Group claims there’s something nefarious afoot with the voting rolls. But, they’re a little light on evidence.

The South Dakota Canvassing group is at it again with pillow-guyesque conspiracy theories, claiming that they have hard evidence of problems with the state’s voter rolls. Except when asked for evidence, the challenges to the group’s assertion are met with a lot of redaction. Which is kind of funny, considering voter date is actually public information.

According to the subscriber only story posted today by Jon Ellis at Dakota Scout:

Materials released by South Dakota Canvassing Group during its Tuesday rally on the steps of the Old Courthouse Museum include affidavits alleging voting discrepancies. Members of the group say they  interviewed voters and registered voters who say that despite not voting, they’re showing up in voter participation rolls in the 2020 general election.


Among the group’s claims was that 256 voters were older than 120 years old. Lund said that was because the state switched voting systems about a decade ago. Some voters on the old system didn’t have birth dates, and when the rolls migrated to the new system, it automatically gave people with no birthdates a birthday in 1900.

Lund said they can explain specific complaints, but not vague accusations.

“It’s so frustrating because I’m of the mindset that if there’s a problem, let’s fix it,” she said. “And they’re yelling, ‘There’s a problem. There’s a problem,’ but they won’t tell me what it is.”

Read the entire story at the Dakota Scout.

Rick Weible, a member of the group and author of election paranoia website Midwest Swamp watch was at my local GOP meeting last week going on about the claims, and went on about the people who were 120 years old (as noted in the above article by auditors as how they fixed records for those w/out birthdates in the system).

He was also going on about how in one county, all the RV voters voted on one day.  Which I would logically assume corresponds to the day they did the date entry at the office. That’s the problem with all the South Dakota election conspiracy theories. While it makes for fodder for the conspiracy minded, the real story falls a little flat.

Before coming out with mouths blazing and tongues wagging, none of these guys bother to ask if there’s a logical explanation. Nor can they point to anyone in South Dakota who was erroneously elected. So what’s the end game?  Disenfranchising voters who make South Dakota their home base? A push to going back to hand-counted ballots?

Neither one is terribly appealing.

Our county Auditors do a good job with the limited resources they have, in an ever more politically-charged environment when it comes to our elections.  It would nicer if they could do their job in an environment where conspiracy theories aren’t snatched up and amplified.

16 thoughts on “Group claims there’s something nefarious afoot with the voting rolls. But, they’re a little light on evidence.”

  1. Isn’t Weible’s wife “managing” Monae Johnson’s campaign?

    Judgement will be her most important asset as sos. She defeated Barnett. Let’s hope she doesn’t defeat herself now too.

    1. looking over some of this:
      there can still be explanations. 552 people registered to vote on election day, probably because they didn’t know we don’t do same-day registration here. 21 states plus the District ofColumbia now allow same day registration and newcomers don’t know that we don’t. Due to confusion of whether they were registered, 49 may have cast provisional ballots which were not counted. A possibility is that pollworkers didn’t know what to do with people who insisted their names should be on the voter registration rolls, and let them vote even though they shouldn’t.

      The 36 “new” voter registrations of people registered in 2021 who voted in 2020 could reflect people who changed their voter registrations, say, addresses or party affiliations & were not “new” voters at all, but a data entry error was made in an auditors’ office.

      It’s quite possible there are explanations for a lot of this but more details are needed.

  2. All this fuss over whether or not there is fraud, abuse, or some form of scheming going on during federal, state, and local elections is all for not IF the “Legislature” is not fully convinced to hold an all out “Public Hearing/investigation on the matter to resolve the issue. The Heritage Foundation has reported in its own investigation, that some level of Fraud exists in ALL 50 States, even South Dakota, so there is evidence in support of fraud, abuse, and election scheming occuring. To what extent, we will never know if the LEGISLATURE keeps draggging its feet. Republican legisatures will fight such battles where they win, and Democrat Legislatures will fight such battles where they win. So the issue just continues to drag on and on.

    I have no explanation why the SOUTH DAKOTA LEGISLATURE wants to fight “Public Hearings, Investigations on the matter so much today, especially since as a STATE, we are known to be one of the most conservative, traditional, and hardcore Constitutionalist “States” in the Nation.

