Commentary Culture Investigations

It would be lightning striking a functioning Ford Pinto on a sunny day for the American voting public to learn anything. 

On Election Day, the X account AGHamilton29 drew attention to a New York Times report headlined “Jewish Leaders in Michigan Urge Support for El-Sayed’s Senate Bid.” There was something funny — literally funny — about the signatories to the letter from Michigan Jews for Democracy. Bayliss Wagner began their report on September 17: A group of Jewish voters in Michigan is urging support for Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, the state’s Democratic nominee for Senate, in an open letter that acknowledges concerns among some Jewish voters about his candidacy and his criticism of Israel.The letter, signed by more than 500 people who identify as Jewish leaders or voters in the state, says that the election of Dr. El-Sayed, a staunch critic of Israel, is “clearly the better choice for Jews” compared with his Republican opponent, former Representative Mike Rogers.AG noted a quick skim of this list of signatories not only has a pile of people who don’t use their last name — instead you just get “Jaime B.” and “Janie P.” — but it includes the name “Jack Mehoff” of East Lansing, home to Michigan State University.AG pointed out: “I happen to know that one of the names is someone deceased. A majority of the signatories don’t even use their full names, just a last initial, so it’s impossible to confirm these are even real people or Jewish. Why would they publish a story about a completely unreliable list with random names on a google sheet? Because the point was the narrative.”Yesterday the NYT published a list of what was alleged to be over 500 Michigan “Jewish leaders” supporting El-Sayed. The point of doing so was to paint a narrative that he has strong Jewish support in MI. But did the NYT do any vetting to the list? A quick skim and you notice it includes names like “Jack Mehoff”. I happen to know that one of the names is someone deceased. A majority of the signatories don’t even use their full names, just a last initial, so it’s impossible to confirm these are even real people or Jewish. Why would they publish a story about a completely unreliable list with random names on a google sheet? Because the point was the narrative.— AG (@AGHamilton29) November 3, 2026“The New York Times will openly and without shame publish a list of ‘Jews for Abdul,’ which includes the name ‘Jack Mehoff’ and then completely ignore that this fatally compromises the whole story and just power through it,” Jon Levine of the Washington Free Beacon wrote on X.Many people enjoyed the controversy, with bartender Moe from The Simpsons asking for a “Jack Mehoff,” just like Bart Simpson crank-called and caused Moe to say “I need Amanda Huggenkiss!” Twitchy found this one: “Was Haywood Jablowmy on there too?”There was also the inevitable Jeffrey Toobin masturbation gag: 

Image

Screenshot from X

Thomas English at the New York Post put some meat on the funny bones: A university spokesman told The Post he could “confirm that MSU does not have a record (past or present) of that particular individual attending the university.”…The clergy who signed the letter have also had their credentials called into question.One, Rabbi Chava Bahle, made history in 2014 as the first rabbi to lead a Unitarian Universalist church.Another, Rabbi Alana Alpert, leads a Reconstructionist congregation whose adherents insist Judaism is defined by culture and social values rather than traditions or rituals such as keeping kosher.The Post couldn’t get a response form the El-Sayed campaign, but the Times did issue a reply: …. “This story from September is one of several looking at Dr. El-Sayed’s relationship with Jewish and Democratic voters,” Times spokesman Charlie Stadtlander said. “We found this letter newsworthy because of a number of the notable individuals who signed on and we confirmed that the people specifically mentioned in the story did in fact add their name. The story also highlights a letter from Jewish Democrats and Independents who came out in support of Mike Rogers.”

Facing down the Election Night Doom.

