By John Q. Hosedrinker 
President Trump’s actions surrounding the upcoming White House governors dinner and his obsession with the 2020 election results suggest a plan to “steal” future Republican victories. This includes potentially pardoning figures who could corroborate debunked election fraud claims and advocating for the “nationalization” of elections by Republican control in key areas. A recently passed House bill, though unlikely to become law, aims to enable voter suppression by tightening identification rules and allowing the Department of Homeland Security to seize voter rolls. If the November midterm election results are close, the scenario could become dire, with attempts to delegitimize the outcomes and potentially prevent the seating of newly elected members, echoing past efforts to overturn election results.
Read the original article here
It feels like the realization that Donald Trump might be plotting to “steal” the upcoming midterm elections is dawning on many, but for some, this has been an evident concern for quite some time. It’s not necessarily a new development, but rather a growing clarity around a strategy that some believe has been in motion for years. This isn’t necessarily about Trump acting as some sort of intellectual mastermind; rather, the narrative suggests he’s more of a public face for a well-established agenda driven by others behind the scenes. The idea is that these orchestrators might be using him as a fall guy, intending to recede into the shadows once their objectives are met, leaving him to bear the brunt of any fallout.
The evidence pointing towards this alleged plot is multifaceted, drawing on past actions and stated intentions. One of the most striking elements involves the pardoning of individuals involved in the January 6th Capitol riot. This is seen by some as a signal of a broader strategy to reward loyalty and potentially secure cooperation for future endeavors. The focus on freeing election deniers, like Tina Peters, a jailed county election clerk, or even more prominently, seeking a pardon for former Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro in exchange for testimony about alleged election fraud in 2020, highlights a willingness to engage with controversial figures and narratives to achieve specific goals.
More concretely, there are proposed changes to election administration that raise significant concerns. The idea of “nationalizing” elections, as suggested in a podcast, where Republicans would aim to “take over the voting in at least 15 places,” is viewed as a direct attempt to control electoral processes in key areas. This echoes past tactics, like the “Stop the Count” tweets during the 2020 election, when results were not favorable, indicating a pattern of challenging election integrity when it doesn’t align with desired outcomes. This strategy, some observe, is not only a political tactic but also a reflection of an ego-driven desire to win, rather than a commitment to serving the country.
Furthermore, legislative efforts are contributing to the growing unease. The passage of the Trump-backed “SAVE America Act” in the House of Representatives is seen as a significant move. This bill aims to tighten voter identification rules, reduce mail-in ballots, and empower the Department of Homeland Security to seize voter rolls in any state. While its passage in the Senate might be blocked, the intent behind it is viewed as clear: to allow Trump to operate with maximum impunity during the midterms and beyond. The potential for widespread voter suppression through such measures, combined with predictions of ICE surrounding polls to intimidate minority voters, paints a grim picture of potential election interference.
The current political landscape, with Trump’s polling numbers showing a reversal from previous years, adds another layer to this concern. If the midterm results are close, the potential for delegitimizing the outcomes becomes a very real threat. The fear is that the strategy isn’t just about winning elections, but about ensuring that even if the results are not in his favor, he can cast doubt on their legitimacy, potentially preventing the seating of newly elected members of Congress. This focus on sowing doubt and undermining faith in the electoral process is seen as a primary objective.
The legal challenges encountered in the past also inform the current anxieties. The string of failed lawsuits following the 2020 election, many presided over by judges appointed by Trump himself, suggests that the legal route for overturning election results might not be the most effective. However, the narrative suggests that even without legal standing or merit, the intent will be to declare the results illegitimate, an expectation that has become par for the course. This raises questions about the effectiveness of existing safeguards and the preparedness of the Democratic party to counter these tactics.
The notion that this plot is only “becoming clear” now is a point of contention for many. The observation that Trump has been at war with elections for years, and that this is his go-to strategy, suggests that the signs have been evident for a long time. For those who have been paying attention, the current developments are not surprising but rather a confirmation of long-held suspicions. The suggestion that Trump might not even be personally crafting his social media anymore, with hints of AI being used to maintain his public presence, adds a concerning dimension to the control and manipulation narrative.
Ultimately, the argument is that the focus should shift from Trump as the sole antagonist to the broader network of individuals and groups committing these alleged acts. The term “Project 2025” is cited as a political initiative by these individuals, with the belief that Trump might be serving as a figurehead, destined to take the fall while others orchestrate the true agenda. The fear is that this is not just about winning an election but about a more profound attempt to undermine democratic processes and establish a different form of governance, with the potential for a third-world dictatorship if unchecked. The core concern is that this alleged plot to “steal” the midterms is not a new or surprising development, but a consistent pattern of behavior that has been escalating, and the full scope of its implications is only now becoming starkly apparent.