Aaron Blake, senior political reporter, writing for The Fix at The Washington Post, joins to discuss the competitive races around the country, and which results might come as a surprise.
Brian: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Happy Election Day again, everyone and it's our informal, unofficial, thoroughly unscientific exit poll for Election Day 2022 for the whole show. Here's the Election Day roll call, again, some of the groups of you were hoping to hear from who made up your mind in any race in the last two weeks. Maybe there's an indication there, though, thoroughly unscientific of how some things might go.
Also, who feels like you're voting for something in this election, and who feels like you're voting against something, that's to get the vibe out there of what you're feeling as you vote this year. We're inviting any caller from any swing district or any swing state other than New York, New Jersey, or Connecticut, or I should say, in addition to our usual callers from the tri-state in New York, New Jersey, or Connecticut. Any caller from any swing district or any swing state other than around here.
Also, anybody to describe an incident or anything interesting at your polling place today, 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692, or tweet @Brian Lehrer. I've been reading some of the interesting tweets coming in as well and as more of your calls and tweets come in, with me for a few minutes now is Washington Post senior political reporter with their politics section called The Fix Aaron Blake with a national take on election day today. Aaron, thanks for a few minutes on obviously a busy day for you. Welcome back to WNYC.
Aaron: Happy to talk to you, Brian. Happy Election Day.
Brian: Just people know, this Washington Post politics section called The Fix that you write for. That's not about rigged elections. Is it?
Aaron: It's not. We do write about those claims a fair amount these days, it seems.
Brian: I guess it's for the politics junkies who need their fix like many of our lessons. All right, your latest article is The Five Big Questions on Election Day 2022 and your question number one is a big one for watching the polls tonight. How quickly will we know and it's not as simple a question to answer as people might think, right?
Aaron: Yes, look we obviously saw in 2020 that the vote-counting process can take a little bit longer than most everybody would like for it to. That's not unusual, despite some of the conspiracy theories that you just alluded to. What we have in this election is the Senate races, especially that are expected to be the most pivotal ones just happen to be some of these states that could take a little bit longer in Pennsylvania, and in Arizona to toss-up races there.
The vote counting generally takes longer through a series of different dynamics that exist in those states, but not necessarily in others. Then the other third toss-up appraise, three of the four toss-up races, is in Georgia, where if neither candidate gets to 50% plus one will have a runoff just like we did in 2020 when those races were decisive for the majority. I would say to the extent this lasts beyond tonight, or even the wee hours of Wednesday morning.
That's probably a good thing for Democrats because it suggests that the red wave hasn't materialized, but I think we should all be prepared for the possibility that we're not going to go to bed tonight knowing that these things and we may not even know them as of Wednesday morning when it comes to who controls the Senate.
Brian: Yes, and to what you alluded to about absentee ballots. That'll be one of the biggest things to watch for tonight as the returns come in. Most states count the mail-in ballots after the election day ballots, sometimes many days after election day for a variety of reasons, even though most of the mail-in ballots are already there, and that will create a false impression during the election night coverage shows tonight of who's leading in a number of key races. These days, as you know Democrats tend to vote more by mail than Republicans do.
Some races will be looking like they're going to [unintelligible 00:04:23] when they really won't eventually, and so I guess one of the biggest questions of the coming 48 hours and beyond is will Republicans try to use that ballot counting sequence to mount phony claims of stolen elections. That could lead to more big lies more January 6 type of assaults, or even Republican governors or state legislatures, nullifying legitimate outcomes. Are you going to be watching for things like that, or do you think that's an overblown fear to even put it that way?
Aaron: No, I don't believe that's overblown and I say that because we've all have you seen lots of pre-gaming from Trump allies that have been suggestively complaining about how long the vote tallies could take in states like Pennsylvania. Not necessarily connecting that to fraud explicitly but certainly, that's something that the former president was all too willing to do after the 2020 election. I do think it's also worth pointing out that a big reason why some of these vote counts take a long time in states like Pennsylvania, is because the laws don't allow for those votes to be processed or counted in advance of Election Day.