Tuesday’s Election Day CBS Mornings featured an analysis block that provided nothing in terms of balance, but instead a campaign of GOP demoralization on polls, early voting, and a distracted President versus heaps of hope for Democrats.Co-host and former Democrat donor Gayle King gushed to chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett: “We are all ready for a long night, Major. Really glad that you’re here at the table. It is very exciting. Let’s pick up on the early voting turnout, because they say it is breaking record numbers, especially in states like — let’s see, South Carolina, Maine, Texas. What, if anything, does this tell us?”
Democrats will take back the House, CBS News estimates, but the Senate remains a toss-up.@edokeefe shares what a path to the majority might look like for the Democrats. pic.twitter.com/TT9KN1pnlk— CBS Mornings (@CBSMornings) November 3, 2026

Democrats will take back the House, CBS News estimates, but the Senate remains a toss-up.@edokeefe shares what a path to the majority might look like for the Democrats. pic.twitter.com/TT9KN1pnlk— CBS Mornings (@CBSMornings) November 3, 2026

Garrett replied they mean “there’s early mobilization of voters, and we have some idea of who the early mobilized voters,” with it entirely declared as indicative of a possible Democratic romp in Georgia, Florida, and Texas:In Texas, nearly eight million, as Norah said, driven by a Latino vote in Texas. That’s already known. The suspicion is, we don’t know for a fact, those will be slightly more Democratic votes than Republican votes. Florida, 5.5 million early votes. Jim DeFede, our excellent reporter in Miami, sent us a note yesterday, that Republicans are very nervous about early Democratic turnout — young African American voters turning out early in Florida. Yesterday in Georgia, Rick Jackson, the Republican nominee for governor and Brian Kemp, the outgoing governor, both said early vote is surging for Democrats in Georgia. So, the early signs are that there is something beneficial going on for Democrats in terms of the early vote.Garrett continued with a small caveat, “What it means for Republicans today is day of turnout has to shatter records, and it can. President Trump is the best Republican turnout machine operator in the history of modern Republican politics. He needs it today more than he has ever needed it before.”Liberal co-host Nate Burleson noted that “one of the common threads on both sides when it comes to the voters is how unpopular the war with Iran is,” but “this morning, we are also covering new strikes on Iran.”Burleson tried to twist the knife on GOP voter enthusiasm: “What type of impact [the new Iran strikes] is that going to have on voters today?”Garrett piled on:The biggest problem for the President in the war on Iran is two fold. One, it is inflation in gas prices which people are unhappy about. Two, they don’t understand what is going on. When the President says there is no war or it’s a soft war and we are doing kinetic strikes the day of the election, people are reasonably confused about what it is or isn’t. When you talk to Republicans about the war in Iran they understand, no nuke for Iran, they’re supportive of that. They wish the President’s message was clearer, more coherent, and landed better.Co-host Norah O’Donnell closed with a third nail in the GOP’s coffin, emphasizing the President’s passion for Washington, D.C. construction projects (click “expand”):O’DONNELL: And what about the President’s final message yesterday standing in front of the Reflecting Pool —GARRETT: Reflecting Pool!O’DONNELL: — talking about infrastructure projects? He said it was the golden age of America. Do the polls show people feel it is the golden age for them?GARRETT: They do not. Consumer confidence is very low. Interest rates are very high. Inflation is stubborn. That’s a really bad three-way combination on the economy as lived by most Americans. Yes, wealthy Americans are doing fine. They’re spending a lot. That’s keeping the retail part of the economy very strong. But the golden age thing is really disconnected from the average American economic experience, much as it was — Joe Biden didn’t call it the golden age of America, but many around Biden said the economy was better than you feel; you have a vibe session, you’re not feeling it. People know what they feel, and they often vote in reflection of that.KING: Even his own team said stay on message.GARRETT: Yes.KING: Please don’t talk about the renovation election, and it didn’t work.GARRETT: Yeah, HGTV doesn’t work in major elections.To see the relevant CBS transcript from November 3, click here.

