If You Don't Know Whether or Not to Vote for Trump or Biden in 2024, You Ain't American
So why is it exactly that Donald Trump is a threat to democracy again? Because Democrats say so. It’s just a bunch of pablum — vapid, intellectual pap.
*My publisher gave me two weeks to rewrite my book and take it a chainsaw to the manuscript. This is the opening salvo.
The 2024 Presidential election is the most consequential election in our lifetime. Democrats have already framed the rematch between former President Donald Trump and incumbent President Joe Biden as an election that will determine whether or not American ‘democracy’ dies. America is, in fact, not a democracy. We are actually a republic. Nevertheless, according to the left, the survival of our democracy is entirely dependent upon the re-election of President Biden.
The claim may serve to rally the most rabid and loyal Democrat voters to harvest ballots for Biden come November 2024, but for most, it should incite as much enthusiasm as watching Joe Biden eat an ice cream cone.
Even before the 2020 election and the so-called J6 ‘insurrection’ in 2021, Democrats had already settled on the narrative that President Trump represented a ‘threat to democracy.’ In fact, the New Yorker claimed Trump was “a bigger threat than ever to U.S. Democracy” in June of 2020 — 5 month before the election. The Democrats’ J6 insurrection narrative hadn’t even been hatched.
Trump has since asserted that the 2020 election was ‘rigged’ or ‘stolen.’ This so-called ‘election-denialism’ is now cited by Democrats as evidence that Trump is a threat to democracy.
Is Biden a threat to democracy then too?
On June 10th 2020 Biden claimed that Trump was going to try to “steal this election” during an interview with Trevor Noah.
Perhaps Presidential candidates are only a threat to democracy if they accuse their opponent of stealing the election after the media declares a winner.
After Trump trounced Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, Clinton called Trump an “illegitimate President” and repeatedly suggested the election was ‘stolen’ from her. In 2019, three years after her defeat, Clinton claimed during a CBS News interview, “I believe [Trump] understands that the many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories — he knows that — there were just a bunch of different reasons why the election turned out like it did.”
Is Hillary Clinton a threat to democracy? How about the Washington Post?
The Washington Post published an article in December of 2016 with the headline, ‘The 2016 election was stolen. Got a nicer way to say that?’
Or are Presidential candidates only a threat to democracy when — after engaging in the heinous offense of election denialism — their supporters take to the streets of Washington D.C. to protest the election outcome?
On Trump’s inauguration day on January 20th, 2017 a mob of angry, election-denying Clinton supporters violently clashed with police in Washington D.C. in an effort to disrupt the ceremony. Six police officers were injured and 217 protesters were arrested. Two D.C. police officers had to be taken to the hospital. Even CNN reported at the time that “protesters smashed storefronts and bus stops, hammered out the windows of a limousine and eventually launched rocks at a phalanx of police lined up in an eastbound crosswalk.”
Did Hillary Clinton incite an insurrection at the Capitol? Or even elsewhere in the country?
These same violent demonstration took place throughout the United States — in New York, Seattle, Dallas, Chicago, and Portland. At least one person in Seattle was in critical condition at the hospital with a gunshot wound. Liberal groups celebrated these protests.
Once inaugurated, a special counsel was tasked with investigating Trump for allegations that he colluded with Putin to steal the 2016 election. What was the basis of this dangerous accusation and the justification for the costly $32 million dollar, and two year long Robert Mueller investigation? A dossier filled with salacious and uncorroborated claims of some vague conspiracy between the Donald Trump campaign and the Russians.
Not only was no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion found; on the contrary, we learned that the Steele Dossier was paid for by the Clinton campaign. It was election interference.
Four years later, during the 2020 election campaign, real and authenticated evidence of Hunter Biden leveraging the position and influence of his father Joe Biden while serving as Vice President to enrich himself and his family was published in the New York Post.
Within five days of the article being published, 51 former intelligence officials released a statement discrediting the reporting as Russian disinformation. Four year prior, the Clinton campaign had invented uncorroborated evidence of Trump-Russia collusion to interfere in the 2016 election. Four years later, the Biden campaign was dismissing corroborated evidence that Biden had sold influence for personal gain as Russian disinformation.
The Biden campaign enlisted the aid of Michael Morell, a former deputy director of the CIA, to gather the signatures from former intelligence officials to lie about the authenticity of the Hunter Biden laptop, from which the evidence had been gathered. This too was also election interference.
Surely it’s a threat to democracy when the FBI and CIA conspire with a Presidential campaign to deceive the American voters. But Trump didn’t do that. Biden did.
