Category: Elections

BLUF:
These five items make it clear that the Democrats’ efforts to build and sustain a majority electoral coalition are not guaranteed in any way by the race-ethnic trends detailed in the Census data and dwelt on by the media. Instead the challenges faced by the Democrats have simply mutated, interacting in profound ways with class and cultural issues that have undercut—and may continue to undercut—presumed gains from rising racial diversity.

Will Census Trends Save the Democrats?
Five Reasons Why That Just Ain’t So

The latest data release from the 2020 Census, which will be used to guide decennial redistricting, has been greeted rather breathlessly by the nation’s media and has been absolute catnip for commentators and observers who lean toward the Democrats. Consider some of these headlines:

“America’s White Population Shrank for the First Time”;

“Vast Stretches of America Are Shrinking. Almost All of Them Voted for Trump”.

“Census release shows America is more diverse and more multiracial than ever”

None of this is necessarily wrong, though it’s worth noting that these findings are consistent with trends of long-standing rather than something qualitatively new. What is questionable however is the political gloss that tends to put on these results. Leftist filmmaker Michael Moore called the announcement “the best day ever in US history”, which, while over the top, fairly represents the delight among most progressives that a presumably conservative white population is in precipitous decline while a presumably liberal nonwhite population keeps growing, the harbinger of a diverse, progressive future America.

At least that’s the story. But, as noted, these trends are ongoing, not new. Why should they now lead to progressive hegemony when they haven’t before? Many on the left appear to believe that, whatever the story up ‘til now, we have finally reached some sort of tipping point where the effects of underlying demographic trends can no longer be denied. Maybe. But then again maybe not.

Here are five reasons the Census trends may not be quite the bonus for Democrats so many want to believe (and others fear).

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
Keep this in mind the next time someone on the left claims that the idea of replacing the American electorate is a conspiracy theory.

NY Times Op-Ed Reveals Endgame of Border Crisis: Let Illegals Vote

In a little over six months, the Biden administration has allowed hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants to flow across America’s southern border. Many conservatives have suggested that this is nothing more than a cynical attempt to change America’s electorate by creating more Democrat voters.

A writer for the New York Times just seemed to confirm that this was the endgame all along.

Liberal journalist: There is ‘no good reason’ only citizens can vote

A guest columnist for the New York Times argued this week that “there is no good reason you should have to be a citizen to vote.”

According to the Times, the essay is “part of a series exploring bold ideas to revitalize and renew the American experiment.”

Atossa Araxia Abrahamian, a New York-based progressive journalist and former senior editor of the Nation, claimed in an opinion piece Wednesday that “it’s time for Democrats to radically expand the electorate.”

How? First by granting permanent legal residents the right to vote. Why? Because, according to Abrahamian, they contribute as much to the country as any natural-born citizen.

“Nearly 15 million people living legally in the United States, most of whom contribute as much as any natural-born American to this country’s civic, cultural and economic life, don’t have a say in matters of politics and policy because we — resident foreign nationals, or ‘aliens’ as we are sometimes called — cannot vote,” Abrahamian wrote.

Talk about saying the quiet part out loud.

Carmine Sabia of the Conservative Brief has more:

It sounds like a good faith argument from someone who just wants the right to vote in a nation where he resides and pays taxes.

But then you have to read just one paragraph farther to comprehend what it is that Abrahamian actually wants.

“Considering the Supreme Court’s recent decision undermining voting rights, and Republicans’ efforts to suppress, redistrict and manipulate their way to electoral security, it’s time for Democrats to radically expand the electorate. Proposing federal legislation to give millions of young people and essential workers a clear road to citizenship is a good start. But there’s another measure that lawmakers both in Washington and state capitals should put in place: lifting voting restrictions on legal residents who aren’t citizens — people with green cards, people here on work visas, and those who arrived in the country as children and are still waiting for permanent papers,” the writer said.

And there it is.

Make no mistake. There are Democrats in Washington who agree with this.

Keep this in mind the next time someone on the left claims that the idea of replacing the American electorate is a conspiracy theory.

