It seems as though the war over elections has been calibrated to destabilize our civil society. Never-ending skirmishes over source code, chain of custody, adjudication rates, tabulator errors, and improper funds have not elicited even a white thread of surrender from those who keep firing the same tired bullet: “election-denier.” All with sufficient commitment to fairness to learn these terms, regardless of party, appear destined to battle to our mutual deaths. What a victory for those who seek to destroy America.
The fight over “Election Integrity” is like the “War on Drugs.” It is a hopeless conundrum planted before us, a rabbit hole big enough to swallow the nation, and coincidentally all our tax dollars. Simply stated, an election is incapable of firmly adhering to a code of moral values. Only people can do that.
There are two kinds of elections in America, by law (Title III, Sec. 301 [a][5]):
1. Accurate.
2. Invalid.
It gets better. To be accurate, elections must meet extremely stringent standards established under federal law by the “election deniers” of 2000: Democrats. The allowable error rate in a federal election, in order for that election to be valid and therefore certifiable, is 1/10,000,000 ballot positions or 1/125,000 ballots (see 3.2.1). According to the federal election assistance commission that set this legal standard, “this rate is set at a sufficiently stringent level such that the likelihood of voting system errors affecting the outcome of an election is exceptionally remote even in the closest of elections.” When it comes to federal elections, there are no honest mistakes.
