Greetings, my sisters & brothers & others — I hope that you are all in good spirits & doing well, when this article finds you. I wasn’t planning on writing an article today — but, after having a conversation with a Clinton-Supporter, I was inspired to write one. Before I begin, I’d like to encourage each & every single one of you to engage with our opponents, in dialogue & with kindness. When I was a child, I was taught that “the purpose of an argument is not to win but to get closer to the truth” and that remains one of my guiding principles, today.

Anyway, I never cease to be amazed at the amount of insight that can arise from sustained, authentic, respectful debate — but let’s move on!

Voter Suppression vs. Election Fraud

First, I’d like to draw the important distinction between voter suppression & election fraud. Election fraud is when someone illegally alters the elections results — this can happen in any number of ways, including voting-machine hacking, ballot-stuffing, ballot-destruction, etc. Voter suppression, however, doesn’t necessarily have to be illegal — it can be but it can also be written into the laws themselves. Broadly speaking, voter suppression occurs whenever someone (or some party) does something that results in less people being allowed or able to vote.

For those of you who are interested, I’ve already written about election fraud in several of my recent articles (like this one, which is about #ExitPollGate, or this one, which involves CVS data & jelly-beans) — but, today, I want to talk about voter suppression.

Some Very Concerning Numbers

Let’s change gears for a second & look at some numbers! According to US census data, there are about 219 million eligible voters in the United States, at the moment. Now, according to FairVote (a non-partisan group that researches elections stuff), about 29 million people voted in the 2016 democratic primaries and, for comparison, 30 million votes were cast in the republican primaries. Let’s take a closer look:

\mathtt{29 \div 219 = 0.1324}

So, only 13.2% of eligible voters participated in the democratic primaries. And…

\mathtt{30 \div 219 = 0.1369}

About 13.7% of eligible voters turned out for the republican primaries. Together, that’s only 26.9% of the eligible voters in the United States of America. Now, I’d like to focus in on the 13.2% of US voters who were allowed to vote in the “democratic” primaries…

The Built-In Suppression

of the Primary System



Taking Clinton’s & Sanders’ current percentage-shares of the delegates, 54.6 – 45.4%, and dividing that 13.2% proportionally…

\mathtt{13.2 \times .546 \approx 7.2}

We find that a mere 7.2% of US voters want Clinton to be the democratic presidential nominee — that’s less than 1 in 14 voter-age citizens. Quite the “popular” vote, huh? And, if you run the same calculation on Mr. Drumpf, you get 8.5%. So —

\mathtt{7.2 + 8.5 = 15.7}

So, combining the totals of the two state-party’s “presumptive nominees” (to be clear, Clinton is not the nominee), we find that both of them were chosen — setting aside the possibility of election fraud, for a second — by a pitiful 15.7% of our eligible voters!

That is not normal. That is not democracy.

What You’re Supposed to Believe

The shameless vipers of the corporate-media are peddling this flimsy story that “the elections happened, they were fair, the people have spoken, & now we’re going to send the two nominees that you chose to the general election, with a couple of cute third-party candidates for comic relief.”

You’re supposed to believe that these ridiculous “elections” — which you paid for, by the way — somehow represent the tentative will of the people. They don’t want you to think about the fact that both — I want to emphasize that, both — of the candidates that you’re expected to choose between in November were chosen by a total of 15.7% of voters. And if you won’t vote for one of them, then you are a whiner, a sore loser, a dreamer, or — worst of all — an idealist! You’re supposed to believe that the other 84.3% just “don’t mind” who the nominees are.

You’re supposed to believe that no one was unfairly excluded from the democratic process. You’re supposed to believe that, if you don’t vote for the candidate that (maybe) 7.2% chose, then it’s your fault that the big, bad Drumpf is going to win!

Nevermind the fact that 84.3% is almost 12-times the size of 7.2% — you’re supposed to believe that Clinton is “the only viable candidate” against Drumpf. You’re supposed to believe that the 84.3% that didn’t vote for Drumpf or Clinton is just so lazy & stupid & apathetic that it would be impossible to muster another 7.2% or 8.4%.

You’re supposed to believe that these clowns are the best that we can do.

You wouldn’t want that crazy other person to get elected all because you didn’t vote for me, would you? You wouldn’t want that crazy other person to get elected all because you didn’t vote for me, would you?

To Sum It All Up

I don’t believe it. If all of you don’t believe it, either — then, it’s just a silly story. Then, we win. If we believe the story, it becomes true — so don’t. As much as I would like for this section to be longer, it really is as simple as that. That’s the sum of it.

In solidarity,

John Laurits #SeeYouInPhilly

P.S. A dude wrote an attack-piece on this article & I responded to it with this new article. Basically, he had a problem with the way I calculated voter-turnout. Anyway, if you’re interested in that kind of thing, you can check it out — or, if you’re about to post a rebuttal to this article in the comments, you should check out my counter-article to make sure that I haven’t addressed the issue already. Alright. Good talk. Bye.