BLUF:
Conclusion. The trend is ever more evidence and revelations of election fraud in 2020. This is bad news for the Democrat Party and greatly strengthens Republican efforts to pass new election integrity laws in states around the country. And that trend also explains the increasing desperation of the Democrat-media complex to stonewall, obfuscate, lie, and attempt to explain it all away. Not going to work, as more Americans are getting red-pilled every day! Keep up the pressure on all of your elected representatives because it is having a positive effect.

(LONG article)

A.U.D.I.T. of Elections: Grassroots Pressure Begins to Pay Off

A.U.D.I.T.: About Undermining Democrat-Implemented Theft (of elections)

Despite the near-blackout from the legacy media, the saga of the 2020 election continues – and it ain’t what the Democrats are bleating endlessly (“the most secure election EVAH!”). Every day there are new revelations that explode their myth that all claims of election fraud are “baseless.” And actions by some legislators in various states are inching in the right direction, thanks to relentless grassroots pressure.

I have to admit that “baseless” is just the latest in a long line of Democrat-spun words that triggers me! Because they are lying out their a$$e$. I don’t care what Rachel Maddow and the other fools at MSNBC (and a lot of others in the media) nervously bleat daily in trying to spin the reality of what happened last year. They are paid to spout the Democrat line and are liars. It’s a simple as that. And as Rasmussen polling reported on 20 July, even 37% of Democrats – 61% of all Americans – support investigating and fixing election integrity issues. Would the numbers be that high if people were confident that last year’s election was “the most secure ever”?

Continue reading “”

Quote O’ The Day:

“I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this — who will count the votes, and how.” ― Joseph Stalin .
source: The Memoirs of Stalin’s Former Secretary by Boris Bazhanov.

Running Scared

I have a number of things to attend to but I do have something to “tide you over.” The collection of links below presents a convincing picture of Left-wing panic and the reasons for it:

Well-verified evidence that the elections in six states were corrupted by fake ballots, multiple-counting of votes, deliberate invalidation of votes for President Trump, and votes by non-citizens will present the Usurper Regime with a serious problem: It will have lost all pretense to a “right to govern.” However, it will also present Us the Patriots of America with an equally serious problem: What can we do about it?

It has already been noted that once a president has been inaugurated, there is only one non-electoral method for removing him from office: impeachment by the House of Representatives, followed by conviction by a two-thirds majority of the Senate. That remedy is unlikely to be applied. What, then, must we do?

I shall refrain from making any “insurrectionary” suggestions. But would such a suggestion really come as a surprise, Gentle Reader?

H.R. 1 Was Always Doomed to Fail, and the Democrats Have Nothing Else

In the world of Congressional politics, there is a rule most people like to conveniently ignore every time a new Congress is seated: H.R. 1 is never meant to become law.

The first bill of each Congress is always a messaging bill put out by the party in power. It is a list of lofty goals meant to signal to the base that “We are fighting for you!” In truth, though, H.R. 1 is meant to be a platform, not an actual law.

So, while a lot of people have been very worried about Democrats like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema breaking their word and voting to obliterate the filibuster, keeping the history of prior H.R. 1 bills in mind and understanding that Manchin and Sinema are playing the long game certainly indicated the bill would die a proper death in the Senate.

Continue reading “”

Biden’s Proposed Funding of Critical Race Theory Puts US on a ‘Very Dark Path’: Inez Stepman

The Biden administration’s proposal to fund education programs informed by Critical Race Theory (CRT) is “dangerous and pernicious,” according to senior policy analyst at the Independent Women’s Forum, Inez Stepman.

In April, the Department of Education proposed a new rule to prioritize funding education programs that incorporate the New York Times’ 1619 Project and critical race theorist Ibram X. Kendi into their teaching of U.S history and civics.

The Department outlined new priority criteria for a $5.3 million American History and Civics Education grant, as well as exemplary materials for K-12 educators to use.

However, Stepman, who is also a senior contributor at The Federalist, told Epoch TV’s “American Thought Leaders” program that Ibram X. Kendi’s teachings are “incredibly radical” and may instead put the United States on “a very dark path” by teaching children to actively hate each other.

