One major factor in holding the Republic together is the vote.  If one disagrees with government policies, one can hope to remove that government at the ballot box.  If one is disappointed with the outcome of an election, he can campaign harder in the next one.  The vote allows hope to "spring eternal."  It stabilizes the Republic during times of internal dissent.

But what happens when large portions of the public cease to believe that their votes count?

The 2020 election was fraught with irregularities, to say the least.  Even if one disbelieves that fraud was involved, competence is called into question.  There were photos of counting stations with large obstructions that prevented legally required observation of the process.  There is video of boxes of ballots being counted after — after — observers were expelled.  At least one precinct, in Detroit, counted more votes than were cast, all for Democrats.  One might argue that these and other items of evidence were falsely portrayed, but without an honest investigation, how would we know?

It is certainly reasonable to ask how it came about that the vote count on Election Night, which favored President Trump, was reversed only after midnight, and under dubious circumstances.

One dramatic consequence of widespread public distrust of elections occurred famously — or infamously, as one might believe — on January 6, 2021, when thousands of protesters demanded a delay in certification, pending such investigations.  A great many of those protesters, most of them peaceful, are still in prison, even though there is credible evidence that they were encouraged by government agents provocateurs to enter the Capitol building.  And the prosecutions continue, with no less an aim than to imprison President Trump.

Fraud need not be as obvious as the Tammany Hall variety of the early 1900s in New York.  For example, government and news media collusion, concealing the veracity of the contents of the Hunter Biden laptop, certainly had an influence in favor of the Democrats — as it was intended to accomplish.

Again, even if one insists that there was no widespread fraud, no alteration of the outcome — even then, vast numbers of voters who voted Democrat have since stated that they would not have done so had they known then what they know now: facts that were illegally concealed from them.

Since 2020, numerous states have passed legislation to "tighten up" their voting laws — for example, stricter controls on "ballot-harvesting" and voting by mail.  These are clearly vulnerable to fraud and need reform.  Doing so now, after the fact, raises the question of why these lax procedures were allowed in the first place and what effect they had.

In short, the opportunities for fraudulently altering the outcome of elections are so clear that only those who commit, or benefit from, fraud can strongly object to needed reforms.  Their tactic is to claim that any attempt to impose closer observation of voter verification and vote-counting is racist.  Many of those who object are in powerful positions only because the current process put them there — therefore, they have a disincentive to change that process.

As each election becomes more critical than the preceding one, the incentive to win at any cost is increasing.  Indeed, it is no longer as important to hide the fraud as it is to win the election — at any cost — even if the fraud is obvious and "in your face, ha ha."

The losing side in the 2024 national election will possibly never win another one, after the winner consolidates power.  I believe that both sides understand that.

Whatever the outcome of the next election, the losing side may well give up all its confidence in the electoral system.  Once a vast portion of the electorate loses any hope, the nation will enter a dangerous phase, one from which it may never recover.

Voting is our one secular sacrament, and we have desecrated it.  Is there time to restore it?

Image: cagdesign via Pixabay, Pixabay license.