It's less than two weeks before the midterm elections and Democrats and mainstream media figures are already warning us that we shouldn't trust the results. But they have a plan to make them "better."
Earlier this month, MSNBC political analyst Claire McCaskill expressed concern over election turnout, and called for outsiders to monitor the elections.
"If people don't show up and vote in November in these midterms, we will have to have other countries sending monitors to America to watch our votes," said McCaskill, a former U.S. senator representing Missouri.
That wasn't a new idea. Back in 2008 and in 2012 a group of liberal organizations, including the NAACP and the ACLU, called upon United Nations monitors to oversee the presidential election.
McCaskill's concern was low voter turnout. On that very issue, Georgia was one state that particularly concerned Democrats after it passed a voter integrity law that President Joe Biden described as "Jim Crow on steroids."
She needn't have worried, according to Gabriel Sterling, chief operations officer at the Georgia Secretary of State's office.
"Our team here at @GaSecofState is reviewing turnout today and we are seeing record numbers again," he said. "As of 5pm we've seen over 100,000 Georgians cast early in person votes. Another record, this for Day 2 of Early Voting."
In addition, "triple the amount of Black voters have cast their early votes this year in comparison to the primaries in 2018." So much for "Jim Crow on steroids."
That should close discussions on foreign monitors coming in to interfere with elections, right? Nope, not according to MSNBC again — this time anchor Nicole Wallace.
Wallace asked her guest, Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., "Do you think it's time to ask for friends and allies to come over and help us monitor our elections?"
She added, "We used to do that in other burgeoning democracies."
But we're certainly not "burgeoning" — we've been at this for more than 200 years. And we're not technically a democracy — we're a republic.
Himes didn't take the bait. He said he wasn't "there yet."
In addition, America has the best election monitors there are — partisan poll watchers. Each political party and special interest group is permitted at least one poll watcher for each polling location to keep things honest.
Nonetheless, on Monday, the same day Wallace suggested bringing in foreign election monitors, the Biden administration claimed to be "tracking multiple threats to the nation's election security infrastructure ahead of the midterms," as Politico reported.
It added that an intelligence bulletin would be released sometime this week.
But one of the beauties of U.S. elections is that there is no national "election security infrastructure." The Constitution directs that the individual states set the "time, place and manner of holding elections" through their legislatures.
There's no central authority or clearinghouse. Democrats attempted to snatch the election administration away from the states and put them under federal control last year by introducing H.R.1, the "For the People Act." It would have provided for universal mail-in voting and ballot harvesting, while eliminating most safeguards like voter ID and signature verification.
But the "parade of imaginary horribles" marched on.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton extended the threat beyond the midterms to include the 2024 presidential election. But the threat wasn't coming from our devious foreign adversaries — nope. This was a domestic threat.
"Right wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential election," she claimed.
"If the right-wing Supreme Court rules that state lawmakers can overturn voters' choice in presidential elections, 2024 could very well come down to the six swing states — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — that are trending blue in presidential elections but ruled by Republican state legislatures."
But the real problem is neither flawed election administration by the states nor interference by foreign adversaries.
The problem is that Democrats know they are going to get their butts handed to them in 13 days, according to former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich. He predicts that Nov. 8 will be a red tsunami.
"I would say we'll be between plus three and plus seven … in the Senate; and we'll be between plus 20 and plus 50 in the House, with the most likely number being plus 44," Gingrich told The Epoch Times.
And they respond by denying not just the results of past elections but future ones as well. They've become pre-election deniers.
We used to call people who made wild accusations and predictions conspiracy theorists. Now we just call them Democrats.
Michael Dorstewitz is a retired lawyer and has been a frequent contributor to Newsmax. He is also a former U.S. Merchant Marine officer and an enthusiastic Second Amendment supporter. Read Michael Dorstewitz's Reports — More Here.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.