After 2020 we saw a push by Democrats in some of these key states, like Michigan, Wisconsin, in Pennsylvania to allow that process to start much earlier and the Republican-controlled legislatures wouldn't go along with that. What we have is a situation which it is going to take longer, things could have been done to prevent that, but there wasn't any action that actually would allow for it. When we see Trump allies complaining about the length of the ballot counting process, they might want to look to their fellow partisans who could have done something about this in the last two years and largely passed on it.
Brian: Look to that point, you have another article on the Washington Post site called, How Republicans Have Prevented Mail Ballots from Being Counted Earlier. Did Republicans do that consciously?
Aaron: I don't know how deliberate it was them saying that they would prefer that these things be counted later and then using that as a pretext to call the process into question, but there's no question that the Democratic governors in these states have pushed for that. Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf has asked for a standalone bill that allows for earlier processing, similar situation in Wisconsin. In Michigan, they actually are allowing processing to take place a couple of days earlier, but not the actual counting of the votes. Which means it probably won't have that much of an impact.
The reason that some of these bills were opposed by Republicans is that they warned that this would be-- opening the ballots earlier and counting them would subject the process to more alleged shenanigans, that's their objection to this idea. Certainly many states, including states like Florida, allow these ballots to be processed and counted much earlier and we have Republicans like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis hailing his state's ability to be able to count those votes quickly. It does suggest that at the very least there is a means to rectify the situation and there hasn't been a whole lot of interest in doing something about it.
Brian: There are Republican candidates getting ready, it seems to engage in big lies have their own Donald Trump's style, if they lose. Here's a clip folks of Arizona Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake, speaking yesterday. You'll notice that when she addresses the journalists in the room, we had to bleep out a word.
Kari Lake: We're ready for fair elections, aren't we, and yet, I know like many of you, and especially me, I'm worried about tomorrow. Who's worried about tomorrow? These [inaudible 00:08:35] there don't want us talking about stolen elections. Well, it doesn't matter what they attempt tomorrow, because we're going to show up like our lives depend on it.
Brian: Yes, Kari Lake, who herself was a TV news anchor, and the bleeped word there where she called the reporters in the room, a certain B-word that ends with A-R-D-S that we decided wasn't meant for a family show like ours, but you get the enemy of the people vibe there, but she also seemed to be preparing, Aaron, to not accept a loss. How serious do you think the Kari Lakes of this election cycle are about that and how much is it just rhetoric that panders to a certain Trumpy base?
Aaron: Well, on the one hand, I think it's obviously an attempt to rile up the Republican Party base, which has proven very receptive to these claims and believes them in large part despite the utter lack of evidence of significant voter fraud in American elections. I do think that if this is not as good of a night for Republicans, as many handicappers are expecting it to be, we are going to see those claims because those claims are really, in many ways the lifeblood of the Trump movement. Trump has shown since the 2020 election, how stouting these claims rallies people to your cause, even if it doesn't ultimately lead to the overturning of an election result. I think we had a lot of Republicans who said these kinds of things like the clip you just played of Kari Lake during the primaries, and then backed off of it. It's really interesting that she is still going down this path not only given she's in a general election in a swing state but also given she is looking like a slight favorite in that race at least if you believe the polls that exist in that race so far. Usually, we'd see this kind of rhetoric from somebody who maybe thinks they might come up just short, and the fact that she's saying that is certainly interesting.
Brian: We remember that Donald Trump even after he won in 2016 empaneled this whole election fraud investigation committee because he wanted to try to prove even though it was fake that he really won the popular vote not only the electoral vote. Even candidates who win might sometimes launch phony claims of election fraud, but interesting the analysis you gave of why Kari Lake might be doing it in this case as well. Washington Post senior political reporter with their politics section called The Fix, Aaron Blake. Aaron, thanks a lot for a few minutes today. Good luck covering the rest of the day.
Aaron: Thanks Brian, I really appreciate it.
