I have asked: 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?”
Listener Sandy responded with this:
Let’s put this moral and reasoned argument another way.
If a student was found to have cheated on one of 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?
Well put.
“Widespread” as the media and Democrat standard for something deserving investigation, repeated with propaganda-style frequency, is a hint at what has happened: 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.
And when someone tells you there was no cheating, ask them how they know given the media declared such to be the case without serious investigation. And besides we’re not claiming “widespread” cheating, we are pointing to very specific targeted cheating.
Another take on election cheating
Listener Sandy responded with this:
Let’s put this moral and reasoned argument another way.
If a student was found to have cheated on one of 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?
Well put.
“Widespread” as the media and Democrat standard for something deserving investigation, repeated with propaganda-style frequency, is a hint at what has happened: 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.
And when someone tells you there was no cheating, ask them how they know given the media declared such to be the case without serious investigation. And besides we’re not claiming “widespread” cheating, we are pointing to very specific targeted cheating.