All errors should be reported to

Friday, August 24, 2018

We do not need Congress running elections

I was amused by this headline over a story at Yahoo News by Alexander Nazaryan, "White House blocks bill that would protect elections."

Hold on. I thought the Democrats-with-bylines did not believe in voter fraud. I Googled his name and found this story Alexander Nazaryan filed on July 5, 2017, "Trump's Election Boogeyman Wants to Make It Hard to Vote for Everyone but Republicans."

Maybe they are not the same Alexander Nazaryan.

After all, the 2017 Alexander Nazaryan told us, "There is no evidence that the nation’s electoral process, which is administered by states, lacks integrity."

While the 2018 Alexander Nazaryan reported, "The Trump administration has been unable to settle on how elections should be secured, and whom they should be secured against."

So, despite no evidence that the electoral process lacks integrity, President Trump isn't securing the electoral process.

In Democratland, there is no voter fraud except by Russian bogeymen.

The 2018 Alexander Nazaryan wrote, "Despite consensus from the nation’s intelligence agencies that Russia interfered in 2016, President Trump has dismissed the threat, even as others in his administration have issued unambiguous warnings."


How did they reach a consensus with no evidence?

Our intelligence experts don't come off as very bright in such a scenario.

His next two sentences were "Trump has instead asserted that millions voted fraudulently in New York and California for Hillary Clinton, thus giving her an edge of some 3 million votes in the 2016 presidential race. No evidence of statistically significant voter fraud has been uncovered."

This is the Democratic Party line: Russians hacked despite no evidence, and there is no evidence of voter fraud despite numerous convictions for fraudulent voting.

The 2018 Alexander Nazaryan wrote, "The Secure Elections Act, introduced by Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., in December 2017, had co-sponsorship from two of the Senate’s most prominent liberals, Kamala Harris, D-Calif., and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., as well as from conservative stalwart Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and consummate centrist Susan Collins, R-Me."

This proposal is a bipartisan mess, just like the one we had following the 2000 election. Voters had failed to elect a Democrat president. Congress blamed the voting machines and ordered new ones. Now that the people have again failed to elect a Democrat president, Congress said those machines were hacked. They must have been. There is no other explanation.

So now Congress will fix the fix of a problem that did not exist.

The 2018 Alexander Nazaryan wrote, "As it currently stands, the legislation would grant every state’s top election official security clearance to receive threat information. It would also formalize the practice of information-sharing between the federal government — in particular, the Department of Homeland Security — and states regarding threats to electoral infrastructure. A technical advisory board would establish best practices related to election cybersecurity. Perhaps most significantly, the law would mandate that every state conduct a statistically significant audit following a federal election. It would also incentivize the purchase of voting machines that leave a paper record of votes cast, as opposed to some all-electronic models that do not. This would signify a marked shift away from all-electronic voting, which was encouraged with the passage of the Help Americans Vote Act in 2002."

Here's an idea: Butt out.

Let the states run the elections, and have Homeland Security do something useful, like building a wall.

To be sure, among the 50 states, there will be mistakes. But mistakes in Illinois don't affect West Virginia. Mistakes in Washington do. And they are nearly impossible to correct. I can vote out my state secretary of state if I don't like how she is doing her job.

The Federal Election Commission? We never elected them.

If Trump is blocking this legislation, good. If not, he should.


Please enjoy my books in paperback and on Kindle.

Trump the Press covers the nomination.

Trump the Establishment covers the election.

Fake News Follies of 2017 covers his first year as president.

For autographed copies, write me at


  1. Considering that a valid photo ID is pretty much essential to survive these days, why aren't the Democrats pushing for the government to get everybody a photo ID?

    1. Seems so logical doesn't it?

      Maybe Uber and Lyft could prove how civic-minded they are and help provide transportation to those poor housebound people we so often hear about so they can get their voter ID.

    2. Shhh! Don't tell anybody, Myiq-

      But the Dems have three reasons for that:

      1. Being racist, they don't think that black people are smart or capable enough to get ID on their own; and

      2. Without ID, illegal aliens can cast votes (e.g. California, where voting rights are given to illegal aliens along with drivers' licenses.) Then

      3. The dead always vote for Democrats; they do it over and over, and they don't even have to show up in person at the polls, since no ID is required in many states.

      The Dems would prefer that no one knows about these things, so do keep it quiet; we'd hate to upset them!

  2. The government's motto:

    If it ain't broke, fix it until it doesn't work.

  3. A paper record is better than no record at all, but if an electronic voting machine is hacked, so would the paper record that it generates. The paper records would be consistent with the vote tallies the hacked machines have recorded electronically, but would be equally wrong, I would imagine. This is no solution, not when illegal aliens can vote unchallenged, when people can vote out of precinct, when voters can be intimidated by thugs at the entrance to polling stations, when people can cross state lines to vote multiple times in different locations (Snowbirds in Florida, students in Wisconsin are well known examples that come to mind), when service people overseas have their ballots delayed so they don't get counted, when people can cast votes in other people's names because they don't have to show a valid photo ID, when "same day registration" allows people to vote before a valid check can be made on their residency, and so on, ad infinitum.

  4. It is a little-known fact that the Spetsnaz‘s primary mission is to prevent the election of American Leftists.

  5. Having elections centralized usually results in them being corrupted and incumbents being protected.

    If we are going to have an America run by and for elites we should simply dispense with the pretense of having a democratic system and say what is really going on.

  6. "No evidence of statistically significant voter fraud has been uncovered."

    They can continue to make this assertion because so many states, mainly Democrat, stonewalled the Voter Fraud Commission by refusing to turn over their data, resulting in its shutdown before it really got started. Data that in many of states was available for purchase by anyone other than, of course, a commission looking into voter fraud.

  7. Hurricane Lane - Live Streaming via The Weather Channel

    ps. would you consider adding CC to your blogroll?

  8. Don, did you by any chance, perhaps omit an "i" when spelling the name of Mr. Naz_aryan. His name would be more fitting for a leftist propagandist with an i in there.

  9. The Democrats are more concerned with Facebook posts and new voting machines than they are about the very real problem of fake identity voting.

  10. Trump should be talking about Voter-ID plus paper ballots -- and mentioning how Democrats have been indicted over voter Fraud. Even naming names, perhaps pointing out that censorship of guilty Dems is secret Fake News not talked about, which should be.