Brian: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. Now back to your calls and tweets on our informal, unofficial, thoroughly unscientific election day expo for the Brian Lehrer Show for election Day 2022, 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692, or tweet @Brian Lehrer. David in Jersey City you are on WNYC. Hi David.
David: Hi Brian. Thank you for taking my call.
Brian: Sure. You wanted to respond to some of the earlier callers I think.
David: I did. I think the Republicans have let, or the Democrats let the Republicans create mass hysteria about crime. Every week you can go on the NYPD website, and see crime statistics and the story they're telling is madness. In 1990, there were 2,262 murders. In 2022, there are 363, and every form of crime is down. I don't know why Democrats don't push back. I've heard callers express their concern, we live in a hellscape and it's just not true. Democrats don't have a way to combat this misinformation but it's just so alarming that we have no messaging on this.
Brian: Well, if you compare it to 1990, as you just did then it's way, way down. If you compare it to 2018, then many categories of crime are significantly up though certainly not anywhere near those 1990 levels. One of the things that maybe isn't getting talked about enough is that the shootings and the murders are down substantially in New York City this year. When Eric Adams came into office, remember it was the blueprint to end gun violence and all of that.
Gun violence is down the murder rate which is the cystic that people usually cite. The number of murders is down significantly in New York State this year. That's despite the bail reform law that some people like to highlight. Other categories of crime though are significantly up compared to just before the pandemic, though way less than 1990. Maybe David, today it's going to be in the 50s, because it's been so warm before it's going to feel cold. When we get to April and it's been below freezing for a few months and the temperature goes to the 50s, it's going to feel warm. Maybe that's some of what people are experiencing about crime stats.
David: Yes, I think people need to be smart enough to realize we had a once-in-a-century pandemic that changed all these dynamics and they will get back on course. I think this narrative that-- in general, we live in the most prosperous, peaceful time in history, and we're told that we live in a hellscape. Certainly, so many people believe it. My parents, God bless them, they cower at home in fear of some of these issues and I try to break through that bubble. It's very discouraging and we have to see reality not what people want to tell us with a propaganda edge.
Brian: David, thank you for your call. We appreciate it. Katie in Union Beach in New Jersey, you're on WNYC. Hi Katie.
Katie: Good morning Brian. Thank you for taking my call. I just wanted to remind New Jersey voters that you do not need identification or a driver's license to vote. When I went to my polling station this morning, I was asked for identification. When I challenged the poll worker, she hemmed and hawed for a little bit, and then eventually she decided that she would look me up and allow me to vote.
Brian: The moral of the story again is?
Katie: You do not need identification in the state of New Jersey to vote.
Brian: Thank you very much. A good reminder for people. I said electioneering welcome here. It's our informal, unofficial, thoroughly unscientific election day exit poll electioneering welcome here. Here's somebody who's actually electioneering because they're actually a candidate for a local office in Rocken County. Ellie in Stony Point, you're on WNYC. Hi Ellie.
Ellie: Hi everyone. My name is Ellie Kasner. I'm running for Stony Point Town Council, which is the most local office. My main interest in calling in today is that my husband is a huge fan of the show and I'm calling to say thank you, thank you, thank you for doing everything possible to help me run. I was also hoping to say that--
Brian: That's your husband, not to me, just to be clear, but go ahead.
Ellie: Yes, it's very clear, Charlie, thank you so much. Then I was also calling, we're in the 18th congressional district where Sean Patrick Maloney is facing Mike Lawler and I've been at a number of events to hear each one of them speak. Mike Lawler's whole attitude is to bring things down and make things contentious, be dirty, and vicious with his words. Sean Patrick Maloney is an exceptional person with an amazing history and he's not perfect, but he has done so much for the Hudson Valley, and I really believe in his campaign. I wanted to share that with listeners.
