Trump's 'wait-and-see' on election acceptance is no attack on democracy

Judging by the manufactured outrage erupting from the chattering class and talking heads, one might think Donald Trump has decided in his blackest of hearts to rip out American democracy by its very roots with his bull-headed refusal to give up the notion the presidential election may be "rigged."

Even Vice President Joe Biden is all adither, saying it is an attack on democracy's "very essence." That is goosebumps stuff.

Wednesday night's debate moderator, Chris Wallace, deep into the debate asked Trump: "Do you make the same commitment that you will absolutely – sir, that you will absolutely accept the result of this election?"

Trump answered: "I will look at it at the time. I'm not looking at anything now. I'll look at it at the time."

That sounded like "Let's wait and see," to me, but since that moment, when democracy's heart was torn out and stomped, commentators reveling in their umbrage have tsk-tsk-tsked Trump, who has, if anything, the temerity to say what he is thinking.

[Elections officials brace for fallout from Trump's 'rigged' claims]

What has been conveniently ignored in the maelstrom is that Trump is only the latest in a long line — including a herd of Democrats — who have suggested elections could have been, or were, rigged or stolen. Bernie Sanders comes to mind, as does Al Gore, who disputed the results of his 2000 defeat to George W. Bush. Or John Kerry in 2004, who blamed rigged voting machines. Even Hillary Clinton. The National Review reports she told a private fundraiser in 2002 that Bush had been "selected," not "elected."

Why would Trump be so stubbornly stubborn about a "rigged" election and what exactly could he mean?

For starters, a 2012 study by Pew Charitable Trusts entitled "Inaccurate, Costly and Inefficient: Evidence that American Voter Registration System Needs an Upgrade" found about 24 million voter registrations no longer valid or significantly inaccurate. It found more than 1.8 million dead people listed as voters; and, about 2.75 million people are registered in multiple states.

Elections expert J. Christian Adams told "FOX and Friends" he estimates there are 4 million dead people on U.S. voter rolls. Adams was the Voting Section lawyer at the U.S. Department of Justice and he says the Obama administration has no intent to clean up the voter rolls.

Many voter rolls across the nation are clogged with people who long ago should have been swept off. Why are they there? The Justice Department has come under fire for its failure to enforce a section of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, known as Motor Voter, requiring rolls be cleansed periodically.

Add to all that, Indiana's top election official, Republican Secretary of State Connie Lawson, discovered thousands of irregular voter registration forms she characterized as potential "voter fraud." Indiana State Police are investigating.

Then, CBS reported in "Hacker demonstrates how voting machines can be compromised" that the nation's older, electronic voting machines are vulnerable and can be hacked with a $15 device available online.

[Trump assault on election integrity reverberates among allies and rivals]

Dead people voting and bogus registrations and vulnerable voting machines are bad enough, but what about media coverage? Surely, that is sacrosanct and down the middle. Reporters are society's political referees; they guard their integrity like rabid wolverines and are quick to reveal any and all conflicts with a subject or story to avoid even the appearance of favoritism or conflict. Right?

Oh, were it so. The Center for Public Integrity has on its website a piece headlined, "Journalists shower Hillary Clinton with campaign cash" that belies what you know or thought you knew about journalists.

After offering a laundry list of offenders at large and small news outlets the center reported: "In all, people identified in federal campaign finance filings as journalists, reporters, news editors or television news anchors — as well as other donors known to be working in journalism — have combined to give more than $396,000 to the presidential campaigns of Clinton and Trump."

Let's face it, widespread rigging of an election would be virtually impossible because the election systems, run by states, are not connected. But it could be done here or there or in battleground states such as Pennsylvania, where 1980s voting machines are feared vulnerable. We all should be concerned.

An Economist/YouGov survey of 1,300 U.S. citizens 18 and older in web-based interviews from Oct. 15-18 found more than 2 of every 3 respondents were very or somewhat concerned about the nation's electoral system security. Only 21 percent said they were either not very concerned or not concerned at all. The poll's margin of error was 3.9 percentage points.

The upcoming election appears, in so many ways, "rigged" already and it seems many of us, Republican and Democrat alike, are fretting about the same things Trump frets about.

Maybe for good reason.

Paul Jenkins is editor of the AnchorageDailyPlanet.com, a division of Porcaro Communications.

The views expressed here are the writer's and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary@alaskadispatch.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@alaskadispatch.com.