Street Money

At least one news service has called PA in favor of Joe Biden, but, of course, they're using a vote count that has radically changed since election day. Numbers reported in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, two Democrat controlled cities, made the rather substantial difference. It's conceivable that the numbers are "mostly-accurate" (to coin a phrase) and the presidential race is mostly over. But then, there's this ...

Have you ever wondered why it is that Democrat voters in certain 'in-play' cities across the United States (e.g., Philadelphia, Detroit, Atlanta) turned out in numbers that are far above the historic averages for those cities. Is it that they are enthusiastic for the candidate? Or maybe it's that they're well-informed on all the issues? Or maybe it's that they really, really care about an old white guy who has at times made borderline racist comments? Or maybe it was the influence of Lady Gaga or Barbra Streisand? Maybe.

But it's more likely that part of the reason is "street money." If you live in an urban environment, you probably know what that phrase means, but it you don't, the Urban Dictionary provides some guidance:

"Democrats hand out like 10-20$ to people in the "ghetto" to try and get them to vote democrat." [sic]

Word on the street indicates that in 2020, the number became $20 to $50. But why quibble?

PBS (no less:) provides the Democrat-friendly definition:

For decades, everyone from presidential hopefuls to City Controller wannabees have used that money to help get people to the polls. Philadelphia Democrats are famous for it, but Philadelphia Republicans rely on it, too.

Here’s how it works: Candidates cut checks to the local Democratic and Republican parties, which in turn cut checks to ward leaders. You can think of them as mid-level managers in the city’s parties.

Additionally, some ward leaders get money from candidates and political consultants directly. Then the money moves down the chain again, to committee people. They’re the party’s foot soldiers. They use street money to stump for the candidates, hand out sample ballots and shuttle voters to the polls.

Uh ... huh.  That's the sanitized version of what happens.

Later in the article, we encounter this:

Zack Stalberg, president of the Committee of Seventy, a government watchdog group in Philadelphia is a former editor-in-chief of the Daily News. He’s heard plenty of stories about street money.

“Best one I ever heard of was a guy who, on behalf of his father, told me that his job was to fill the family car with cash and drive it around town, and reach into the trunk and hand it out,” Stalberg said. 

And who exactly gets the money? Hint: It's not only the street organizers, it's individual voters who then either hand over their signed mail-in ballot to be completed by Dem operatives or meekly go to a polling place after being "paid" and pull the Dem lever. 

If this happens only a hundred times, it's no big deal. But with Dems getting hundreds of millions from their billionaire contributors, a lot of car trunks can be filled and a lot of money can be doled out. 

Think of it this way—200,000 votes purchased in Philly and Detroit and Atlanta using "street money" can swing the state and a national election. Sure, that's around $20,000,000 +/- dollars (in cash, untraceable), but a very small price to pay for power. And for the donors who publicly commit, say, $100M for one state alone, $20M is chump change.

The irony of "street money" is that the votes themselves are legal, but the process of obtaining them is unethical at best. Well ... no. Actually, it's illegal. But proving this illegality is close to impossible—that's the genius of the strategy.

UPDATE-1:

It will be nearly impossible to question the validity of votes purchased with "street money," but that's not the only problem with vote totals reported from major Dem cities in battleground states. Because proof of voter fraud is so difficult, the Dems may have become arrogant and overplayed their hand. In Nevada, there has been a referral to the DoJ alleging "3,026 cases of voter fraud," and that may be the tip of the iceberg coming out of Las Vegas.  Page after page of dead people voting by mail has been uncovered in Detroit.

It remains to be seen whether hard evidence of fraud is presented for Philly and Detroit and Atlanta. Circumstantial evidence indicates that it has occurred, but hard evidence is the only thing that matters. 

Get ready for the Democrat smear shops and the allied trained hamsters in the media to work hard to denigrate even the most solid claims of fraud. In their view, fraud doesn't exist, but they're the same people who told us that Russian collusion was a dead lock, that a blue election wave was a certainty, and that Donald Trump is a "white supremacist."

UPDATE-2:

The Democrat spin machine has already revved up, and one of its key talking points is that "Trump voters just need to accept the results ... it's the patriotic thing to do, and it's best for our democracy." This is intoned with a degree of solemnity that is touching.

That would be the same Democrat spin machine that NEVER accepted the results of the 2016 election and spent four years trying to undo it. Bethany Mandel comments:

Yeah, they want us to sit back and say, ‘Hey, we see a lot of shady sh*t going on here in these swing states but ok, Biden won.’

[They want us to] shut-up and accept it.

No.

Heh.

Hold on ... this is gonna get ugly ... fast.