You didn’t read the article, did you?
I read it. It's a poor excuse for professional journalism. Then again, it isn't meant to be journalism—it's meant to engender doubt and confusion with heavily biased hackery.
"The majority of double voters were Democrats" [Contains no explanation of how that would be known or what the percentage might be—simply intended to appeal to conservative suspicions]... "officials said" [Who are they? What official position do they hold? It wasn't written as a quote, is it paraphrasing what was said?]
Further down into the article—with some careful reading to make the connections to
scattered information beyond the first paragraph—you find that
of the 1,700 double-votes...
"
1,042 people knowingly voted twice
in the June primary, with 60% of them using Democratic Party ballots." [Naturally no mention of which ballot the other 40% that double-voted used] [No mention that it was the
first in which election officials were dealing with a huge increase of mail-in ballots or that the
vast majority of the double-votes occurred in the first of three separate elections with a massive number of mail-in ballots] [No mention that the June primary accounted for 60% of the double votes in all three elections]
"Another
294 voted twice in the
August runoff election." [No mention of what the party breakdown was] [No mention that it was a huge drop from the first election which was responsible for the vast majority of double-votes]
"Results are preliminary, but investigators so far have found
at least [at least is used to
imply that there may be more, without any evidence that there
are more—but that's intentional and doesn't mention that those votes have been counted three times including a full hand recount]
400 cases of double voting in the presidential race." [Do some adding and you find that out of the 1,736 double-votes across
three separate elections 400 were related to the most recent presidential election (and the focus of nearly all attention recently)] [No mention that
all of the double-votes were found by election officials in the routine post-election canvassing that occurs after every election and publicly reported by them—not as the result of some "investigative reporter".]
Further evidence of sloppy biased writing...
"Details are unclear about the total number of people who showed up at the polls on November 3 despite having cast an absentee ballot by mail or drop box, but
the number is estimated to be in the hundreds of thousands." [Estimated to be in the hundreds of thousands by whom? The Kraken lawyer?
No indication here how many were actually allowed to vote at the polls on election day for a second time. Written to produce alarm and a misimpression to the casual reader.
However...] Separated
by several paragraphs in this screed you find...
"
Raffensperger faced a backlash from liberal voting-rights groups over his
warnings about fraud following the June primary, when more than
150,000 voters tried to vote twice but reportedly [reportedly is added to cast some doubt]
were unsuccessful. The system is supposed to catch double-voters, but at least 1,000 still slipped through safeguards." [The reader is left to do the math that 1,000 ballots slipping thru out of a 150,000 total
means that over 99.3% of attempts to double-vote were blocked before it could occur in the first election with a huge increase of mail-in ballots and that
there were far fewer in subsequent elections or that
state officials found the double votes during routine canvassing post-election and reported it publicly.]
It's a long article, so there are many more examples of heavily biased and sloppy writing pretending to be journalism. Where there is clarifying information for some of the statements that attempt to stoke the biased readers alarm thru implication, it is separated and scattered around to make it more difficult to understand the context. And as you would expect, there is never any mention that
Trump explicitly recommended that his voters do exactly what is discussed, cast a mail-in ballot and then go to the polls and vote again—as a check to confirm that your mail-in ballot was received and counted!
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-vote/trump-encourages-supporters-to-try-to-vote-twice-sparking-uproarFor a better read, there is...
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/08/910653086/georgia-reveals-double-voting-cases-but-no-evidence-of-malign-intentionsOr the video of the press conference held by Secretary of State Raffensperger regarding the subject which may have been a major factor in the dramatic reduction in double-voting in subsequent elections following the June primary...
https://www.youtube.com/Georgia's secretary of state says double-voting is a felony, 'and we prosecute'
