This has always confused me.
The shelves in libraries, in book stores, in professorial offices, are bulging under the weight of books about political corruption and stolen elections; there's been so much written on the subject the mind boggles.
Just tons and tons of stuff written about it.
And many of these books the past several generations (not years, generations) were researched and written by left-leaning academicians.
When the final chapter of American history is written, long after the Democrats, liberals, and primitives are pushing up daisies, I'm sure those future historians will rate the Democrat party as the most venal, the most corrupt, institution in all of American history, surpassing even the mafia and Wall Street.
There's an obvious and gaping "disconnect" with reality here, among the primitives.
Republicans, being generally popular in small places, and among ethical people, don't, and very rarely have had, the "tools" to cheat. It's never been Republicans running those big-city political machines, where hundreds of thousands of "votes" are created out of thin air.
A Democrat ward-boss in Cleveland can create more "votes" than all those honestly cast in the Upper Great Plains States, and this really bothers me.
And I'm still pissed that a Democrat in Wisconsin got to vote eight times for Alphonse Capote Gore in 2000, and got away with it, while I in Nebraska could vote only one time for George Bush.
The primitives don't know shit about who practices dishonest politics.