-
What the GOP did particularly right — overwatch of voting processes
-
What “they” did wrong — not playing rope-a-dope and keeping Biden in the race and spending so much time on hectoring about the mechanism of voting instead of inoculating the vote early on
Our General Observations:
We agree that the GOP election process overwatch nationwide, along with marginal legislative efforts at insuring voting integrity (primarily in red-states), were key to reducing Democrat cheating, en masse anyway. But the other emphasis by the GOP of promoting the idea of voting by mail was against interests of the integrity of the vote and complicated the overwatch. Also, but for “vote by mail/ bank the vote” being such a resource hog, the vote might have been better for Trump and for GOP gains in congress with a relocation of resources to better expand the vote for Trump and in the process demoralize the Dem vote.
Let us elaborate a bit more: **
We do not want Republicans or independents cheating on a onesy-twosy basis matching Democrats at their game. At home voting means no photo ID at time of vote, and no overwatch as to coercion-intimidation-falsification or substituted judgment (voting for someone else) and no contemporaneous observed signature. It is absolutely the most insecure way of voting and then at the other end it has to rely on signature verification and lengthier counting periods complicating validation and overwatch. Signature verification is a joke anyway.
The GOP apparat says they won with vote by mail and banking efforts in that regard. Our view is that typical of credit grabbers they just love the paid hustle, whatever it is. Resources spent repetitively hectoring people to vote early by mail cuts into motivational and expansive messaging and availability of funds for early messaging to inoculate the population and grow the GOP base.
People know how to vote, if they are interested they will vote. Voters in the 1960s and 70s voted at as high or higher a rate with a relativly minuscule amount of vote by mail, less voting opportunities in person, less transportation availability and voting largely constricted to one day. Make people interested. Put patriotism in them, educate them, expose the Democrats as a party, begin in early spring even February promoting party alongside primary election messaging by candidates (which will help those candidates be more consistent in their messaging) .
We also believe it was/is a phony claim to say that “banking the vote” saves money. Id like to see an audit validating that claim. My view is it wastes money assuming people do not know how to vote. Every repetitive sentence used to hector or explain how to vote early by mail is wasted breath that cuts into motivational messaging.
As previously mentioned it cuts into growth messaging and funds to do so. As long as one person in a household holds to voting securely, which means voting in person and holding to the good-government concept of voting no more than a few days before Election Day — that household continues to receive all the stupid hectoring because “bank the vote” — never mind that it is the HOUSEHOLD being hectored.
The intimidating tone goes that if you “bank the vote” “we” won’t “have to” continue to contact you with breathless information on how to vote early by mail. Oh they tried to fine tune it with vote records but the “we see you have not voted” big-brotherism is endemic and the general ads and admonishments continue unabated, — wasted messaging on all but a very few. It is narrow messaging that hits the voted and the high propensity just the same, forgoing actual growth and suppression messaging for messaging about the mechanism and timing of voting. They used guilt as well, insufferably trying to instill guilt for not voting early – now suddenly de rigueur. Door knocking to encourage voting is fine, but giving people the bum’s rush, inculcating vote-by-mail is against good-government interests.
It should be understood that Trump 47 is only a plurality president (albeit he did better than Trump 45) not breaking 50% with Harris being only 1.5% behind him. Why so many who can read the results keep saying Trump “won the popular vote” I do not know. He was the most popular of the various candidates but somewhat more voters preferred someone else.
Arguably key to his strong plurality win is not that Trump was so overall enthralling (he brought unnecessary negatives to the table affecting leaners) but that the Democrats found someone worse than Hillary in the form of Kamala Harris and the utter failure of the Biden-Harris administration on the economy, the border, the culture and foreign policy. The majority of voters in fringe parties might have given the actual popular vote to Harris although thank God and the system Trump would have still won the electoral college and thus the election.
