Counting Our Chickens? The Potential Of Going From Red Wave To November Nightmare

It is November 8, 2022, election day.  At the end of the day, the promised Red Wave seems to be securely in place.  As November 9 dawns, we once again discover that there has been an overnight sea change.  What was a Red wave has become a Blue tsunami.  Instead of the expected Republican gains of 10-15 seats in the House and 3-5 seats in the Senate, it was the Democrats who gained 18 House seats and 7 Senate seats.  A stunned GOP watches throughout the next few days as more mail-in ballots arrive and are counted – nearly all for Democratic candidates.  How could this happen?

Vote early and vote often

Unlike in 2020, counting did not need to be shut down.  Real-time monitoring of results from compromised statewide systems provided all the information needed to calculate how many votes had to be created in each race to guarantee that the proper parties won.  Advanced print-on-demand services were able to produce tens and even hundreds of thousands of properly marked and serialized ballot forms to support the ghost voter registrations that were injected into the state voter rolls as same-day registrations.  Without envelope or signature requirements, the ballots could be introduced into the system and counted as though they were legitimate.

Proof of life after death

With universal vote by mail, there were millions of official ballots available, ballots that were stolen or sold or simply sent to people who had died or moved or changed their name, or even had been registered to vote even though they didn’t qualify.  All these millions of loose ballots were available to be collected and used to produce “official” votes.

Even if it was later found that the legitimate voter already had a vote recorded in their name, the best that could be done was to provide them with a provisional ballot – a ballot that could only cancel, but not replace the prior false ballot created in their name.

Cheap at twice the price

Massive Democrat donations before the election had been used to hire thousands of “election support contractors” whose job would be to distribute the manufactured ballots to dropboxes, or, in the worst case, to put stamps on envelopes, scrawl a date and signature, and drop them off in mailboxes for postal delivery. The addition of a first-class stamp was a trivial expense compared to the $80-$100 to purchase, prepare, and deliver a fraudulent ballot.  All total, the cost to swing the midterm elections was probably less than $50M – a small “investment” to reap billions in State and Federal money later.

No such thing as too much overkill

These things didn’t even take into account the more conventional, or perhaps traditional, fraud methods, mostly applied at local levels to affect the outcome of initiatives and local races.  When the dust settled and the counting was finally done, an outstanding 146M voters had turned out to vote in the midterms and had cast over 389M ballots.  It was a landslide victory for Democrats across the country.

We have your best interests at heart

Meanwhile, back in Washington, in the week after the election, Congress returned to session to pass the “Defending our Elections” act.  This bill made it a Federal crime punishable by up to 25 years in prison for questioning the validity of the outcome of a Federal election.

House Speaker Pelosi stated: “We have the most secure election systems in the world, so there is no justification to question any election.  Questioning the integrity of the result simply undermines the authority of the government and promotes division among the diverse people of this Nation.  This bill will unify us and eliminate the disruption we have seen in the past.  It is necessary to protect our Democracy.”  She received a standing ovation from House Democrats.  In the Senate, after voting to eliminate the filibuster, the bill was passed along party lines with Vice President Harris casting the deciding vote.  President Brandon signed it later that day.

A treaty for all time

A day later, the Senate, acting in bipartisan accord with three Republicans, one each from California, Wyoming, and Utah, voting in favor, the UN Small Arms Treaty was approved for signature.  The President quickly signed the treaty during a press conference where he declared “this is a great day for the safety of our children.”  The treaty was binding and irrevocable so no future legislature could repeal it.  The Supreme Court promptly declared it unconstitutional as it was an improper cancellation of the Second Amendment, but since it was a binding treaty, that determination didn’t matter.  Besides, it was Constitutional for the country to enter into treaties, so there was a case to be made that it actually was Constitutional.

The ATF, using the gun owner database it had illegally been preparing for years, had, in anticipation of this moment, sent lists of guns to be confiscated to every police department, sheriff’s department, and FBI office across the country.  Each organization was, upon signature of the treaty, to conduct confiscation raids to collect every firearm on their lists.

Numerous police departments experienced massive outbreaks of a mysterious flu-like disease that removed huge numbers of officers from service on that day.  Many sheriff departments declared a special vacation day and fishing contest with a special prize for the biggest fish story.  The FBI officers were ecstatic as they got to fire up their MRAPS, wear all that cool scary gear, and maybe even pop a few caps in those insurrectionist patriots.