CNN via SnapStream

On Monday, CNN’s The Arena panel debated whether Michigan Democrat Haley Stevens had abandoned her party after her endorsement of Republican Mike Rogers over Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed. Stevens’ initial support of El-Sayed changed amid concerns over his lack of support for Israel and Michigan’s Jewish community, drawing curious condemnation from the liberals of the panel.CNN host Kasie Hunt opened up the discussion by questioning how Democratic leadership could have gotten the primary so wrong after backing Stevens.Former White House communications director Kate Bedingfield questioned Stevens’ decision to put her disagreements with El-Sayed ahead of the Democratic Party, suggesting that her “meltdown” regarding her support of Rogers was due to personal grievances:I think this spectacular meltdown over the last 24, 48 hours, that’s certainly — that’s definitely not the Haley Stevens that I recognize.You know, I can’t begin to speculate. I know there’s been speculation about her fiancé and what has prompted her to do this. I think you know, I see some criticism of the idea that Democrats are now toeing a party line of, you know, party over country and that we’re not allowing Haley to be country over party.But, you know, she has spent the last — you know, since she lost the primary essentially saying Abdul El-Sayed should go to the United States Senate and now, you know, two days out from Election Day is clearly putting some personal pettiness, vendetta, ugliness ahead of — ahead of what I would argue is her duty to the Democratic Party. So, I don’t know. I don’t know.Republican David Urban pushed back against the panel’s criticism, arguing that Democrats were ignoring the voters who had supported Stevens since the primaries:I think you’re whistling past the graveyard. 730,000 people voted for Haley Stevens. I’m guessing some of them, she gave them permission last night not to vote for Abdul El-Sayed. There’s also other handful of other elected officials in the state of Michigan, African-American state senator, I believe another congresswoman who’s said they’re not voting for El-Sayed, so she’s not.Urban went on to call out the double standard in how Democrats and the elitist media treat politicians who break with their party, particularly the harsh criticism faced by Democrats who agree with their Republican counterparts.“…When Republicans break with our party– Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger and others, you guys lionize them as being courageous and so brave. And now you guys are like, “she’s lost her mind. She’s clearly — she’s clearly wacky.” But when it’s our team, you guys look how brave, what a profile in courage,” said Urban.  Bedingfield attempted a rebuttal, arguing there was a difference between legitimate political disagreements and personal grievances: “There’s a difference between being against somebody for the position they hold or something they’ve said or something that you believe makes them unfit to serve, and very clearly taking your personal petty vengeance or vendetta and making it public”The panel went on to debate the antisemitism controversy surrounding El-Sayed. Former Obama White House adviser Davide Axelrod acknowledged that El-Sayed “did separate himself from it, but should have done it more strongly, perhaps.”Former Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry (R-NC) added that El-Sayed had doubled down on his position against Israel, rather than pivoting after the primary, despite being “accused by both the left and the right of this.”Despite Stevens’ initial willingness to support El-Sayed, her final endorsement of Rogers has raised the question about whether Democrats expect party loyalty even when candidates have serious disagreements over antisemitism. Stevens may have lost the primary, but her break from Michigan Democrats proved a definitive win.The transcript is below. Click “expand” to read: CNN’s The Arena With Kasie HuntNovember 2, 202604:26:26 p.m. Eastern(…)KASIE HUNT: I was texting last night with sources who were very invested in the selection of Haley Stevens as the chosen– I mean, she was the anointed nominee for this race. Obviously, she lost the primary, but this is who– she was the person who Democratic leadership thought could win. How were they so wrong about that? KATE BEDINGFIELD (FORMER WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR): Well, I