Even in a city accustomed to voting scandals, this is a Doozy

Residents of Bridgeport, Conn., are preparing to cast their votes in what may be the nation’s most confusing election.

A judge this week threw out the results of the Democratic mayoral primary, citing surveillance videos that appear to show significant voting irregularities. He ordered election officials to hold a new primary, but had no authority to postpone the general election in the meantime. And so the general election will go ahead as planned on Tuesday.

What happens next is uncertain.

“It’s clear we’re in very uncharted legal waters here,” said state Rep. Steven Stafstrom, a Bridgeport Democrat and co-chairman of the Legislature’s Judiciary Committee.

The city finds itself in this mess after videos surfaced showing suspicious activity at absentee ballot drop boxes. Clip after clip we see two women putting wads of paper into the boxes.

“The videos are shocking to the court and should be shocking to all parties,” Bridgeport Superior Court Judge William Clark wrote in his statement. He added: “The number of ballots so mishandled is such that the outcome of the primaries is seriously called into question and the court is unable to determine the legitimate outcome.”

Although voter fraud is rare nationwide, Bridgeport, a city of about 150,000 in the southwestern part of the state, has been plagued by election irregularities in recent years.

In June, the State Election Enforcement Commission, which is investigating the primaries, said there was evidence of it possible crime during the 2019 mayoral elections. Last year a judge ordered a new Democratic primary in a state representative race over allegations of absentee ballot fraud. In 2017 a judge ordered a Democratic primary for a rerun of City Council seats after one absentee ballot, improperly handled, decided the race.

The incumbent mayor, Joe Ganim, was first elected in 1991 and served until 2003. He was convicted on federal corruption-related charges, resigned and spent seven years in prison. He made a comeback in 2015 and has been mayor since then.

“We’ve faced a lot of disappointments over and over again,” said 23-year-old Joel Monge, who heads Bridgeport memesa popular social media page.

The current legal battle began after the September primary, in which Mr. Ganim defeated his opponent, John Gomes, by 251 votes. Mr. Gomes challenged the outcome in court, citing the video clips that came from municipal surveillance cameras stationed near the city’s four absentee ballot drop boxes. A clip appeared on social media days after the primaries, which led Mr.’s lawyers. Gomes filed a lawsuit to get all 2,100 hours of tape on the mailboxes.

Judge Clark ruled that just two women had committed or were directly involved in 15 incidents involving mailboxes being filled with ballots. He wrote that the videos showed “credible evidence that ballots were being ‘harvested'” — a process in which third-party individuals collect and submit completed absentee ballots in bulk, rather than individual voters submitting them for themselves, which is inconsistent with the electoral laws. .

Both women, the judge wrote, were “partisans” for Mr. Ganim.

Bill Bloss, Mr. Gomes’ attorney, said his own review of the surveillance videos showed that no more than 420 people had returned their ballots at Bridgeport drop boxes, but that at least 1,253 ballots had been submitted.

Mr Ganim denied any involvement. “I was as shocked as anyone when the video came out,” he said.

Both candidates said they were appalled by the videos, and both men acknowledged that some of their supporters submitted multiple ballots.

“There is video footage of the irregularities on both sides,” Mr Ganim said. He added: “That is not acceptable. We all want everyone’s voice to count. We all want fair elections.”

Mr Gomes said his supporters had acted legally and submitted ballots for family members. The entire scandal is unfortunate, he said, adding, “Another black eye for Bridgeport.”

But the judge’s order targets Mr. Ganim’s supporters, some of whom appear to have submitted many ballots many times over.

“These cases do not appear to the court to be random,” Judge Clark wrote. “These appear to be deliberate acts with a partisan purpose.”

As a result of the primary confusion, choosing the city’s next mayor has become extremely complicated.

On Tuesday, the general election will feature four candidates: Mr Ganim; Mr. Gomes, now running as an independent; David Herz, a Republican; and Lamond Daniels, an unaffiliated candidate.

If Mr. Gomes wins the general election, he plans to withdraw his complaint about the Democratic primary and, if necessary, formally ask the judge to revoke his order for a new vote. In that scenario, Mr Gomes would probably simply become mayor.

If Gomes does not win the second primary on Tuesday, he will advance to a second general election as the Democratic candidate. (According to Rowena White, his campaign spokeswoman, Mr. Ganim is still believed to be on the ballot, this time with the New Movement Party.)

Alternatively, if Mr Ganim wins the general election on Tuesday and then wins the second primary, there would be no second general election, Mr Bloss said. Mr. Ganim would be re-elected.

If either of the other two general election candidates wins on Tuesday, Bridgeport would hold a new Democratic primary and then a new general election.

Officials have yet to decide when a second primary will take place. Mr. Ganim could still appeal the judge’s order calling for a new vote. And both campaigns would take time to get going again, even for a revote.

For voters, the bizarre election spectacle was disheartening.

“There just aren’t the checks and balances,” said Anthony L. Bennett, the lead pastor of Mount Aery Baptist Churchand added: “It is a great city, with great people, that has had a troubling history of unchecked and irresponsible government leadership.”

Officials are trying to regain voters’ trust. This week, Connecticut Secretary of State Stephanie Thomas appointed one temporary election monitor to oversee the mayoral elections.

“The public needs to know that whatever can be done will be done,” Ms Thomas said.

But critics noted that many absentee ballots have already been submitted for the general election — and wondered how one person could appropriately monitor the entire election.

And election skeptics across the country, who have long pushed to limit absentee voting, have seized on Judge Clark’s ruling.

They allege that Bridgeport — a historically Democratic city in a deeply Democratic state — is just one of the first places where absentee voting fraud has been caught on camera.

“That this happened here is beyond reasonable doubt.” Elon Musk wrote about X, the site formerly known as Twitter. “The only question is how often it happens.”

That worries many Democrats in Connecticut, including Mr. Ganim, who noted that many of his voters have difficulty accessing polling places on Election Day and need the option to vote absentee. They may have health problems, he said, or may not be able to get enough time off to vote.

Many potential voters in Bridgeport believe they have been abandoned by the government once again.

“A lot of people in Bridgeport just don’t vote in general because they always assume Joe Ganim is going to win,” said Mr. Monge, who runs Bridgeport Memes.

But, he said, the videos had angered many of his friends, perhaps prompting them to join in: “I think a lot of people are going to vote.”