How about when the FBI pressures social media companies to suppress stories that are damaging to a particular political candidate, even though they know the stories are true?
The FBI did just that — pressuring both Facebook and Twitter to suppress the bombshell report from the New York Post about the Hunter Biden laptop emails during the 2020 election. In the case of twitter, FBI agent Elvis Chan contacted Twitter’s then-head of trust and safety, Yoel Roth, hours before the Post published the laptop story on October 14, 2020.
In March of 2022, the Washington Post joined the New York Times and admitted the damning emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop were real. Both the Post and Times had previously dismissed the Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation.
So who exactly is the real ‘threat to democracy’?
Ahead of the 2020 election, Hillary Clinton said that “Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances.”
Ahead of the 2016 election, Trump refused to say whether or not he would concede. “I will look at it at the time,” Trump said.
In 2016, computer scientists urged Clinton to challenge the election results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, claiming they had gathered “evidence” to suggest the election results had been potentially manipulated. These claims were repeated on the left leaning cable news networks.
On January 6, 2017, after the electoral college vote tally concluded to confirm Donald Trump the winner of the 2016 Presidential election, more than half a dozen Democrats rose to object to the results of the election; citing Russian hacking, the legitimacy of the election and electors, voting machines, and even voter suppression.
Then-Vice President Biden, who presided over the certification in his role as the president of the Senate, reminded these insurrectionists that any objection had to be in writing.
In October of 2016, prior to the certification, the New York Times published an article with the headline, ‘Could Donald Trump Reject the Election Results? Yes. Would It Do Any Good? Nope.’ The article went on to acknowledge that Trump “could plead with Congress not to recognize a state’s votes, or to challenge the way they were counted….but that would be uncharted territory for Congress.”
That’s precisely what President Trump did in the aftermath of the 2020 election — a lawful but untested process derived form the Electoral Count Act of 1887.
After Clinton lost the 2016 election, her campaign was urged by Democrat activists to defy the electoral college. A group of rogue, anti-Trump electors carried out an intense campaign to persuade dozens of Republican electors to ditch Trump.
Here’s how the Washington Post covered the effort: “The theory goes, then, that the electoral college vote shouldn't hew to the mostly winner-take-all tradition with which we're familiar. Instead, since Clinton got more votes, those electors should support her, where possible, and hand her the presidency,” wrote the Post.
“Is it possible?” the Post asked. “Theoretically. Will it happen? Ha ha ha ha ha no.”
Was Clinton a threat to democracy when she advocated for blowing up the U.S. Constitution because she was unhappy with the results of the 2016 election? Imagine if Trump had won the popular vote but lost the electoral college in 2016. How would the media and Democrats have responded if Trump, rather than Clinton, suggested eliminating the Electoral College because he lost?
In September of 2017, Hillary Clinton floated the idea that she would formally contest the election she had lost eight months prior. “I don’t know if there’s any legal constitutional way to do that,” she told NPR’s Terry Gross. “There are scholars, academics, who have arguments that it would be, but I don’t think they’re on strong ground.” Clinton was praised by CNN for “leaving open the possibility that she would pursue legal action to invalidate the last presidential election.”
Ironically, in the same interview Clinton claimed: “I believe that Donald Trump poses a clear and present danger to our democracy.”
So why is it exactly that Donald Trump is a threat to democracy again? Because Democrats say so. It’s just a bunch of pablum — vapid, intellectual pap.
While Clinton, Biden, and Trump have all accused their political opponents of “stealing” an election, Trump is the only one, who didn’t interfere in an election. While Trump has been falsely accused of collusion to steal an election, Biden is actually guilty of collusion to steal an election.
As the 2024 rematch between Trump and Biden approaches, it is imperative that American voters base their decisions on reality rather than fiction and reason rather than media generated emotion.
Much is at stake in the 2024 Presidential election — much more than our so-called ‘democracy.’ The survival of our country likely depends upon who is elected President. It’s an election unlike any other in our lifetimes; not merely right versus left but good versus evil and freedom versus tyranny.
But the choice should also be the easiest in our lifetimes. We have two records upon which to base our decisions. Every American voter has lived through both the Trump years and the Biden years. Under Trump we had it so good but we were told it was so bad. Under Biden we had it so bad but we were told we had it so good.
2024 is our American re-election; the opportunity to right was is wrong and put the now-derailed American locomotive back on the track to freedom, prosperity, and security. If you have a problem figuring out whether or not to vote for Trump or Biden, then you ain’t American.
Consider this your voter guide for the 2024 election.