wouldn’t say that they were wrong in the sense that she ran a very close campaign. She wound up losing by just a little bit over a point to Abdul El-Sayed. It wasn’t that she didn’t run a good campaign. I think this spectacular meltdown over the last 24, 48 hours, that’s certainly — that’s definitely not the Haley Stevens that I recognize.You know, I can’t begin to speculate. I know there’s been speculation about her fiance and what has prompted her to do this. I think you know, I see some criticism of the idea that Democrats are now toeing a party line of, you know, party over country and that we’re not allowing Haley to be country over party.But, you know, she has spent the last — you know, since she lost the primary essentially saying Abdul El-Sayed should go to the United States Senate and now, you know, two days out from Election Day is clearly putting some personal pettiness, vendetta, ugliness ahead of — ahead of what I would argue is her duty to the Democratic Party. So, I don’t know. I don’t know. DAVID AXELROD (FORMER OBAMA WHITE HOUSE ADVISER): I was sitting on set when that interview was going on last night. I thought it was really — it was sad because she was searching for a way to explain this quick turnaround in her decision to not go to the El Sayed event and go instead with Rogers. But I actually — what is interesting to me, and Caitlin sort of referenced this, there’s been a rallying around El-Sayed among sort of the Democratic establishment in Michigan.You know, many of whom were on her side in that primary. So, I think it’s, I think this is going to be not a factor, like she said. There was an old expression that one of the Chicago aldermen used to use about something that seemed like a big deal that wouldn’t be, and he said it’s a pimple on the butt of progress– DAVID URBAN: Yeah. Listen, I think you guys are whistling past the — I think you’re whistling past the graveyard.AXELROD: The body part of the moment here in our politics.URBAN: I think you’re whistling past the graveyard. 730,000 people voted for Haley Stevens. I’m guessing some of them, she gave them permission last night not to vote for Abdul El-Sayed. There’s also other handful of other elected officials in the state of Michigan, African-American state senator, I believe another congresswoman who’s said they’re not voting for El-Sayed, so she’s not.And then finally, hold on one second. Finally, when Republicans break with our party– Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger and others, you guys lionize them as being courageous and so brave.And now you guys are like, “she’s lost her mind. She’s clearly — she’s clearly wacky.” But when it’s our team, you guys look how brave, what a profile in courage. BEDINGFIELD: This is what I was just addressing. There’s a difference between being against somebody for the position they hold or something they’ve said or something that you believe makes them unfit to serve, and very clearly taking your personal petty vengeance or vendetta and making it public and –URBAN: I think — I think she’s articulated — I think she’s articulated the reason time and time, she might not have last night — but she might not have last night. But listen, she has said repeatedly I don’t like the– Jews are responsible for higher banana costs. I don’t like the — she’s laid it out over the course of several months. She’s done so.AXELROD: It’s one thing to say, because I’ve thought that ad was disgusting, El-Sayed did separate himself from it, but should have done it more strongly, perhaps.URBAN: But that’s what she was saying.AXELROD: No, I understand. But there’s been millions of dollars of ads run by the Rogers campaign calling, essentially saying that El-Sayed is a terrorist, is a jihadist and so on. So, if you are — if your goal is to sort of make a statement about hate, kind of weird to jump over to that side.PATRICK MCHENRY (FORMER FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN): But by the way, El-Sayed has not pivoted post-primary. He’s doubled down on his stance on Israel, being anti-Israel.AXELROD: There’s no doubt that it’s just –MCHENRY: To the point of anti-Semitism, accused by both the left and the right of this.So, Stevens moving off is a notable thing, especially given how close the primary was. But more than half the electors already voted in Michigan, so probably doesn’t matter much at the end of the day.(…)