Authorities quickly learned that there were a few problems with those plans.  Somewhat reminiscent of a poem by Robert Burns, plans were ganging aft agley all over the place.  Sometimes the arms to be collected were delivered at point blank range by their owners.  Other authorities making collection runs suffered a sudden onset of high-velocity lead poisoning contracted from friends and neighbors of the collectee.  If it had been Saint Valentine’s Day, it would have been called a massacre.

At the end of the day, it was determined that among those who had attempted to carry out the orders of the ATF, there had been a 73 percent attrition rate, against a 12% rate among those from whom collections were to be made.  FBI cupola gunners suffered particularly high initial losses that were only reduced when they couldn’t get anyone to man the cupola-mounted M2 .50 caliber weapons.  A few FBI teams were lost in their entirety on occasions when they tried to burn down the abodes of people reluctant to part with their family heirlooms.

Just a story – so far

Hopefully, by now, most readers will have realized that the above chronicle is just fiction or a cautionary tale at least.  Unfortunately, much of it could come true in a few short months.

Fraud by mail

Few states have implemented reforms to their election systems that would prevent the sort of fraud we have seen in 2020 and elections since.  As of this writing, just two more states have outlawed ballot drop boxes – devices that were put to good use in 2020 to introduce fraudulent ballots into the system.  States have retained the vote by mail systems that worked so wonderfully to facilitate introduction of fraudulent ballots into the counts.  At last count, there were over a dozen new fraud mechanisms that vote by mail systems enable to alter election results – these in addition to more traditional methods of ballot destruction and ballot box stuffing.

Rhode Island just eliminated a signature requirement for ballot returns, and California relaxed requirements for signature verification.  Many locations will accept vote-by-mail ballots for counting that do not bear any signature and may even be returned in a plain envelope. Even with signature requirements, the difficulty in signature verification leads to most ballots being accepted.

Photo ID requirements have been fought tooth and nail by Democrats who have claimed that such requirements are attempts at voter suppression aimed at black voters by those racist Republicans.  All the other places where photo IDs are required are discounted.  As a matter of fact, though, with vote by mail, photo IDs are nearly useless, and offer little or no protection against election fraud.

Laissez le bon temps rouler

Dirty voter rolls are another facilitator of election fraud.  In California, a voter might be classed as inactive if they don’t respond to a number of inquiries and show no record of having voted for several years.  Non-response might be due to death, having moved, or some other legitimate factor, but California requires that they be retained on the voter rolls and a vote by mail ballot be sent to their last known address.  The result is snowdrifts of unclaimed mail-in ballots being available for use by interested parties.

The addition of same-day registration compounds the problem.  New voters can be created in quantity and introduced into the voter rolls through compromised electronic systems.  These manufactured “ghost” voters can appear as legitimate, have ballots manufactured for them, and have those ballots counted just as though they were real voters.  Often the only way to detect these artificial people is through canvassing where samples of voters are visited to check if they voted and how they voted, but not who they voted for. “Sir, our records indicate that 327 people claimed your studio apartment as their residence in the voter registration process.  Would it be possible to speak with them, please?”

To add insult to injury, most states sell their voter roll information, typically for only a few hundred dollars per county.  With that information, along with information of residents, new voter registrations can be created for unregistered residents in a way that is difficult to detect.

California also has an internet-based system that allows voters to print ballots at home.  All that is needed in most locations is a voter name and date of birth – information readily available online and through the voter registries.  With this system, tens of thousands of ballots can be created for unknowing voters, including multiple ballots for individual voters, printed, and mailed off for inclusion in official counts.

See no fraud, speak no fraud, hear no fraud – must not be any fraud

All these and many more fraud mechanisms exist and remain uncorrected across multiple states.  Official sources claim that election fraud is rare and that these mechanisms have had no significant effect on election outcomes.  They even go so far as stating that claims of election fraud are simply irresponsible spreading of mis- and disinformation.

How, though, would they know?  Most claims of election fraud remain uninvestigated by State and Federal authorities, or even dismissed as irrelevant or imaginary.  The solid evidence of fraud that has been exposed by such organizations as TrueTheVote and presented in documentaries such as 2000Mules has largely been ignored.

If you keep doing the same thing….

