Why the constancy of the term “widespread” in relation to election fraud?

Pratt on Texas - copyright Pratt on Texas all rights reserved“Biden aides hope Electoral College vote is GOP turning point,” was an AP headline and the story appears to say that we are supposed to simply accept that Democrats appear to have stolen an election for president and forgo all attempts to investigate such.

What type of American is it, and there seem to be many of them, who can watch the various things that happened on election night and the days following and convince themselves that all was on the up-and-up and thus deserves no serious investigation?

Is it that the cancer of political corruption is now so endemic that people are accepting of such? Do they just figure that an election lost to fraud is the cost of one’s own side not doing as an effective a job at cheating as the opposition?

“Widespread” as the media and Democrat standard for something deserving investigation, repeated with propaganda-style frequency, is a hint at what has gone wrong.

Disturbingly I hear hints at this morally bankrupt position even from some on the Right. What else does the constant mantra of “no widespread vote fraud” mean if not that some cheating is OK and should be overlooked as long as it did not pass some magical, and undefined, threshold of frequency or quantity that it became “widespread?”

“Widespread” as the media and Democrat standard for something deserving investigation, repeated with propaganda-style frequency, is a hint at what has gone wrong. In a close electoral contest the Left didn’t need “widespread” cheating, it only needed deep and significant cheating in a handful of central count rooms in Democrat run cities in three to five states to throw an election.

When you repeatedly hear or read “no evidence of widespread vote fraud,” remember the reason “widespread” is inserted time and again: There was only limited, highly focused cheating needed to do the trick.

Share Pratt on Texas

Comments

  1. Let’s put this moral and reasoned argument another way.

    If a student was found to have cheated on one or six questions of an exam…would we just excuse those questions or would we recognize that his entire exam was fraudulent and toss it out?

    If six athletes were discovered to have cheated during a winning game, would their behavior have been tolerated and their team given the trophy or would the win have been overturned?

    We have incontrovertible evidence of voter fraud − and frankly, well beyond just the handful of contested states − yet we are being told to overlook all of that and accept the results as legitimate.

  2. Ron W Brown says

    Bravo!! This couldn’t have been said more succinctly.
    I remain as “pertinacious” as you that this 2020 presidential is both flawed and fraudulent.
    The same so-called Republicans who are missing in action in fighting this travesty are THE SAME ONES who consistently think “bipartisan” ALWAYS MEANS surrendering Constitutional or Conservative points to Liberal and Socialist governance!
    Ron Brown

Speak Your Mind

*

© Pratt on Texas / Perstruo Texas, Inc.