On 'election integrity,' Dems' duplicity is shameless

Perhaps to distract from their own sinister plans to pack the Supreme Court with pliable left-wingers once they (inevitably, in their eyes) win the 2020 election, Democrats and their progressive allies in what passes for the "press" these days are pestering Republicans, including President Trump, with gotcha questions about a "peaceful transfer of power." Trump, rightly, has said the obvious: He will accept the results of a fair election, but not an unfair one. Duh!

The Democrats' preference? It should be they and their media acolytes who get to decide who the winner is in November. President Trump should thus be forbidden from declaring victory, even if he has more votes, and the counting, and the litigating, of the election returns should continue until such time as Joe Biden is the victor.

Just as Al Gore wanted to drag out the process in 2000, because every time the votes were counted he seemed to gain a few more, so Democrats today assume that a combination of gamemanship, lawyerly cunning, procrastination and a whole lot of mail-in ballot irregularities can guarantee them the White House in 2021 … and – who knows? – maybe indefinitely thereafter.

And, unless we're very careful, they may be right.

Let us pause for a moment, however, to consider the audacity and the duplicity of the Democrats' position.

TRENDING: Major state passes bill to control gas prices

Democrats are claiming that voter fraud is so rare as to be inconsequential. They suggest that Republican concerns about the integrity of the mail-in ballot process are baseless. They and their pet journalists assert that President Trump's allegations of election fraud are "false" and there is "no evidence" to back them up. They assure us that millions of ballots sent out, unsolicited, to people who may or may not still be registered (or alive), at residences that may or may not be theirs, are hardly a cause for concern. Our elections are bulletproof, after all! To temporize about whether one would accept the results of a U.S. presidential election, therefore, is beyond the pale.

Consider that this is the same party that practices ballot harvesting – the collection of ballots by "helpful" activists – on an industrial scale in places like California, but nonetheless argued that a congressional election in North Carolina in 2018 should be invalidated because similar techniques were used (illegally, in that state) by a Republican operative. In other words, our ballot process is bulletproof, say the Democrats, except when Republicans refuse to play by the rules – which, in their eyes, is often!

Consider that Democrats regularly charge that Republicans engage in "voter suppression" and gerrymandering to "steal" and "cheat" their way to victory. Requiring voters to present IDs, for example, is a racist plot designed to prevent black people from voting. (Driver's licenses, by contrast, are not a racist plot to prevent black people from driving. Go figure.) Likewise, efforts to "purge" voter rolls of people who have died or moved to a different precinct, city, or state (such purges are required by law, for obvious reasons) are similarly inspired by "white supremacy." In other words, the election system in this country is, to borrow a word beloved of Democrats, "systemically" racist, discriminatory and unfair – but surely we should always trust the outcomes of our elections. Yeah, right!

Consider that Democrats routinely allege that our elections are compromised by "dark money," authorized by the supposedly illegitimate 2010 Supreme Court ruling Citizens United. (Never mind that Democrats themselves are swimming in dark money in 2020, and they rode unlimited contributions and super PACs to victory in 2018.)

Consider that Democrats spent most of 2017 and 2018 pursuing a witch hunt against President Trump and Republicans, trying to prove that the Russians manipulated the 2016 election and that they still maintain illicit influence, and possibly direct control, over President Trump and his lieutenants. And keep in mind that the Russians' main contribution to the 2016 election was to release damaging emails (never disavowed by the Democrats) that proved that the DNC was "in the tank" for Hillary Clinton, and plotting against the campaign of Bernie Sanders, from the start.

But hey, democracy is alive and well! No, really.

Consider that one of the darlings of the Democratic Party is Stacey Abrams, their candidate for governor of Georgia in 2018. She narrowly lost, but rather than concede the race, she continues to allege that Republicans stole the governorship by means of illegal "voter suppression." She could have contested the results, of course, but knew her legal case was weak, so decided to carp and moan instead.

And this shameless tactic of refusing to concede even when you are beaten lives on in Hillary Clinton. To her credit, Clinton did accept the inevitable in 2016, but in 2020 she is urging Joe Biden never to concede "under any circumstances." Not even, presumably, if more people vote for Donald Trump! Minor detail, right?

Consider that the Democrats, despite their supposedly limitless confidence in the American voter and our electoral system, have retained phalanxes of lawyers, ready to do battle in any of the states where the results can be contested in their favor.

Consider that for years the Democrats have been trashing the Electoral College, the means by which we choose our presidents and vice presidents, on the grounds that it is anti-democratic, racist and an artifact of the era of slavery. Translation: The Democrats would prefer to rely on the national popular vote, rather than the Electoral College, because they believe they have a greater chance of winning the former.

Consider, moreover, that Democratic doubts about the validity of U.S. elections are not a recent phenomenon. The majority of Democrats believed, in 2016, that Donald Trump won the presidential election because Russian agents tampered with the results. And, as far back as 2004, Democrats alleged that George W. Bush's victory over John Kerry was illegitimate, because, among other supposed irregularities, the voting machines in use in the crucial state of Ohio were manufactured by a company with ties to Republicans. Obviously, therefore, the machines were to blame for Bush's reelection, not the good people of Ohio.

Consider, lastly, that only weeks ago Democrats were claiming that the post office was plotting against American democracy, and a failure to pump tens of billions of dollars into the postal system constituted a Republican conspiracy to impede mail-in voting.

Add all this together, and how credible are the Democrats' claims to be ardent believers in the reliability and integrity of our voting system? How seriously should we take their saccharine love letters to American democracy? Not very!

The truth is that the Democrats and their left-wing allies in the media have been undermining confidence in U.S. elections for decades. They do so when it suits them, which is often, and they playact the role of saintly champions of election integrity when that species of mendacity suits them better.

Democrats, in short, are consistent in only one regard: They respect elections that they win, and they despise and disparage elections that they don't. We can expect the same in 2020.

If Donald Trump wins in 2020 via a contested election, therefore, and many of the ballots for Joe Biden are ultimately disqualified, we can thank the Democrats themselves for helping to demonstrate, over many years, the flawed nature of our election system. In truth, we couldn't have done it without them!

For, when you cry wolf time and time again, it's possible – just possible – that people might begin to believe that wolves exist.