Almost all the mechanisms that were employed in 2020 to alter the outcome of the election still exist today.  We didn’t even get into the role of electronic election management systems and their vulnerabilities.  Democrats have actively fought against any investigations and election reforms, and even a distressingly large number of so-called Republicans have also opposed effective measures.  Courts have dismissed without bothering to review evidence, multiple cases of alleged election fraud – something the Left has falsely claimed as proof that the claims of fraud were ruled as without merit.  Actually, no rulings were ever made.

With all this, can we reasonably expect that the 2022 midterm elections will be fair, honest, and truly reflect the will of the people, or are they more likely to reflect the will of someone or something else – perhaps something like China?  It is likely that in no election in the last three to five years can we really know what the true outcome should have been.  Even the California recall election outcome is open to question.  Why should 2022 be any different?

Remembering Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto

As to the rest of the fantasy above, The UN Small Arms Treaty is a real thing.  Although it was originally proposed nearly a decade ago, it has been revised several times and continues to rear its head as a possible way to circumvent the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.

As it is presently formulated, it would limit the import and export of small arms, require registration of arms, limit the amount and kind of ammunition that could be owned, as well as the capacity of small arms.  Various proposals have included limitations on the number and kind of guns private individuals could own, would require renewable licenses for gun ownership, registration of firearms in a national database, and several other provisions desired by gun control enthusiasts here.

Many see the treaty as a long-overdue way to circumvent Constitutional freedoms and eliminate private gun ownership.  The rest of us see such a treaty as a major step to eliminating individual liberty and to establishing tyranny.

Who needs guns, anyway

Gun control proponents have argued along the lines that the Second Amendment originally was emplaced because people needed to hunt squirrels for food and guns were needed then for nutritional reasons.  However, since squirrels no longer form a significant portion of the American diet, there is no longer a need for personal weapons and they can be banned.  The Second Amendment should be repealed as unnecessary and a danger to children and other living things.

Elimination of personal weapons is a long-standing dream of the Left.  It would give them unrestrained power to implement nearly any proposal they desired and there could be no effective opposition.  Look at how disarmed protesters in Australia were treated when they objected to the Covid restrictions their government emplaced.  Similar treatment was accorded to Canadian truckers who made their own protest.

Now we see protests across Europe against the insane restrictions that their governments wish to impose in the name of the climate god.  We will have to see how effective tractors and manure spreaders are against State-owned heavy weapons and tanks.  Never fear, though.  At some point the populace will be too hungry and weak to mount any effective protests.  Think Venezuela where the populace was disarmed and later starved.  Say goodbye to the zoos of Europe.

In a poll taken recently among authoritarian leaders and Great Reset World Economic Forum participants, they showed overwhelming support for eliminating private ownership of weapons.  “These weapons are dangerous and must be eliminated in order to make our schools safe.  We need to go beyond gun-free zones.  We need more signs so that criminals will know the boundaries they shouldn’t cross.”

A bit of history

Just for the record, US citizens in the early days of our Republic were unrestricted in what weapons they could own.  Not only were rifles and pistols privately owned, but there was no prohibition on any weapon, including cannons.  Many of the cannons used in our Revolutionary War were owned by individuals or jointly by communities.  This situation existed even in our own Civil War where cannons and other “weapons of war” were often owned by individuals and privately formed militia companies.

Furthermore, following centuries of European tradition, individuals could even own warships that could be used against enemy vessels.  The issuance of letters of marque and reprisal authorized such private armed vessels to attack and seize enemy vessels and confiscate their contents.  Such private warships were instrumental against pirates even through the 19th century.

Private ownership of fully automatic weapons (machine guns) was even allowed up until the National Firearms Act of 1934.  Enacted as part of the program of social engineering that was known as Prohibition, it was intended to ensure that criminals were not better armed than police and government officials.  The government hates competition.

To be clear, at the time the Second Amendment was ratified, private citizens could own ANY arms available, including so-called “weapons of war”.  What would our Founding Fathers think of all the limitations today on what weapons people can own, where they can carry them, and on such things as magazine limits?  How many of them would own AR-15s?

By David Robb

David Robb is a regular contributor to The Blue State Conservative and a practicing scientist who has been working in industry for over 50 years. One of his specialties is asking awkward questions. A large part of his work over the years has involved making complex scientific issues clear and understandable to non-specialists. Sometimes he even succeeds.

Enjoy HUGE savings at My Pillow with promo code BSC

The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Blue State Conservative. The BSC is not responsible for, and does not verify the accuracy of, any information presented.

Notice: This article may contain commentary that reflects the author’s opinion.

Photo by Tiffany Tertipes on Unsplash