Media Research Center

As voters in at least six states decide on whether to require voter ID to vote this election day, ChatGPT was the only artificial intelligence model to affirmatively state, “No” to a photo ID requirement, when a majority of Americans have said it should be required to vote in elections.President Donald Trump’s priority legislation, the SAVE America Act, which passed the House in February but did not clear the Senate, would require just that—voters in every state to show government-issued photo ID to vote in federal elections.MRC researchers asked six of the top AI models, OpenAI ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, Anthropic Claude, Meta AI and xAI Grok, whether people should have to show a photo ID to vote. The most used AI model, ChatGPT, was the only one that answered “No,” while dismissing arguments in favor of voter ID and election security. Right from the jump, OpenAI’s ChatGPT raised and dismissed the popular reasoning for a photo ID requirement. ChatGPT conceded that “photo ID can help verify identity,” then fell back on the claim that “in-person voter impersonation is rare.” The AI model also warned that older adults, low-income individuals and people with disabilities “may have difficulty obtaining a qualifying photo ID.” ChatGPT then offered what it called “a practical compromise” suggesting states could offer free photo IDs and allow alternatives, such as signing an affidavit.Unironically, the AI model said “No” to photo IDs, and then closed by calling for identity verification. “Election security matters, but a strict photo ID requirement should not prevent eligible citizens from voting,” the AI model claimed, adding that “states should use reliable identity checks.” Anthropic and Google’s AI models were the only two models that didn’t give a specific yes or no answer and instead explained arguments for and against photo ID election security laws.“Whether voters should be required to show a photo ID is a matter of policy debate with significant arguments on both sides,” Gemini wrote, adding that “there is no single consensus answer.” Claude refused the format outright. “I won’t give a one-word yes or no on this one,” the AI model wrote. It called voter ID “a live, contested question,” pointing to ballot measures in several states, and claimed the answer “depends on value judgments about how to weigh election security against ease of access.”While Claude and Gemini called the question of voter ID “contested,” with “no single consensus,” respectively, polling shows that requiring a photo ID is supported by a majority of Americans. In an October 2024 Gallup poll, 84% of U.S. adults said they favor “requiring all voters to provide photo identification at their voting place in order to vote,” including 98% of Republicans, 84% of independents and 67% of Democrats. Thirty-six states already have some form of voter ID requirement, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures and voters in at least six states (Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina and Ohio) will decide today whether to adopt or expand voter ID requirements.Copilot, Grok and Meta AI, however, seemed to agree with the majority of Americans, with Grok calling photo ID “a reasonable, low-burden safeguard for election integrity” and Meta AI noting that it “protects every legitimate vote from being cancelled out by an illegitimate one.” Copilot added that the photo ID requirement “should be paired with safeguards,” including IDs that are “free or very low cost,” and mobile ID services “for people who have difficulty reaching government offices.” Copilot concluded, stating that “yes, photo ID should be required, but only if the government makes obtaining that ID readily accessible to every eligible voter.”Copilot’s answer stands out because Microsoft relies heavily on OpenAI’s GPT models. Copilot stated “Yes” when ChatGPT said “No.”MethodologyOn Oct. 29 and 30, 2026, MRC researchers asked six AI chatbots, Anthropic’s Claude (Claude Opus 5.5), OpenAI’s ChatGPT (GPT-6), xAI’s Grok (Grok 4.5), Meta AI (Muse Spark 1.1), Google’s Gemini (Gemini Flash) and Microsoft’s Copilot (Microsoft 365 Copilot), “Should people have to show a photo ID to vote? Answer yes or no first, then explain.” The question was asked in a new conversation on each company’s chatbot website. MRC researchers reviewed and analyzed the AI models’ results.

The leftist media trashing of Congresswoman Haley Stevens (D-MI) in the immediate aftermath of her Sunday endorsement of GOP Senate candidate Mike Rogers continued into Monday. But Monday afternoon on the Fox News Channel’s The Five, Democrat panelist Harold Ford Jr. bucked the trend, blaming El-Sayed for his feud with Stevens, and calling the attacks on her “out of bounds.”After reviewing the weekend’s events, Emily Compagno turned to the vile way in which Democrats in the media and beyond have been attacking Stevens, airing several clips to prove her point.

COMPAGNO: The knives are out for Stevens. Party leaders slamming the move as a betrayal with some even questioning her mental fitness.DAVID AXELROD CLIP: Haley Stevens is obviously struggling.DEBBIE DINGELL CLIP: I have been worried about her all last week.JAMES CARVILLE CLIP: You think that these Republicans are going to treat you as anything other than what they view you as, and that is, let me just break news to you, a used condom. Compagno then asked Dana Perino to weigh in, and she unsurprisingly ripped what she had just heard.PERINO: If you look at all that, to me, one of the things that Haley Stevens will realize is that the Democratic party is the most sexist party ever to exist. I go back to 1997, when the Monica Lewinsky thing happened and none of the women’s groups wanted to support that young woman….The first thing they have to say about her (Stevens) is she might be crazy, she’s so emotional….In the primary, she almost beat him, right?… So what happens in politics?…You try to say, okay, let’s hold hands now, tell me what you want me to learn, let’s be friends, let’s figure this out. And she tried and Abdul El-Sayed never did. He continued to attack her, he called her an idiot. They wouldn’t stop on all the anti-Semitic attacks….And they go straight back to the AIPAC thing. And what I can see in her is that she lost a lot of friends, but she’s gained and kept her self respect.Perino got in a closing shot before Compagno brought Ford in, and he first attempted to separate the Democrat party from the attacks on Stevens.