It is frightening that the Dems did as well as they did. Nearly half or more of the country went for a Marxist, more clearly so than ever before, along with so many leftist congressional candidates.
Several of the GOP nomination candidates would have beaten dementia Joe Biden, but Trump in the biggest potential GOP political blunder of the election, helped bring in Kamala and reenergize the Dems and thereby arguably limit coattails in the election.
Agreeing to debate Joe against protocols and thus helping expose Joe and knock him out of the race was stupid, certainly not 4D chess. With Biden the Dems were totally demoralized. Trump should have let sleeping dogs lie and not agreed to Biden’s own stupid bravado. All he had to claim was “protocol” but I guess we could not expect that from the guy who refused to debate his Republican challengers reserving his own debate bravado for a dementia ridden Democrat. It was impulsive for Trump to agree. He should have mustered the discipline to let Dems be saddled with Joe.
With a replacement for Dementia Joe they were able to raise probably $2 billion and kept hope alive . . . they found themselves stuck with Kamala but it was quite possible they could have picked another candidate by perhaps buying Kamala off, like she did with Oprah and Beyonce and “influencers”. That Dems could keep their vote in line as much as they did with Kamala, they could have done so with someone else. Maybe not, maybe so.
But the most secure thing to do for us was run against Joe and also best for the down-ticket races. The Dem’s problem of being saddled with a still really bad replacement candidate was their mistake not Trump’s brilliance. And not having Biden as Trump’s opponent arguably prevented an actual popular win by Trump.
Getting off track a bit as to the messaging battle, the Dems tried to win on abortion which was/is a big part of their problem. Abortion was all they used but it only helped hold a small part of their base, that element was still likely to vote for Harris and Dems anyway. Abortion produced an abortion of a campaign.
Anyway, there should have been no Democrat wins in a CD that went for Trump. As it was there were 12. True, the GOP picked up votes but I believe the failures and distaste for Democrat performance increased GOP trends (a relative concept) more than whether people voted early by mail.
Messaging and now organic distaste for Dem’s suppressed Democrat vote. Good messaging is more important than voting early by mail because good messaging both suppresses the opposition and enhances the GOP across the board. Weakness in the opposition was more important in 2024 than voting early by mail.
So now we have the narrowest of majorities in the Congress. I am grateful we have majorities at all but the situation is dicey, to say the least. I think we would have done better congressionally, long and short term, running aggressively as a party (however Trumpish in tone) against the Dem Party, against anyone connected to the Democrat party for all their egregious failures. Maybe just 3 or 4 CD’s might have followed but we need every bit of such a margin.
So the apparat is crowing and remains big on “early”, perhaps putting a damper on federal efforts at reform. I only accept that “early” is good when it comes to starting and then sustaining inoculating messaging. But this go-around that would have had to begun “early” at a time when the apparat was falling all over themselves saying ~~ we have this now, we will beat them with “early voting by mail” ~~ their mechanism — wasting resources on related stupid messaging ad nauseam.
Voting Republican is what is key, whenever it is done. Voting by mail does not increase the vote. Your opposition having eggregiously bad candidates suppresses their vote and having a better alternative candidate (we had that) and exploiting the difference with messaging is key.
By the way, further marginalizing the situation in Congress, at least temporarily, is Trump raiding some of the incumbent and reelected personnel. To the extent they come from GOP areas still means more money must be spent on those races rather than “banking” that money and using it to sustain the effort of change with supportive messaging and holding GOP incumbents feet to the fire.
*It is certainly arguable but we believe Stein votes would have virtually all gone to Harris or not voted. RFK votes were so calcified his support of Trump so well known, that these diehards would not have voted for Trump or Harris and likely not voted. Same for Oliver — hard core Libertarians had problems with Trump and they are impractical and hidebound. “Other” vote totals and write-ins cannot be predicted. Source of totals: https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2024&off=0&f=0&elect=0
** This commentary, slightly edited here was also part of a comment to Townhall this day.
