A recount in [the Wisconsin Supreme Court] race... seems inevitable, and it is not clear who will ultimately take the seat on the Wisconsin bench. But if this expensive and nasty race ends up in protracted litigation, it could undermine public confidence in both the judiciary and Wisconsin’s electoral process, especially if, as I expect, supporters of Prosser raise ugly allegations of voter fraud.... R. Hasen, in PoliticoDon't dare say fraud!
... because past claims of fraud have been "methodically debunked" — have they? — we should stop even looking for fraud? We'll only suffer if we keep checking for cheaters?
Yes. The new un-speakable word.
Of course, there are mistakes, and there is fraud. Big difference, and a lot of mistakes will be found.
But they do not obviate the possibility, nor the probability, of fraud. (I've told this story often: a (D) pal of mine openly admitted to (D) vote-fraud a few years ago, saying 'Aaaahhh, what's a few votes here and there?' They do it, they KNOW they do it, and they're damn proud of it.)
Back to the citation:
[I]f the Wisconsin Supreme Court race goes into extra innings, I expect things to become especially contentious and partisan.To become contentious and partisan? It's been ridiculously contentious and partisan here in Wisconsin since mid-February.
Slap him again, Prof Althouse. The man's obviously living on a different planet.