mission is very clear and passionate, so thank you for bringing some good things for Hong Kong’. Its a very big change.”