Brian: Why do you think it's so close up there? This wasn't supposed to be close. In fact, you know that Maloney ticked off a lot of fellow democrats after the redistricting this year. He chose to run in the current district rather than something that may be more resemble his old district. That forced another candidate out of a seat, all that stuff that was going on in the spring, but this was supposed to be easier for Maloney, and it looks like it's being pretty hard. We don't know who's going to win that race according to the polls. What do you think is going on with your neighbors?
Ellie: I think a lot of people just don't feel heard and I think that's on both sides of the coin. I know that that might be an overly simplistic answer, but I guess my thing is that people don't feel heard but then they're also not reaching out to their representatives either. It's kind of a double-edged sword. I will say that in a totally unrelated situation, I had reached out to Maloney's campaign to help expedite visa for a 16-year-old refugee from Ukraine who's staying with our family.
Without his help, we wouldn't have gotten the paperwork in time for her to attend school here and stay with our family for the year to stay safe. You have to reach out to your representatives to let them know what you want. They work for you. That's the whole point. To be heard, you have to get out there with your voice, but I think that it's close because people don't feel listened to.
Brian: Thank you very much, Ellie. We really appreciate it. By the way, just to be clear on that district, if it matters to what anybody's going to do, or who you think is going to be on your ballot, I think the caller stated a different district. Sean Patrick Maloney is running in the 17th Congressional District in New York, just to be clear about that. All right, here's Ed who voted in Connecticut and wants to talk about the ballot issue in Connecticut. That's a pretty important one today. Hi, Ed.
Ed: Hello, Brian. First of all, I'd like to say you and your show are a shiny beacon for democracy, and thank you very much for what you do. Actually, I voted in New York. I actually moved up to Dutchess County in August and was able to register and I actually voted in New York.
Brian: So you just moved from Connecticut then, right?
Ed: Yes, I just moved from Connecticut, yes. I took advantage of the early voting and it was actually very, very brilliant. I think other than a jammed printer that kept me there for a few extra minutes, I would've literally walked into the polling place, cast my vote, and walked right out. It is on the ballot in Connecticut to have early voting going forward. I just want to urge the Connecticut residents that it is absolutely worth voting for that issue.
Brian: For people who don't know, New York and New Jersey, both have early voting. Connecticut does not. Connecticut is one of only four states in the country that do not have early in-person voting. I know that Alabama and Mississippi are two of the others. I'm not sure what the fourth one is. That's an unusual company for Connecticut to be keeping in this respect. I haven't been following it. Do you sense that the campaign around this is contentious or close, that people are making arguments on both sides aggressively, or do you think early voting is going to be voted in Connecticut for future elections?
Ed: I think ultimately it will be voted in early. Obviously, the Republicans have some issues with these things, as we all know. I think Connecticut being the blue state that it is it will pass.
Brian: Ed, thank you very much for chiming in. We really appreciate it. By the way, here's a story from a listener in response to Katie, who called in before, and talked about being asked to show ID at the polls and reminding people that you don't have to show ID at the polls-- that was a New Jersey voter in New York writes, "I was also asked for ID, and I said, I didn't think I had to show ID, but maybe because I moved" writes this person, "but the poll worker said, it doesn't have to be the current address just a valid ID, no idea if this is a real rule."
I don't think in New York it is. I think in New York it's your signature, right? Just to say, know your rights folks where you're not, especially if you can't produce an ID, but you're legitimately registered to vote. If you think somebody's trying to intimidate you or suppress your vote in any way just know that you can stand up to your rights for your rights. Let's see. Ias in Bridgewater, New Jersey. You're on WNYC. Hello, Ias.
Ias: Hi Brian. Thanks for taking my call. My key issue that I'll be working for today is defending democracy, and protecting our constitutional republic. I typically always lead Republican but mostly moderate like a typical independent fiscally conservative but socially liberal. This time around, I think I'll be more all-Republican because I didn't like the way the Democrats handle the COVID emergency. It was like our civil rights just went out the door.
They shut down businesses, shut down, economy, schools, mass mandates, forceful vaccinations, things like that. I realized that the Democrats don't really stand for civil liberties like they claim, as soon as we get an emergency, we have executive rules for passes, close to 300 executive orders. The legislature [unintelligible 00:23:41] vacation for almost two years. I think all those things are a real threat to our democracy. That's really where the double cut's lost.
