A lot of you reading my newsletter know I got my public start in the aftermath of the 2020 election. For years, I traveled the country providing statistical proof of cheating (some of it legalized) that impacted the distribution of electoral votes favoring Joe Biden’s rise to the White House. President Trump magnified my work, and I even wrote a book about it:
Do you know what has been instrumental in my capacity to gain an audience on this topic? Credibility. That’s why someone like Newt Gingrich, who has been in the political world longer than I’ve been alive, wrote the foreword to The American War on Election Corruption. If we are going to raise our swords on a topic that impacts the fate of the West, then we must ensure we have our ducks in a row before we put out any wrong information discrediting the effort to save America’s elections.
And this is where I need you to read on, and not misread what I’m saying even now. I have been under a lot of pressure since last week to come out and declare every loss - especially the losses in Texas - as stolen. Because I don’t aim to be first, loudest, or most dramatic with any announcement, and haven’t been any of those things since last Tuesday, some think someone “got to me,” or that I’ve lost my nerve. Meanwhile, I am probably the only person you read who thought we ran garbage elections in 2024 - a GOP popular vote win for the presidency and a hold of the House and Senate. Here’s your proof:
Elections rely on the public trust that their outcomes are verifiable, genuine, and reflect the real intent of legal voters. I can no more prove the election of James Talarico or Gina Hinojosa than I can prove the election of William Henry Harrison as president in 1840. Society’s acceptance of election results is essentially the only thing that gives elected governments the ability to govern. We associate election outcomes like the 2020 election with the loss of a beloved figure, but the underlying trauma is to the system people no longer trust. We can observe and dissect many elections in recent years unworthy of the public trust and highly indicative of cheating that has now been enshrined in the laws of the various states.
Elections, as far as my research can show me, fluctuate in quality and consistent statistical trend lines based on how well-maintained (or the reverse) their voter rolls are. States with Automatic Voter Registration have the worst voter rolls and unsurprisingly favor Democrats overwhelmingly:
New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill, faced with a grease fire earlier this year over her state’s system registering non-citizens, tried to get in front of what is certainly a much bigger number of registrations than she wants us to know about:
Sherrill’s Voter Roll Cover-Up is the Tip of the Iceberg in New Jersey
I took a lot of heat for all of my 2020 election assessments, especially my recalculated margins based on legitimate trends based on historical change and voter registration. One of my “would have been close” assessments was for New Jersey, where I assumed Joe Biden would have only beaten Donald Trump by +5.5%, not the ridiculous +15.9% margin that was certified:
Essentially, if you’re new to reading my work and disappointed I haven’t landed a 90-page paper on Attorney General Paxton’s desk, I’m telling you that I believe our elections weren’t worthy of the public trust long before November 3, 2026. Ironically, the biggest impediment to getting the transparency everyone needs to either accept or deny election results can be found right in our own mirrors. I will explain this point later.
Let’s wind the clock back. Since Texas is the most traumatic of all losses Tuesday, I’ll focus there. I used to live in Texas and understand the voting characteristics of all 254 counties with tremendous familiarity. I know them so well that I cried “foul” after Trump’s win there in 2020. Here’s a local receipt from a nut job journalist from Fort Worth proving my case.
While people want to eviscerate me for exercising tactical patience on election outcomes this week, they were nowhere to be found regarding Texas in 2021 - after Trump won it. I was of the opinion that it was targeted for Biden as well, especially after an intense propaganda campaign suggesting he (Biden) was in the mix to carry it. Georgia, Arizona, and the Midwest proved to be much softer targets and there was no need (or ability) to go for broke in Texas as the results came in, so Trump took it for the 11th GOP presidential win in a row there.
I was blown away by how many votes (or “votes”) Joe Biden had there. After last week’s results, I revisited my 2020 analysis of Texas and will go through it here. Joe Biden had up to 840,000 more votes than I would have expected based on where Trump’s 2020 performance came in. Here’s the starting point for my 2020 analysis of Texas:
GOP presidential candidates in Texas remained stuck in the same range of votes, from 4.48 million to 4.69 million, for four elections in a row. In a state the size of Texas and with its growth (especially its addition of new GOP voters), this is not good and is exactly how the opponent can catch you in a wave year, especially with so many large urban areas strewn about. Bush’s 2004 margin is artificially high given his Texas roots, but Romney’s 2012 margin recovery shows Texas as a clear double-digit red state at the dawn of the Trump era.
Trump’s feud with Ted Cruz, his strangeness to rank-and-file conservative voters, and the Hispanic and suburban arrangement of Texas all contributed to a suppressed 9% margin of victory in 2016, with Clinton +349,255 over Obama’s 2008 total and +569,744 over his 2012 total, which was down from the first-time sugar high. Trump’s total is only +115,204 up from Romney’s in 2012. The same gain in 2020 would have put Trump just over 4.8 million votes - certainly enough to fend off Democrats for another cycle even if margins continued to tighten. Here’s where Trump came in:
5.89 million votes.
Trump added over 1.2 million net new votes from 2016, a record gain for the GOP presidential nominee (including George W. Bush) for one cycle, and more than 2 million votes ahead of Clinton’s 2016 count with many flipped voters (Latino) and a reconsolidated GOP voting base no longer reeling from the Cruz-Trump debacle.
Remember when I told you that prior to Trump in 2020, Grover Cleveland in 1888 had been the only president to gain votes nationwide and not be reelected? That is because when you extend a lead you already have and take voters your opponent needs to get back into the game, you pull away. There should have been very little left in the tank of likely voters for Biden to pull from, and cracking four million votes even looked like a stretch. Even giving Biden a gain equal to Clinton’s 2016 gain over Obama would have put him at just over 4.4 million. How did Biden do?
Biden overran the Clinton estimate, already generous, by more than 800,000, and posted a net gain from 2016 of nearly 1.4 million - higher than Trump’s GOP record and putting him nearly 600,000 votes ahead of Trump’s winning total from 2016. Put simply, had Trump had the standard GOP gain from 2012 or 2016 (his own gain), he would have lost to Joe Biden by a half million votes.
And barely a soul wanted to talk about the 2020 election in Texas, despite it matching the same model that did overwhelm Arizona, Georgia, and other states on the map that year. Attorney General Ken Paxton, who hosted me in 2021, knew Democrats were after the state and didn’t trust the results:
Alright, so why were the 2020 results in Texas so bizarre? I don’t think this research will surprise you: