Thanks for your support: 30% off đź’™ 40% off đź’™ 50% off đź’™ 60% off
Since 2020, the only thing the Republicans have been talking about is election fraud. That’s literally their only message. Over and over again they chant that the election was “rigged,” and that there are ongoing threats to election integrity.
We just ignore them. We dismiss their statements without any inquiry. Worse, we limit our perspective on the matter to denials of their accusations, and we never float any concerns of our own.
“Our elections are the most secure in the whole world,” we say. We believe this with absolute, unwavering certainty even though few of us even understand how our elections work.
Election experts know how the system works. The ones I’ve talked to lately have been more than a little rattled. But the United States of America no longer listens to “experts.” Experts have been the target of smear campaigns launched by corrupt candidates who have been on an unusual winning streak lately.
In election after election, Republicans manage to run candidates who have been not just accused but convicted of terrible crimes. These men win primaries handily. They take to podiums and demand that their victories be seen as “mandates” to install a new authoritarian regime.
For example, Ken Paxton’s transgressions were bad enough that he got impeached by Republicans.
This is the party that’s involved in an ongoing effort to delay the release of the Epstein files. How bad do you have to be to have Republicans say, “Hey now… buddy, there’s a line and you crossed it.”
Well, Paxton just won the Republican primary for Senate in Texas. This follows Thomas Massie’s loss to an extremist in Kentucky.
It used to be that an incumbent pretty much couldn’t lose a primary, particularly not when that incumbent was demanding accountability for a historically unpopular president.
But here we are. We used to think it was impossible for a Republican to win all seven swing stakes too, and at a margin just outside the requirements for a recount. Wow… what are the odds?
How many statistically impossible things have to happen in a row before you start asking questions?
Oh, there have been people asking questions. Those people are called election integrity experts. They haven’t just been asking. They’ve been screaming and yelling and pointing at data.
But nobody’s listening.
We’re all quite content to believe that a corrupt man who would have gone to jail if he’d lost the election was the beneficiary of some miraculous and statistically impossible win.
We’re all quite content to believe that despite being historically unpopular, his voters are showing up in unprecedented numbers to get his extremist candidates elected.
People will say, “Well, look at the money they spent on these races!”
Are you kidding me? Do you think that’s evidence? You’re forgetting that money means nothing to these people. They have control of the government treasury. Heck, they have control of the government printing press. Maybe they’re dumping millions of fake dollars into the races simply to cover up their crimes?
Remember, every accusation is a confession with these people. A man who cheats on his partner is often the first to accuse his partner of cheating. Then she is thrust into the disadvantageous position of having to defend herself.
“I did not.”
“Of course you’d say that.”
Meanwhile the cheater continues to cheat and chortle.
Why do otherwise intelligent people allow the criminal right to completely manage the narrative when it comes to election integrity?
Two seconds after an election is called, all the “journalists” out there start writing their opinions on what the results mean.
“Well, that guy showed that if you stand up to this president, the people will punish you for it.”
“The president remains a kingmaker, that’s what the data shows.”
How about asking if the data is accurate first?
I mean, forgive me as I pause and slap myself in the face repeatedly with a hammer.
Over the last ten years, we’ve learned that this man cheats at everything. Literally everything he says is a lie. I believe the only time he’s not lying is when he stands behind a podium and smirks and declares that he has cheated at elections again and again.
“Oh, he’s just joking,” say the journalists. “He wouldn’t stand up there and confess to criminal behavior.”
Why are you so certain of that?
Those of us who grew up in narcissistic relationships know this dance all too well. Narcissists don’t care what you want. Narcissists don’t care what’s right. They certainly don’t care about your feelings.
The idea of “the will of the people” is an insult to them. They don’t hold anything sacred.
They’ll say things like, “Well, what if the people decide that I should be held accountable for my criminal behavior?”
Then they snort and scoff and go into resting white supremacy face.
These are people who don’t care about truth or honor or decency or human dignity. They feel they are entitled to possess the entire world. That includes your labor, your thoughts, your money, and your body. They feel they have a right to the bodies of your children to use and discard as they see fit.
You know they think this way.
Yet even knowing this, people are inclined to assume that our elections are secure?
What’s with this cowardly and irresponsible wishful thinking?
All I’m saying is check the numbers. If you’re a Republican and you lose a primary, go and check the numbers. If you voted for a candidate who lost, you should put up a stink.
Why is it that the only people in American society that are allowed to denounce election fraud are the ones who apparently benefit from it? They talk about it incessantly. The simple act that they invoke the concept gives us not just the right but the responsibility to discuss the topic as well.
All the articles people are writing about what these elections mean are complete nonsense. If the data is invalid, you can’t draw conclusions about what the people believe, or how effective any messages are, or any of the other dozens of narratives that are deployed to distract us.
Once you accept that election fraud is a possibility, your perspective will shift on our entire political landscape. Once you recognize that there’s the possibility that we’ve been cheated, you no longer have to be angry at your neighbor. A lot of division goes away.
Don’t you get it?
Election reporting is designed to divide us. It’s designed to disregard reasonable questions. Remember there were bomb threats called in during the 2024 race. Those were never mentioned without the framing of, “Well, those threats didn’t have a measurable impact.”
How do they know they didn’t have an impact if there wasn’t an investigation? Speaking of that, why wasn’t there an investigation? Who was arrested for it? What was the motivation?
Was it perhaps a Right wing effort to influence the election on behalf of the same candidate who was convicted of business fraud related to election interference in 2016 and who was under indictment for election interference in 2020?
That guy?
You’re telling me that a guy who has faced multiple credible charges of election interference and who has openly bragged about election interference would never engage in election interference? You’re not even going to look into it?
You also don’t think there’s even the slightest chance that he’d rig primaries to remove longstanding incumbents to install loyalists willing to eliminate any remaining checks on his power? How do you think Paxton feels about the filibuster?
Journalists are willing to say that this is the most corrupt administration in American history. But they still insist this regime respects the concept of free and fair elections.
What definition of “corrupt” are they using? This regime has already funded a secret police, killed innocent citizens, built concentration camps, and is working on adding incinerators.
They’re doing all that but you believe they’d never, ever consider tampering with an election?
How about this? How about if we consider what the most corrupt human being possible would do and then work backwards? Let’s see how much of the process of this hypothetical super predator aligns with what we’ve seen in the world today. Then, for the places we don’t have evidence, rather than dismiss crimes as “impossible,” let’s do our due diligence and see what evidence is out there.
Alternatively, you could ask an election expert. They’re the people over in the corner screaming and waving that everyone is ignoring.
For the last few months, it’s become a rallying cry for people to say, “We didn’t vote for this!” Maybe it’s actually true on levels that haven’t yet become apparent.
All I’m saying is that we owe it to our children to verify the numbers before we draw our conclusions. Election integrity deserves attention, not dismissal. Don’t bet your life on the numbers or assumptions incessantly pushed by a cabal of criminal narcissists.
Thanks for your support: 30% off đź’™ 40% off đź’™ 50% off đź’™ 60% off
I'd Rather Be Writing is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