Brian: Interesting. Why do you consider, I guess you've made the decision that for you, the threat to democracy from the emergency public health measures were a greater threat than the threat to democracy from things like the big lie in January 6th? If that's the conclusion that you came to, how come? A lot of other listeners will be shaking their heads and saying, "No, one was to protect people, the other was just to take power for power's sake."
Ias: Well, first of all, I think, Biden was legitimately elected president and I did not like the way Trump behaved during the elections and after the elections on January 6th was a stain on our record. I definitely want to push that to the side, but I'm talking about the type of trust to democracy that affects average people like me. What happened on January 6th, these guys protest and then left after four hours, and if they didn't leave, we could have very easily sent in law enforcement in the military to kick them out. I didn't see that as a big threat to our democracy. It was a bunch of nut jobs that broke into the capital.
The real threat to our democracy, our average people, is when a governor takes executive rule, one-man rule and
right now in New Jersey, we're under one-party rule. I think those are the real threats to democracy. To protect democracy you need the constitution and respect for the constitution. You also need a viable opposition, which we haven't had really in two years. You also need freedom of speech, which we saw the Democrats shut down and call misinformation. Well, a lot of that misinformation now is true. The lockdowns didn't really work according to the Johns Hopkins reports that came out last month. Vaccinations didn't prevent the spread
[crosstalk]
Brian: That's wrong. No, no, no. I'm going to have to stop you there because at that point-- and Ias, thanks you for your call, but at that point, I had to stop that call because we know that the vaccines have slowed the spread of covid tremendously and slowed the spread of serious cases of covid tremendously. Now we just get back into disinformation and interestingly he called the actual science communication disinformation, and then we could go round and round and round and round.
When we veer from opinion, the things that are just absolutely not true, then at that point I have to call them out. That caller Ias was concerned about governors establishing states of emergency over COVID. I think our next caller Hindi in Manhattan is concerned about what the next governor of New York might declare a state of emergency over. This is a segue, Hindi in Manhattan you're on WNYC, Happy Election Day.
Hindi: Thanks, you too. I was just thinking that same thing as I was listening to that caller. I haven't heard this mentioned very much and I'm surprised, but Zeldin has mentioned and in fact, promised on his birthday in office that he would declare a state of emergency, I guess, due to crime. I find that a little bit alarming because doesn't that give him more sweeping powers to do all kinds of things he wouldn't normally be able to do, such as fire brag, things like that?
Brian: We've covered it here and it's certainly going to be one of the first things that we and everybody talk about if Zeldin is elected today. That is, does he really have the power to do what he's running on, which I think you characterize accurately declaring a state of emergency over a crime set in motion? I think he acknowledges that he can't just snap his fingers and fire the Manhattan DA who was elected by the people. He's got a set in motion, a removal process.
I think the argument that would probably wind up in court is, do they just have a policy disagreement about what should be prosecuted and what shouldn't and what should encourage jail time and what shouldn't, or is [unintelligible 00:28:18] failing to do his job, which is what it would require as I understand it, to remove him. There would be a process. The other thing that Zeldin says is that he would suspend the bail reform law on day one in this state of emergency. That certainly would be another whole legal can of worms.
The people elected the legislature. The legislature passed the bail reform law, the governor signed it, and people have the opportunity to vote their legislators out in this election as well. The New York State legislature is up for election this year too. Does Zeldin have the legal right to snap his fingers, declare a crime state of emergency, and suspend the bail reform law? You are exactly right that this is the conversation that the state is going to be having tomorrow if he's elected today.
Hindi: Thank you.
Brian: Thank you. All right, we're going to take a break. We're going to come back and talk about some of the most interesting ballot measures around the country. Stay with us. It's our informal, unofficial, thoroughly unscientific election day expo for 2022.
Copyright © 2022 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.
New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.