    What can possibly go wrong if the Legisature would hold a PUBLIC HEARING to discuss the following:

    1) Audit, and Review ALL Official Domiciles showing a list of all known “Official Citizens or Residents of the State — this will determine whether RV’rs are property domiciled;

    2) Audit and Review the Entire Statewide Master Voter Registration File – this will put to rest whether or not dead people vote, or there is NO voter on the list who is NOT domiciled in South Dakota;

    3) Audit and Review ALL “BALLOTS” requested and received – this will put to rest whether or not non-domiciled residents voted unlawfully in S.D or not,


    A PUBLIC INVESTIGATION/Hearing will also allow for the Legislature to question the Secretary of State, the Election Board, the Poll Workers, the Residents on just how good or bad the process of governing elections work in the state.

    As a POLL WORKER in 2020 Primary Election, City Election, and General Election, I served as a Super Intendent in the General Election – I had at least 20 people show up who were NOT in the poll book, when faced with the dillema, I called the Election Board, to verify accuracy, and when discovered they were NOT registered to vote, let alone domiciled in the county, had no issue telling them what they needed to do, either A) go back to your previous county to vote, or B) Please register to vote in time for the next election.

    TRUTH IS – “WE” need a System of Holding Elections that is Fair, Honest, Truthful, and one of which the CITIZENS believe in, and if the citizens no longer believe in the “System” – well, something is very wrong with our republic.

    1. unless you recorded the names and addresses of the 20 or so people who weren’t registered to vote but believed they should be, there is no way to follow up on this.

      In 1972 I registered to vote during a campus voter registration drive at the University of Vermont. My spouse suggested we check to verify that we were registered and found out we were not, and we were able to register legitimately in time for the election. After the election, it was reported in the news media that multiple students had shown up to vote and found out they were not registered.
      Nobody could remember the name of the person who pretended to register them.

      Now it seems, young people are duped into submitting personal information to a website
      which fools them into thinking they are registering to vote on line. The people engaged in this are probably living outside of the state or federal jurisdiction. Investigating it is probably waste of time. Only public awareness of the scam will put a stop to it.

      1. I do agree,. I was simply sharing my experiences, but that’s the kind of stuff that would come out in an investigation as you interview poll workers. You get to hear tge stories of what happened, abs how they handled the situation. That’s is what the peoppe want to gear, stories, while also understanding how tge process works and to better understand the process. While I agree, we won’t know with outbdocumented evidence.

        However IF we were to investigate abs audit and review our statewide lists of DOMICLES, VOTER REGISTRATION FILE, and ALL BALLOTS requested and ballots recieved, you can then learn truly how the process guards against fraud, abuse, election scheming.

        Also remember, SOS can actually bring lawsuits against other states where there may be controversies between states where 1 or more people may be domiciled in multiple states, which is illegal, while they can ja e multiple residents, they may only have one domicile, permanent residence the place you vote, deposit your income, partake in all your commercial activity etc.

        With so many RVrs, or nomads placing rheur domicles here, while residing elsewhere, we can gain a better understanding of the over all process.

        Upon further review we gain a better understanding the extent to any fraud, abuse or scheming occurring.

  3. TRUTH IS – only your little group of OAN watchers has a problem with elections in SD. Everybody else trusts it and believes in it. Nobody believes your claims because you cried wolf about “fraud” so many times and it’s all been debunked by the courts.

      1. Ann Onymous, I imagine that the party thinks she is prettier than most, but will defer to Grudznick who is the official arbiter of feminine pulchritude

  4. The problem with this business is that the people they are accusing of fostering election fraud are County Auditors and poll workers who are highly respected (and mostly Republican). Waving the FRAUD flag in their faces is highly offensive to their friends and neighbors who have known them since childhood. If there are problems (and to many people, election laws are confusing) it should be solved in the legislature not by injuring the reputation of life long, solid Republicans.

  5. He complained several times about people turning in ballots “the same day it was sent in the mail.” I told him it was probably just early votes. He said it wasn’t, couldn’t explain then kept complaining about it… Bruce Whalen “rallies” were hard to watch.

Comments are closed.