Democrats’ Election Interference: A History of Manipulation and Hypocrisy

We’re transforming your reading experience by removing all ads and focusing on high-quality, in-depth geopolitical analysis. Enjoy a cleaner, more enjoyable news experience, free from distractions. Help us continue to provide exceptional content by donating today. Your support ensures we remain independent and reader-funded. Visit linktapgo.com/thedumshow to contribute. Thank you for making The DUM News better than ever! – Matt

Election interference isn’t just a foreign threat from nations like Russia or China. While external meddling certainly raises alarms, a closer look at our domestic politics reveals that election interference is also a homegrown problem—and the Democratic Party is a consistent player in this game. Whether it’s through manipulating the electoral system, rewriting state voting laws, or leveraging media propaganda, the Democrats have proven adept at rigging the rules to tilt the playing field in their favor. Let’s dive into the history and methods they’ve employed to interfere with elections.

Gerrymandering, the practice of redrawing electoral district boundaries to favor a particular political party, is a tactic Democrats have employed for decades. One high-profile example occurred in Maryland, where Democratic lawmakers drew congressional districts so contorted that they were compared to a “broken-winged pterodactyl.” In 2011, Maryland Democrats devised a map that allowed them to secure seven out of eight congressional seats, despite the state’s more balanced voter demographics. In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that this gerrymandering was unconstitutional, yet the damage had been done, and the Democrats maintained their control until it was rectified.

Beyond gerrymandering, Democrats have also engaged in forms of voter suppression. While this is a tactic often attributed to Republicans, Democrats have been guilty as well. Take New York’s Democratic primary in 2016, when more than 200,000 Brooklyn voters mysteriously disappeared from the rolls just before the primary election between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. An investigation revealed that many of these voters were wrongfully purged in what critics argued was a deliberate attempt to suppress voters likely to support Sanders, whose populist appeal threatened Clinton’s path to the nomination.

The Democratic establishment’s interference was most apparent during the 2020 primaries, where Pete Buttigieg’s strong showing in early states like Iowa was swiftly undermined. The Iowa caucus famously descended into chaos when the Democratic Party rolled out a flawed app to report results. Buttigieg initially declared victory despite significant discrepancies, and the delay caused widespread confusion, allowing the media to frame the narrative against Bernie Sanders, who had gained momentum.

The 2016 Democratic primaries were a masterclass in interference. The use of superdelegates—a group of party elites unbound by the will of voters—tilted the scales heavily in favor of Hillary Clinton. Before a single vote was cast, Clinton had already secured 400 superdelegates, effectively demoralizing Sanders’ supporters and giving her an insurmountable lead. This system, which allows party insiders to override the popular vote, represents the epitome of undemocratic practices, yet it remains a cornerstone of Democratic election strategy.

Another key method of election manipulation by Democrats has been the widespread use of mail-in ballots under the pretext of COVID-19 emergency measures. States like Pennsylvania, Nevada, and Michigan saw sweeping changes to voting laws in 2020, many of which were implemented not through state legislatures but via executive orders and judicial decisions—bypassing the legislative process entirely. This included the mass distribution of unsolicited ballots, changes to signature verification requirements, and extended deadlines, all justified as emergency measures. However, critics argued these changes disproportionately benefited Democrats, who were more likely to vote by mail, raising concerns about the legitimacy of the process.

In Georgia, the Democrat-aligned group Fair Fight, founded by Stacey Abrams, was instrumental in pushing for the adoption of ballot harvesting—a practice where third parties collect and submit ballots on behalf of voters. Despite legitimate concerns about chain-of-custody issues and the potential for fraud, Democrats have aggressively expanded the practice in key battleground states.

Historically, Democrats have been quick to accuse Republicans of election theft. In 2000, they claimed George W. Bush “stole” the presidency from Al Gore, despite the Supreme Court ruling in Bush’s favor after the infamous Florida recount. They cried foul again in 2016, alleging that Donald Trump’s victory was the result of Russian interference—a narrative they clung to for years, even as multiple investigations failed to provide evidence of collusion. Despite their outcry against Trump, they’ve conveniently overlooked their own attempts to influence election outcomes, such as when celebrities in 2016 openly urged electors to defy their states’ popular votes and refuse to certify Trump’s victory. This blatant hypocrisy is a hallmark of their strategy: decry election interference when it works against them while actively engaging in it when it serves their interests.

Fast forward to the 2024 election cycle, and the Democrats’ hypocrisy is on full display once again. Despite claiming to be the party of inclusivity and fairness, they’ve gone to great lengths to suppress alternative voices within their own ranks. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Jill Stein, and Cornel West—each representing distinct and diverse segments of the electorate—have been systematically sidelined by the Democratic establishment and media. Kennedy, who poses a credible threat to Joe Biden’s nomination, has been smeared as a conspiracy theorist and denied a fair platform to present his views. Stein and West, representing progressive and third-party movements, have been virtually erased from the conversation, exposing the Democrats’ commitment to maintaining a two-party system that leaves little room for genuine choice.

The media, acting as an extension of the Democratic Party, plays a central role in shaping public perception. Through selective coverage, biased reporting, and outright censorship, they’ve ensured that narratives favorable to the establishment dominate the airwaves. The Democrats’ collaboration with Big Tech to suppress dissenting voices on social media platforms is well documented, with platforms like Twitter and Facebook coming under scrutiny for silencing stories that could harm Democratic candidates while amplifying narratives that support them.

Perhaps the most troubling form of interference is the weaponization of the Department of Justice against political opponents. In 2024, the DOJ’s focus on prosecuting former President Donald Trump is a glaring example of how the system can be used to target candidates who pose a threat to the Democratic agenda. While the media frames these investigations as efforts to uphold the rule of law, the timing and focus suggest a strategic attempt to hinder Trump’s campaign and distract from the Biden administration’s own shortcomings. This is the same DOJ that has shown remarkable leniency toward Hunter Biden and other Democratic figures, reinforcing the notion that justice is applied selectively, depending on one’s political affiliation.

The Democrats have long claimed that external threats are the primary danger to our elections, but their actions reveal a different story. Through gerrymandering, voter suppression, manipulation of primary processes, and emergency powers to change election laws, they’ve consistently interfered in elections to secure their power. They’ve perfected the art of pointing fingers at others while quietly engaging in the very practices they condemn.

As we approach the 2024 election, it’s clear that the Democrats are once again positioning themselves to manipulate the process to their advantage. By marginalizing alternative candidates like RFK Jr., Jill Stein, and Cornel West, while leveraging the media, the courts, and federal agencies, they’re working to ensure a predetermined outcome. The irony is palpable: while they decry the threats to democracy posed by Trump and foreign actors, they’ve proven to be the biggest threat to a fair and free election.

In an age where election integrity is more important than ever, we must scrutinize the tactics used by all parties—not just those they want us to focus on. The Democratic Party’s history of interference should be a wake-up call to voters who are tired of the double standards, the hypocrisy, and the endless manipulation. If we truly want fair elections, it’s time to shine the spotlight on those who are quick to cast blame while quietly rigging the system in their favor.