“Just to give you an idea of how radical his scholarship is, one of the things he’s proposed [in his book, Stamped from the Beginning] is to create a department of ‘anti-racism’ in the federal government,” Stepman said.

“So far, that sounds unobjectionable to most people. But he wants that unelected department staffed by trained academics, presumably by him, to have veto power over every municipal state and federal law in the country, if it creates, in his eyes, any kind of disparity between groups. And he wants that body to have veto power over who stands for political office.

“That’s incredibly radical, incredibly contradictory with the American system. But yet the Department of Education is citing this guy as an example of what they want to encourage schools around the country to teach young Americans who then grow up to be voters in this republic.

“I call it woke Stalinism … his position is that a group of unelected academics should have complete veto power over all laws in the United States, and kind of similar to how it works with the mullahs in Iran, to basically select the slate of candidates. The people may vote, but only on the candidates or among the candidates selected by people who think like Ibram X. Kendi.”

Continue reading “”

Here Is Why the Democrats Are Totally Panicked About the Arizona Audit

All eyes are on Arizona. Republicans and Trump supporters are certain that the ongoing audit will prove their over-arching allegation that election integrity was nonexistent in the state during the 2020 election. Democrats and their media sycophants are trying to have both sides of a counter-argument: the audit is “fatally flawed” due to lack of security and faulty procedures, and yet, the election was “the most secure ever,” the allegations of irregularities are unsupported, and there is no need for an audit (all the while fighting through the legal system to shut down the audit on the flimsiest of pretenses). Here is how leftwing kook Rachel Maddow and Soros-backed Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs (D) frame the audit:

Democrats argue that The Hologram won the election overwhelmingly. One would think that they would be delighted to stick it to Republicans politically by conducting a forensic audit that would prove their case and embarrass anyone supporting former President Trump’s “The Big Lie” claim. That proof would also destroy Trump’s credibility completely, making it impossible for him to mount any kind of comeback in 2024. Isn’t that exactly what the Democrats have been trying to do over the past four years through their various hoaxes and impeachment gambits, i.e., to finally “get rid of Trump”? That they’re not fully supportive of a full forensic audit to prove their claim speaks volumes. What are they hiding by both fighting tooth-and-nail to derail the audit while at the same time giving it their all to discredit the findings even before the results are known?

This might be the understatement of the year:

Continue reading “”

Basically because they act like they stole it.

Here’s How You Know Democrats Rigged and Stole the 2020 Election

Let me put this in terms even Democrats can understand.

Let’s say a white police officer killed a black man who did nothing wrong. Unlike George Floyd, this man had not committed any crime, did not resist arrest, didn’t have fentanyl in his system and had no record of violent crime. Assume this poor guy was a law-abiding, taxpaying, churchgoing American and that the cop killed him for the crime of “driving while black.”

How do the police react? They say the shooting was righteous. They refuse to investigate. There is bodycam footage, but they refuse to release it. And get this: They refuse to allow anyone to even talk about it. If any cop talks about it, he loses his job. If anyone in the black community talks about it, social media will suspend them or ban them for life.

What would all of that mean to you? Guilty as charged, right? The police must be covering up a crime. No one who’s innocent acts like that, right?

Guess what? That’s equivalent to the reaction (or, should I say, overreaction) of liberals, Democrats and assorted socialists and communists when Republicans make accusations of massive voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

I thought we’re all allowed to have our opinion in America. I thought we have free speech. I thought we have a right to investigate. I thought we have a right to see the videotapes. I thought we have a right to forensic audits.

I was wrong.

The fix is in. It’s crystal clear to me now that not only was the election rigged but so is everything post-election. It’s simple psychology. Just look at the absurd reaction, or overreaction, by Democrats.

Would anyone dare ban the right to discuss a possibly racist police killing? Can you imagine the reaction by liberals, black activists and the American Civil Liberties Union? What if the Minneapolis police were to permanently ban any discussion of George Floyd’s death? What if every black American trying to give his or her opinion on Twitter, Facebook or YouTube were banned for life?