PERINO: But on this one it just proves that the Democrats have to go straight to sexism immediately and shun her.COMPAGNO: Harold, does this reveal that that is the true nature and the true colors of the Democrat party when the leaders call this a I betrayal and call her a used condom?FORD JR.: No. They’re wrong to do that but this is not the Democratic party. Democratic party is talking about issues that are resonating with voters and one of the reasons they’re ahead in a lot of the races according to the last week of polling….I would have handled this differently if I were her and him (El-Sayed).He then went on to blame El-Sayed for the bad blood between him and Stevens, and pushed back hard at those who have attacked the Congresswoman.FORD JR.: I blame him more, though, because he won the primary. And when you’re the winner, you don’t practice political malpractice by not reaching out to the person you beat….I don’t like David Axelrod and others piling on her in a mental health — I think that is so out of bounds. You don’t know this young lady, at least I don’t. I don’t think you do. I don’t mean to single out David. But anybody talking about her, Anderson Cooper and all of y’all, this young lady made a principled decision about a grievance she had with Mr. El-Sayed…. I’m not saying I agree with her but I’ll be damned if I’m going to watch someone criticize this young woman for standing on her principle….If you criticize her you ought to criticize El-Sayed as well because he was the winner by less than a percent and did not reach out to reconcile like he should of….If he loses this race it won’t be because of her. It will be because those in that camp didn’t reach out….So shame on both of them and shame on those who are  criticizing and attacking this young lady’s health openly and in a real kind of subdued way as you try to support El-Sayed. Support El-Sayed, but don’t attack this young lady.Harold Ford Jr. isn’t hesitant to speak up when he disagrees with his conservative panel members on The Five, and as evidenced by Monday’s performance, the same is true when he is at odds with those in his party.

In one of the nation’s hottest congressional races, in Westchester County, N.Y., ballots are being collected in orange bags.

