All Votes Must Be Counted

The election debacle in Florida continues to unfold as lawyers argue over the validity of highly questionable "provisional" ballots. In another state, an apparent win for a GOP Senate contender in AZ turned into a loss after tens of thousands of votes, heavily weighted to the Democrat contender, were discovered after polls had closed. It's possible that the AZ election results are correct and the Dem candidate did win legitimately.

But in Florida, the facts point to inexplicable actions by Democrat election officials, contempt for court orders, a history of incompetence that always seems to favor Democrats, and partisan actions that all point to election malfeasance. This appears to be the Democrat modus operandi in recent elections when close results have not favored their party.

As I mentioned in a post last week, the blatant nature of these events, coupled with the media's ready acceptance of the results is cause for concern. Conservative writer Robert Spencer doesn't pull any punches as he comments on all of this:

The Democrats are determined to overturn the Republicans’ gain last Tuesday of two Senate seats, and are in the process of stealing those seats in plain sight ...

The shamelessness and unapologetic audacity of this election fraud is no accident. The Democrats in Arizona and Florida and their allies in the establishment media piously intone that “all votes must be counted” as this fraud unfolds before our eyes, but they’re neither stupid nor naïve. It is much more likely that their very brazenness is not a bug, but a feature.

The Left is doing this out in the open to send a message: There is nothing you can do. We will win. If we lose, we will cheat. We will lie. We will steal. And there is nothing, absolutely nothing, that you can do about it.

Spencer's comments may be a bit overblown, but his core argument is solid. When coupled with the Dem's strong objection to voter ID laws—a simple and effective way to eliminate most "provisional" ballots, and their ready acceptance of non-citizen voting, something is going on.

The Democrats and their trained hamsters in the media parse accusations of "voter fraud" by arguing that no "fraud" has been uncovered. Fraud in this context is very, very difficult to prove, and the Dems take every advantage of that reality. When non-citizens have their votes counted, it isn't fraud, it's a "mistake." When bags of uncounted ballots are found long after polls close, it's just an "oversight." When "damaged" ballots are re-written by partisans with no outside observers present, it's a "flaw in the process." When highly questionable provisional ballots (the voter did not have ID and other data did not match) are counted as actual votes, it's because "every vote must be counted." But it's never fraud. Interestingly, it always seems that the votes "found" under these circumstances favor the Dem candidates—always! That is suspicious, VERY suspicious. It violates statistical expectations* and common sense.

It's also fascinating that any attempt to institute more stringent voter ID laws creates wails of anguish from Dems and Dems alone. Why is that? Can they prove that a requirement for strong voter ID is equivalent to "voter suppression?" The simple answer is no, they can't. Yet their trained hamsters in the media parrot their narrative as if it were fact. It. Is. Not.

Something is rotten here, and it affects the integrity of our elections and the democratic process itself. Maybe it's all just coincidence or incompetence, but maybe, just maybe, it's something considerably more nefarious. Where's Robert Mueller when you need him?

FOOTNOTE:
--------------
* Think about it for just a second. If millions of votes have been cast and the result for candidate A and B is 49.75% for A and 50.25% for B, it would follow that any after-the-fact "found" or "provisional" votes would breakdown along the same statistical lines. Any gain or loss in votes would be about 0.5 percent with a small variance. Yet A will often gets 20 or 30 percent more "found" or "provisional" votes that B, if A is a Democrat. Sure, it's possible to manufacture explanations for this anomaly, but you'd think that once in a while, B would get the advantage. Never happens!

UPDATE:
------------
Florida's GOP Senator Marco Rubio explains the Florida election situation in a series of tweets. He writes:

Imagine if an NFL team was trailing 24-22 but in the final seconds hits a 3 pt kick to win. Then AFTER the game, lawyers for the losing team get a judge to order rules changed so that last second field goals are only worth 1 point. Well that's how democrat lawyers plan to steal #Florida election.

For example, #Florida law requires that requires that voter signatures on mail ballots match the voter signature on file.

But Dem lawyers are asking a judge to throw that law out and force Florida to count ballots with signatures that don't match the voter signature on file.

#Florida law requires that a manual recount of "undervotes" in close races & provides a clear standard for determining whether a voter intended to vote for a candidate.

Now Dem lawyers want a judge to order florida to ignore this intent standard when reviewing "undervotes"

In short, Dem lawyers came to Florida to change Florida election laws, AFTER the election. That isn't a strategy to win an election, it's a strategy to steal an election.

Dems keep telling us that "every vote must be counted" But what about the rules that govern which votes must be counted and which MUST be rejected. Rules? The only rules that the Dems abide by are the ones that give them a win. And if rules don't give them a win, then those rules must be ignored.

BTW, Rubio's opening metaphor missed the mark. Here's a rewrite:

An NFL red team is winning 23-22 when with 1 second on the clock, the blue team attempts a field goal, but misses. The red team wins. But the blue team goes to court and asks a judge to change the rules because the field goal only missed by a few inches and it was very windy so therefore the attempt should be worth two points, even if it missed. Just enough of a rule change for the blue team to win.

I'm a Florida voter. On the mail in ballot it clearly states in boldface type that late ballots will NOT be counted; that your signature MUST match the one on file or your vote will NOT be counted; that you MUST clearly mark your choices or the vote will NOT be counted. But of course, that makes the voter responsible for his or her vote, and Dems tend to look askance at personal responsibility for anything.