Who would react like that? Only guilty people.

Here are the questions I want answered.
— If Democrats didn’t rig and steal the election, why are they so afraid of forensic audits in key battleground states, specifically the current audit in Arizona?
— When Trump was an 8-to-1 landslide favorite with bettors around the world late on election night and clearly headed toward a landslide electoral victory, why did five states suddenly announce they would pause counting for the night? And how come Biden was suddenly ahead by morning?
— How come Michigan apparently had a dump of 149,772 votes at 6:31 a.m. on Nov. 4, 96% of which went to Biden?
— How did Wisconsin count 149,520 votes for Biden from 3:26 to 3:44 a.m. on Nov. 4?
— How come Philadelphia vote counters were so desperate to keep witnesses out of the counting room? Why did they refuse entry to witnesses (to Republicans) until those witnesses had a court order in hand?
— Why were the windows in a vote-counting location in Detroit covered with cardboard so nobody (no Republican) could see inside?
— There are videotapes filmed in Detroit of vans pulling up in the middle of the night with what obviously look like boxes of ballots. In Atlanta, there are videotapes that clearly show ballot containers appearing at a vote-counting location after a fake water main break was used to force all GOP witnesses out of the counting room. Why can’t we discuss these videotapes?
— How come Twitter banned me for life over mentioning these videotapes?
— How come the Arizona Senate’s liaison for the vote audit says Maricopa County hasn’t complied with the subpoena by turning over passwords to Dominion voting machines?
— How come the Biden DOJ suddenly wants to stop the Arizona audit?

These are all valid questions. Why do we get backlash for asking them and posting them on social media? What are Democrats hiding? What are they so afraid of?

In the end, that’s the proof Democrats rigged and stole the 2020 presidential election. The truth is in their ridiculous, heavy-handed overreaction. They’re desperate to stop you from looking into or even talking about this.

Democrats are guilty as sin.

Just me, but it appears that Proggie Politics™ isn’t as popular as advertised.

Austin Residents Vote to Ban Homeless Encampments

More than half of Austin residents voted Saturday to reinstate a ban on homeless encampments in the city.

Fifty-seven percent of voters in the Texas state capital said they were in favor of reinstating criminal penalties for camping in public spaces via Proposition B, the Austin American-Statesman reported.

The controversial measure was one of eight proposals on the ballot. More than 150,000 Austin residents cast a vote, with 85,830 voting in favor and 64,409 against, according to the paper.

The vote comes after the city’s mayor, Stever Adler, and the city council in July 2019 canceled a more than 20-year-old ordinance that banned camping in public spaces.

Opponents of ‘Critical Race Theory’ Win Texas School Board Election

A Texas school board has scored an overwhelming election victory to stop “critical race theory” and a new “cultural competence action plan” from being forced into classes.

The elections in Southlake on Saturday were so divisive that backers of the new anti-racism measures called on the Department of Justice to intervene — and even pop star Demi Lovato ripped opponents of the plan.

Republican win in Texas special election raises questions about Biden’s popularity

The special election in Texas’ Sixth Congressional District on Saturday was seen as the first competitive race since Joe Biden was elected president and a bellwether on how a district that was seen to be purpling reacted to the new administration’s first 100 days.

The results were seen as a blow to Democrats because two Republicans earned enough votes to advance to a runoff. Susan Wright, the wife of the late Republican Rep. Ron Wright, was followed in votes by Jake Ellzey who eked out a win over Democrat Jana Lynne Sanchez. (Sanchez conceded in a social media post. She lost by about 400 votes.)

John Fund, a national affairs columnist for the National Review, took to Twitter on Sunday to consider the outcome of the race and the general popularity of a president who just released his vision for the future of the country.

“If Biden Is So Popular, Why This?” Fund asked, linking to a story with the election result. “Republicans grabbed the two runoff slots in the Texas 6 special election yesterday. Dems were shut out, their candidates won a total 36% in a Dallas area seat that Trump carried by only 3 points last November.”