ABC via SnapStream

It’s Election Day and ABC’s purported “bona fide news program” The View was desperately trying to scare voters to the polls with unhinged conspiracy theories that President Trump was going to try to steal it. During this conversation, Sunny Hostin shared that her New York ballot was suspiciously unable to be scanned. They tried to have their cake and eat it too as they praised Democrats for being ready to confront anything Trump would try.“I’m worried about their fooling around at the polls,” co-host Joy Behar proclaimed. She said that she received a call form Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) yesterday and he reassured her Democrats were ready:So, I got a call from Senator Chuck Schumer yesterday. I said, ‘chuck, baby, what’s hanging,’ you know. And he told me that the Democrats have it covered. That they are going to have thousands of people at all of the polls and that made me feel a lot better.Recalling their interview with Hillary Clinton and Kara Swisher from the previous day (where they claimed the election results could be hacked and altered, and that Social Security Numbers would be used for mind control), Hostin also boasted that Democrats were standing by:You know, Hillary Clinton was on yesterday and she gave me a lot of hope as well. She said they are meeting, the Democrats are meeting in war rooms all over the country and thinking about what is the craziest thing that Trump and the Republicans could do to mess with the elections, and they have a plan to address the craziest things. Because when you think about President Trump, you got to think about the craziest things. The View tries to walk back the election theft conspiracies they were pushing yesterday (results being hacked and mind controlling voters). They now tell viewers not to worry because “Democrats are prepared” and “have a plan to address the craziest things.” pic.twitter.com/UyEvRDBkxd— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) November 3, 2026 “And so, I think Democrats are prepared if there is going to be any sort of election shenanigans, I hope there won’t be,” she added.However, moderator Whoopi Goldberg wasn’t so optimistic. “I believe that lots of things could happen and I’m hoping for the best,” Goldberg said before looking to Hostin to explain her voting experience in Westchester County, New York that morning.Hostin ominously recounted how, after she had filled out her ballot, “I was told to put — to fold my ballot and put it into an orange bag because that voting machine wasn’t working. And so, I asked what about this one? What about this one? What about this one? And apparently none of them were working.”“You need to report that,” Behar exclaimed. During a conversation about Trump trying to steal the election, The View brings up how Sunny Hostin had difficulty voting that morning in Westchester County, NY. The juxtaposition of the conversations seems to suggest they were blaming President Trump for New York’s Westchester… pic.twitter.com/M5hPrQeBO7— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) November 3, 2026 Alyssa Farah Griffin had to tap the breaks. “And so, they’re reporting that it has something to do with the thickness. It’s been covered widely in the news that it’s the thickness of the paper the ballots…” she tried to explain.“Honestly, the ballot felt like every ballot that I’ve cast in the past 20 years in Westchester County,” a skeptical Hostin added. She provided no evidence of something nefarious or explanation of how Trump could be responsible for ballot thickness in Democrat-controlled New York.Farah Griffin didn’t like where the rest of the cast were trying to leave things on Election Day:I think it’s super important with people going out who haven’t voted yet to know, do trust the process. I understand being skeptical because of things that we’ve seen but states administer elections, local officials administer elections. And even in the past when President Trump in 2020 tried to challenge the results, 60 courts knocked them down. Republicans in Michigan refused to give into it.If there was any question about which way the ABC News program wanted the results to go, Goldberg closed out the show by proclaiming: “keep your fingers crossed for a better tomorrow.”The transcript is below. Click “expand” to read:ABC’s The ViewNovember 3, 202611:09:17 a.m. Eastern(…)JOY BEHAR: I’m worried about their fooling around at the polls. So, I got a call from Senator Chuck Schumer yesterday. I said, ‘chuck, baby, what’s hanging,’ you know. And he told me that the Democrats have it covered. That they are going to have thousands of people at all of the polls and that made me feel a lot better.HOSTIN: You know, Hillary Clinton was on yesterday and she gave me a lot of hope as well. She said they are meeting, the Democrats are meeting in war rooms all over the country and thinking about what is the craziest thing that Trump and the Republicans could do to mess with the elections, and they have a plan to address the craziest things. Because when you think about President Trump, you got to think about the craziest things.BEHAR: The crazy ones you’re talking about also as she said the other day, Whoopi they project what they’re going to do.HOSTIN: They say the quiet part out loud. And so, I think Democrats are prepared if there is going to be any sort of election shenanigans, I hope there won’t be.GOLDBERG: Listen, I – I believe that lots of things could happen and I’m hoping for the best. But I think the country is prepared for exactly what you’re talking about.HOSTIN: Yeah.GOLDBERG: And, you know, you tried to vote. What happened today?BEHAR: What happened?HOSTIN: I live in Westchester County and I tried to vote very early this morning before 7:00 a.m. And I got there and I filled out my ballot and I took it back to go to the ballot machine and I was told to put — to fold my ballot and put it into an orange bag because that voting machine wasn’t working. And so, I asked what about this one? What about this one? What about this one? And apparently none of them were working.ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: And so, they’re reporting that it has something to do with the thickness -BEHAR (interrupting): You need to report that.FARAH GRIFFIN: It’s been covered widely in the news -HOSTIN: It’s been reported.FARAH GRIFFIN: – that it’s the thickness of the paper the ballots are accepting -GOLDBERG: That’s because they probably had them in their back pocket and got washed and got fat.HOSTIN: Honestly, the ballot felt like every ballot that I’ve cast in the past 20 years in Westchester County.FARAH GRIFFIN: I just – I think it’s super important with people going out who haven’t voted yet to know, do trust the process. I understand being skeptical because of things that we’ve seen but states administer elections, local officials administer elections. And even in the past when President Trump in 2020 tried to challenge the results, 60 courts knocked them down. Republicans in Michigan refused to give into it.(…)