The long term price of short term election rorting for America

Andrew L. Urban

Warren Mundine and Alan Jones had just spoken as we broke for morning tea. It was November 4, 2020, and the fateful US Presidential election results were coming in. Several hundred attendees at the 2020 CPAC* in the function room of Daltone House on Sydney’s Darling Island, watched and barracked for Trump. I was seated at a table next to the late Senator Jim Molan, who was about to join Senators Eric Abetz and Alex Antic on stage for the speaker session after tea break, moderated by Jones.

Jim Molan, too, was seeing optimistic signs that Trump would be re-elected. By the afternoon, elation gave way to concern, as Biden’s numbers suddenly soared in a small handful of states. Molan and I were perplexed. Still perplexed weeks later, I came across the funny peculiar voting numbers that changed history.

To this day, I have not seen any rational accounting – credible or otherwise – to account for the following results – an example that I have previously presented in various articles in my utter amazement.

This from earlier in 2023:

“I have been told that we have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organisation in the history of American politics.” I saw Joe Biden make that statement as part of a news report on Fox News, shortly before the election. If he was confused and really meant to say ‘voter fraud prevention organisation’, his slip-up may have been a Freudian slip – telling the truth. The slavish, anti-Trump media ignored it, let it sink unacknowledged.

In a podcast interview after the election (on December 21, 2020), Dr Peter Navarro said that more than 379,000 possibly illegal ballots were allegedly cast in Michigan. “That’s more than twice the victory margin.” Navarro holds a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University and was a professor emeritus of economics and public policy at the University of California-Irvine for more than 20 years.  He served as Assistant to the President and Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy at the White House during the Trump Administration.

During a nine-hour period on Nov. 4, Trump had a significant lead over Joe Biden, he added. Within “five seconds” at around 6:30 a.m. Biden’s “total [votes] skyrocketed by 141,258 votes,” or “30 times the expected vote count,” Navarro said, citing data from the New York Times.

“Within that same time frame, do you know how many Trump got? 5,968,” he said. In another instance at around 3:50 a.m. ET in Michigan, “54,497 votes were provided for Biden while Trump only received about 4,718 votes.”

Navarro has compiled three reports on the way the election was corrupted.

The famously boastful November 2020 Time magazine article “The secret bipartisan campaign that saved the 2020 election” omitted some telling ballot results that do not tally with the outcome. Perhaps because they do not seem to have so much “saved” the election as corrupted it. Here are some, for Georgia, Nevada and Arizona, from a December 2020 report by US lawyer Stephen B. Meister:

Let’s begin by looking at some undisputed swing state data. Take Georgia to start. In 2012, Barack Obama won 1,773,827 votes in Georgia. We are now told Biden won 2,473,633 Georgia votes, besting the first black president by a stunning 699,806 votes.

In other words, we’re asked to believe that Biden outperformed his former boss by 39.45 percent in Georgia, though Biden was soundly defeated in the 2008 Democratic Primary by Obama, and that was when Obama’s sole political credentials were that of a Chicago community organizer and Illinois state senator, and before Biden’s obvious cognitive decline.

Trump garnered 2,461,854 Georgia votes, and thus would have handily defeated Biden’s former boss.

Now let’s look at Nevada. It presents a similarly incredulous (sic) picture. Whereas Obama in 2012 won 531,373 votes from Nevadans, Biden, we are led to believe, won 703,486 such votes, besting his former boss by 172,113 votes—improving Obama’s performance by 32.39 percent. Again, Trump, who gathered 669,890 Nevada votes, would have soundly defeated a candidate turning in an Obama-level performance.

 Arizona is altogether ridiculous. In 2012, Obama won 1,025,232 votes in Arizona. Yet Biden, we are asked to believe, got 1,672,143 votes from Arizonans, a whopping 63.10 percent improvement over Obama’s performance. Once again, Trump, who won 1,661,686 votes from Arizonans, would have handily defeated a candidate turning in an Obama-level performance.

Given these facts, it is surprising, is it not, that the media failed to pick up what was arguably the biggest news story of the whole election, if the results were true and accurate: basement-bound Biden attracted more votes (in these states, at least) than had Barack Obama, whose job approval ratings averaged 48% over his two terms and who was universally praised for his oratory skills. As Obama might be forgiven for saying, “C’mon, man!”

(For the record, 65% of Biden votes were cast via mail or absentee system, the same % as voted in person for Trump. Preferences were more evenly divided among those who cast their ballots in person ahead of Election Day: 52% voted for Trump while 47% voted for Biden. Could that be due to the greater security of in person voting?)

I repeat this information to provide context for my argument that Trump was probably correct in accusing the Democrats and their sympathisers of rigging the election. And I say this in the further context of my argument that the Democrats are now paying the price for their uncontrollable Trump-hating obsession. All of their own making, they face the wicked problem of being stuck with their choices for 2024: a problem called the Biden-Harris ticket.

Biden is now so challenged by his deteriorating mental condition that he is unelectable. VP Harris has always been unelectable. The wily Democrat strategy of boosting Trump’s chances so it is he facing Biden has worked … too well. But the Democrats can’t just ditch Biden and install Harris as per succession protocol. They don’t have a replacement for one or both. And time is running out.

There has never been a better example of what is meant by the expression ‘hoist by their own petard’. Still, there is always a chance they can “save” the election – again. As we know, all votes are equal, but some votes are more equal than others …


In what in retrospect looks omen-esque (is that a word?) the speaker program later that day included “Jacinta Price, Director Indigenous Research Centre for Independent Studies, Sky News commentator, Alice Springs Deputy Mayor. On: The Left’s pursuit to silence anyone who speaks out about Aboriginal violence & sexual abuse, and the consequences we now face.”

*CPAC – Conservative Political Action Conference

This entry was posted in Quotidian. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *