Let’s Look at the Election Process

I am not an election denier, but I am an election cynic. The events of this past week should be embarrassing to all Americans. But the fact it does not seem to concern the Left might be because it is their design. It is not a case of bending or breaking the law but about formulating the law to ensure a favorable outcome., COVID brought some extenuating circumstances to the process. Now that the Pandemic is behind us, we should put these provisions into mothballs. The provisions are too beneficial to Democrats for them to let them revert to pre-pandemic policies. Extended voting hours, mail-in ballots, and ballot harvesting favor the Left.

The Democrats continue to fight Voter ID mandates as racist and a burden to minorities. Contending that it is difficult for minorities to obtain an ID is condescending and more racist than the mandate itself. This ID policy is essential to ensure a one-person, one-vote election. The ID is also a concern, with some states allowing non-resident college students to use their college ID as proof of domicile and the ability to vote in all local elections. Many issues with this. The non-residents are, by definition, not residing in a voting district. They can obtain an absentee ballot from their home if they would like to vote, and there is no control that they haven’t, which would mean multiple voting instances. This is fraud and a possible felony.

There were many situations where Democrat candidates refused to debate, agreed to only one debate, or scheduled the debate late in the season. This was critical in the Pennsylvania Senate race, where all three situations happened. John Fetterman suffered a stroke in the spring and refused to drop out of the race. His cognitive skills were obviously impaired to the point where he could not complete sentences and required a teleprompter to communicate. He tried to avoid any debate but finally consented to one in the closing weeks. There were 1.4 million mail-in votes cast in Pennsylvania, and most before voters could witness Fetterman’s dismal performance in the lone debate with Mehmet Oz. Fetterman went on to win the seat and may not be mentally able to perform the job.

The following two are somewhat similar. Ranked voting defies logic. The election is supposed to be your vote for your best choice for the job. What is the purpose of ranking the four or five people in a given race? When no candidate attains over 50% of the votes, the second choice votes are added, and so on, until a candidate hits the 50% minimum. This method of election is coming into play in Alaska and Maine. It is possible that the candidate who got the most votes initially may not win the election. A run-off election is also being held in Georgia because no candidate hit the 50% mark. In a race with as many as five candidates, one candidate getting more than 50% of the votes is statistically improbable.

The last two situations happened in New Hampshire. Millions of dollars were spent by the Democrat Party on Republican candidates in the primaries. The purpose is to influence the election and to get a softer candidate into the general election against their candidate. This is nothing short of election tampering. And finally, we have to get methods to verify vote counts. Senator Maggie Hassan received over 1,100 votes in the town of Columbia. Not a lot of votes but nearly twice the actual population of Columbia. How does a town of 695 cast a total of 1,300 votes? I can guarantee you will not see an explanation from Hassan.

We are too good and sophisticated a country for our election process to be this questionable. I am not for federalizing state elections, but fine-tuning must be done. We are a week since the election, and we have some races where all votes have yet to be counted. At best, this is feckless. At least, it is embarrassing, and someone needs to lose a job in these situations.