Clarence Thomas Blasts the Supreme Court for Ducking the Pennsylvania Election Challenge.

Few things are worse for public confidence in elections than having the rules changed in the middle of the game (or after it). An epidemic of late-in-the-day changes to the rules was particularly corrosive in 2020. Courts are ill-equipped to referee those changes when partisan tempers are running hot. The Supreme Court just threw away its last opportunity to remedy that problem before the next election cycle.

The Court this morning (Monday) turned away the remaining challenges to the 2020 election in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona, and Michigan. Some of these challenges were legally meritless, and none of them offered any legitimate grounds to change the outcome of the presidential election, but the Pennsylvania case in particular raised a serious, recurring issue of election law: whether state courts or state executive officials can use the general, open-ended terms of state constitutional provisions to throw out specific rules passed by state legislatures governing federal elections. Articles I and II of the Constitution reserve to state legislatures the power to set rules for federal elections.

That’s exactly what happened in Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania supreme court used the Pennsylvania Constitution’s general guarantees of “free and equal” elections and “free exercise of the right of suffrage” as an excuse to invalidate the state legislature’s explicit deadline for mail-in ballots to be received by 8 p.m. on Election Day — the same time the in-person polls close. That deadline was enacted in 2019 and left untouched in revisions to the mail-in ballot rules during the pandemic in 2020. The Court should have heard the case before Election Day, in order t0 ensure that the rules of the road were set in advance. Refusing to hear the case either before the election or after the election guarantees that the issue remains unsettled for the next election.

Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, wrote a dissent blasting the Court for repeatedly ducking this issue (Alito added his own dissent). Normally, federal courts will not hear cases once they are moot, and that would normally be the situation here: Justice Thomas noted that there was no evidence in the record that the Pennsylvania deadline extension changed the result of any federal election. Normally, federal courts will also not hear cases when there is no injury yet or when they are not ripe — that is, nobody has been harmed yet. That was the argument raised by the dissent in a challenge to Minnesota changing its mail-in ballot deadline: We shouldn’t even require ballots to be segregated until we see if it would change the outcome. But that can risk creating a Catch-22: a case is always too early or too late. So, there is an exception to the mootness rule to deal specifically with situations where the ripeness and mootness rules together would make it impossible ever to hear a properly brought case: for an issue that is “capable of repetition, yet evades review.” As Thomas noted, the Court has invoked this rule in election cases before, and should have done so here to avoid repeating the problem:

[The Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s] decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future. These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable. . . . An election system lacks clear rules when, as here, different officials dispute who has authority to set or change those rules. This kind of dispute brews confusion because voters may not know which rules to follow. Even worse, with more than one system of rules in place, competing candidates might each declare victory under different sets of rules.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
How is it that all of a sudden, legal fights and claims of machine count biases are no longer seditious and treasonous behavior? Take a look at who it is making these challenges, then check the party affiliation—that is the needed detail in determining whether this is a grave and evil threat to our nation, or a morally correct attempt at correcting an error in noble and angelic fashion.

Democrats Are Challenging Two Elections Results While Somehow Not Attacking Our Democracy

It almost appears that the standards for accusing someone of threatening our democracy, challenging the integrity of the Constitution, and inciting treasonous behavior could possibly be fluid. After months of stern words from the press and clampdown efforts by social media titans towards anyone who dares to suggest election results were problematic, we now see a pair of candidates who are loudly complaining about the results in their elections.

Two things become quickly apparent; there is little outrage heard about these objections, and both of the obstinate candidates are Democrats.

In Iowa, a marginally tight Congressional race has been declared in favor of Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks. Her Democrat challenger, Rita Hart, has taken her case to the House of Representatives to have that body review the election and determine if action needs to be taken. The result of the race was razor-thin—Miller-Meeks won by just 6 votes. Hart, meanwhile, contends there is a district with nearly two dozen valid but uncounted votes that should be tabulated, giving her the victory.

