Categories
BW Member Blog

Every single vote vs. every single ballot …

At this point I’m wondering if Biden’s speech on election night (or the wee hours of the next morning, depending on what time zone you’re in) where he said words to the effect of “we must make sure every single vote counts” — Wasn’t a trigger phrase for “Begin operation Steal the Election in earnest NOW!”

 

We all know the Left has weaponized language but here’s the thing about that statement Biden made.  I’m all for making sure every legitimate, legal, rightful vote is counted. No real American would even consider arguing with that idea.  That’s not what Joe meant …

 

What Joe meant was “we must make sure that every single ballot, no matter how specious, questionable, illegal or illegitimate is counted”.

 

Because a vote is not the same thing as a ballot.  Every single American over the age of majority who has not had his voting rights rescinded or suspended has the right to exactly one vote.  The vote is cast by using a ballot but the ballot is not the vote.  The vote is the legitimate, legal, correct exercise of franchise by an American citizen.  Every single vote must be counted.  A ballot is not a vote, a ballot is a piece of paper (or other media) which CARRIES the vote and is an intermediary device between voter and vote tabulator. 

 

A ballot may or may not carry a legitimate vote because if the vote was illegitimate so is the ballot.  If the vote was fictional so is the ballot.  Any ballot, no matter how seemingly correct it appears on the surface, is less useful than toilet paper if it does not carry a legitimate vote.

 

Joe Biden does not want every single legitimate, righteous vote counted.  He wants every single ballot counted whether every one of those ballots carries a legitimate vote or not.  Therein lies the crux of the matter.

 

At this time, validating ballots is not a foolproof process.  That’s the avenue for voter fraud to get traction, the ballot is the weakest point whether it’s a paper ballot or an electronic system.  That’s where tampering is most easily accomplished and that’s why Joe wants every single ballot counted regardless of whether it actually carries a legitimate vote or not.

3 replies on “Every single vote vs. every single ballot …”

So, rather than have a safe, secure election, we have an election designed to be a win for the party controlling the apparatus of election. Joe Biden wins because his side is incapable of not cheating to win, and the response to the Wuhan Flu made cheating easy, cheap and beyond the low integrity of the Left

At this point I’m not even sure the main goal was to steal the election by cheating. Think about this, it might be a little bit paranoid but …

If your goal is to circumvent and nullify the political structure of the United States that prevents you from doing the things you want to do in order to achieve unlimited power over the people, production and wealth of the U.S. — Which we know is someone’s goal because of obvious moves like judicial “legislation from the bench” — Then just stealing an election isn’t enough.

Because even if you manage to steal the election and gain power within the U.S. Constitutional matrix with all of the checks and balances that entails, you still do not achieve unlimited power. Because the laws of the United States of America preclude that. So …

The path to that unlimited power is to destroy the confidence the body politic has invested in the election system itself.

Many, many mainstream, non-radical Democrats who refuse to acknowledge the radical shift in their own, traditional party still believe to this day that GW. Bush stole the election from Al Gore. Now no matter how this recent election plays out in the courts there are going to be a lot of people on the losing side, whichever side that is, that believe the election was stolen by the winning side.

This drastically erodes public confidence in the election system itself and it doesn’t matter which side comes out on top. This is incidentally why Bill keeps bringing up third world elections where people are required to dip a finger in ink to prevent voter fraud.

In this scenario to the goal is to generate a positive feedback loop that culminates in both sides agreeing that the election system is no longer working and something else must be done.

The amplifier for that feedback loop is the mulit-pronged assault by Leftist elements who have seized major influence in the Democrat Party. Social unrest and rioting, gross exaggeration of virtually non-existent racial disparities, flooding the nation with illegal immigrants who have no investment in nor desire for assimilation but rather prefer to live in enclaves of their fellow outlaws (because they ARE outlaws) and like ticks absorb the wealth of America while maintaining the lifestyles and choices that ruined their homelands in the first place … And now destruction of confidence in the system whereby we select our leaders — All have a greater cumulative impact than just stealing an election while still being forced to rule within the Constitutional framework that limits their power.

Stealing the election may accelerate the process but the process proceeds no matter what. Gaining power by stealing the election may just be frosting on the cake.

Like I said, that might be a little paranoid but then again we might genuinely be witnessing the fall of our Republic. In my view coincidences on this kind of scale are very nearly impossible.

New Jersey mailed unsolicited mail in ballots to every registered voter. By regular mail. No signature required to accept delivery. They required multiple signatures on the return envelope, with no corresponding check as to whether the signatures belonged to the actual registered voters. All because of the specious argument that you could not vote in person because of the Yellow Plague.

The appropriate solution to the imaginary problem of in person voting, if you somehow believe that voting is more risky than grocery shopping, was not to throw election security away for the spurious argument of plague preparedness, it, rather obviously it seems to me, would have been to increase the number of in person polling stations so as to decrease the numbers of voters who would be voting at each place, cutting down on the risk of contagion.

Trouble is, nobody asked me

Leave a Reply