The argument from the legal team of Miller-Meeks is that Hart never took the proper course of first filing claims in their state courts, before moving onto the House. Alan Ostergren, attorney for Miller-Meeks, stated “No amount of partisan spin can change the fact that the precedents of the House of Representatives require a contestant to first present her claims under state law.” A House committee will be formed to look into the results and make a determination.

Less close, but seemingly more intense, was the result seen in another House race, this one in New York. GOP candidate Claudia Tenney has defeated incumbent Anthony Brindisi. The 122-vote margin has led to intense efforts to see this result overturned. Brindisi has taken to the courts, something we have been told since November is offensive and a sign that there is an attempt to upset the natural order of our electoral system and threatens the core of our democracy.

Continue reading “”

Claudia Tenney to be certified as winner of New York’s 22nd race, judge rules

Oswego, N.Y. — Republican Claudia Tenney will be certified as the winner of New York’s 22nd Congressional District race, a judge ruled Friday, ending a three-month ordeal in the only undecided House race in the country.

The ruling represents the most definitive answer to who won in an election saga with many twists and turns, though it’s not entirely over yet. Democrat Anthony Brindisi has promised to appeal at the state court, and he could seek to contest the election results at the House of Representatives itself.

Even after the state certifies Tenney as the winner, it will take action by the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives to seat her.

Tenney, of New Hartford, is ahead of Brindisi by 109 votes. She earned 156,098 votes to Brindisi’s 155,989. Tenney’s margin amounts to a .035 percent lead over her opponent.

State Supreme Court Justice Scott DelConte ruled that counties and the state elections board are to certify the election, rejecting an effort by Democrat Anthony Brindisi, who occupied the seat until early January, to keep the election unofficial until his appeal to a higher court concludes.

Continue reading “”

Why Trump Voters Don’t Trust the People Who Count the Votes

Perhaps not since the nineteenth century have so many American voters so fervently doubted the outcome of a national election.

A Slate headline from December 13 reads: “82 Percent of Trump Voters Say Biden’s Win Isn’t Legitimate.” If even half true, this poll means tens of millions of Americans believe the incoming ruling party in Washington got its political power by cheating. 

The implications of this are broader than one might think. Under the current system, if many millions of Americans doubt the veracity of the official vote count, the challenge to the status quo goes beyond simply thinking that Democrats are cheaters. Rather, the Trump voters’ doubts indict much of the American political system overall, and call its legitimacy into question.

For example, if Trump supporters are unwilling to accept that the vote count in Georgia was fair—in a state where Republicans control both the legislature and the governor’s mansion—this means skepticism goes well beyond mere distrust of the Democratic Party. For Trump’s vote-count skeptics, not even the GOP or the non-partisan election officials can be trusted to count the votes properly.

Continue reading “”

Opinion: Just What Were You Expecting?

…………….

Here is my question for every American (remember my opening statements); What did you think would happen?!

What did you think would happen when you impeached, under false pretenses, a President who was the choice of close to half of America?

What did you think would happen when you spent each and every day denigrating 73 million Trump supporters, calling them “bitter clingers,” “deplorables,” who live in “flyover country,” who go to work, pay their taxes and just want to be left alone?

What did you think would happen when you stole an election, right out in broad daylight…with the help of folks who are supposed to be on our side…I’m talking about the Georgia Secretary of State here. Then did it again two days ago, with the help of the very same SECSTATE.

What did you think would happen when the Supreme Court of these United States refused to hear us on a case in which they have primary jurisdiction?

What did you think would happen when 74 million Americans watched the folks supposedly on their own team, tell them to roll over and suck it up?

Going forward…Knowing that 74 million Republican, Independent, along with a few million Democrat voters did NOT vote for stacking the Supreme Court, the admission of Puerto Rico & DC as states, the “Green New Deal,” massive wealth redistribution, gun confiscation or national lockdowns or mask mandates…What do you think will happen when a totally leftist controlled government tries to ram those policies down our collective throats?

I am very afraid. And you should be too. Rather than decry the brave patriots in DC today (minus actual criminals) we should take today as a cautionary pause. But we won’t. Y’all better Buckle Up.