It ought to be acknowledged at the outset that the bar for redoing an election is set incredibly high.
Nonetheless, the 2020 presidential election has compromised American peace — and, for this reason, it can be argued that the election should be redone in those states where the election process has, with evidence, been called into question.
At the time of this writing, it is looking as though the decision-making desks of several news outlets are preparing to declare Joe Biden the next president of the United States. President Donald Trump’s campaign, however, has filed a number of legal challenges in battleground states that, despite the best efforts of Big Tech and the mainstream media, will cast doubt — serious and legitimate doubt — on whether Biden actually is the winner.
A country of due process
Because of the longstanding peace that America has enjoyed within its borders, a simple truth has been taken for granted: we are a country of due process.
This is most evident in the judiciary. It is a common misconception that the purpose of the American judiciary is to produce justice. The government put in place by our Founders never guaranteed that. After all, how could the Founders have guaranteed justice when no one knows exactly what justice is in the first place?
The Founders didn’t guarantee justice, but what they did guarantee was a process, a set of rules — the same set of rules by which everyone is to play. The hope was that this process would make possible the conditions necessary for justice, but it never guaranteed justice.
Instead, it guaranteed something much more important: fairness, and thus, peace.
The supremacy of peace
A government isn’t much of a government if it is unable to keep the peace among its citizens. Without peace, everything else is meaningless: a country could have the most just governmental system ever devised, but if the citizens are constantly at each other’s throats, it’s moot.
For this reason, peace must come first; everything has to be ordered in a way that produces peace. Due process is one example. No, it doesn’t always lead to justice, but what it does always lead to is fairness, and so long as the process is fair — or, at the very least, so long as the process is perceived as fair — the people will accept the results, and thus, the peace will be maintained.
Republicans have long understood this supremacy of peace, which is precisely why we are process-oriented, rather than outcome-oriented. Democrats take the contrary view.
Economics, perhaps, provides the best example. We prefer equality of opportunity over equality of outcome because the former is fair and the latter is not, since a person with more merit would end up in the same place as a person with less merit in that scenario.
The same truths apply
It may seem that we are quite some ways from our subject matter, but we aren’t. America, too, has a due process for its elections. It’s the reason why people don’t take to the streets every time their preferred candidate loses.
Just as with judicial due process, there are a set of rules in place for elections, and, so long as those rules are followed, the people will accept the results of an election. Why? Because that’s fair.
The problem with the 2020 election is that serious doubt has been cast on the fairness of the election process. There is evidence out of Nevada, a hotly contested state, that dead people and ex-residents voted; there is evidence from such states as Michigan and Pennsylvania that, in violation of federal election law, Republican poll watchers have not been given meaningful access to ballot-counting locations.
But worst of all is the way Democratic officials — not state legislatures, which would have been the lawful way to do it, but Democratic officials — with the help of activist judges in states like Pennsylvania have changed the election law so as to allow mail-in ballots to be counted after Election Day. Is it any wonder that people are questioning the post-Election Day ballot dumps that overwhelmingly favor Biden?
No other way out
The point is that evidence has been produced — and this is important, otherwise there would be superficial allegations — that shows the process has potentially been compromised. And once the process goes, so too goes that which the process produced: the perception of fairness, and, ultimately, peace.
It has to be understood that it no longer matters if Biden won legitimately, if he does go on to win. What matters is that we can’t be sure whether he legitimately won because the process has been compromised.
The Trump campaign is doing its best to fight this in the courts. Lawyers are arguing that some votes are illegal and therefore ought not to be counted. But it is hard to believe that this is the solution here.
The political left has proven over the past several months that it is more than willing to resort to violence if it doesn’t get its own way. What do you think will happen if the Supreme Court, for example, decides to invalidate a meaningful amount of ballots? Wouldn’t this also play right into the Democrats’ hands, considering the claims that they have made that Justice Amy Coney Barrett was appointed to make sure Trump remains president?
It appears that we are left with a situation in which, no matter what, American peace is compromised. It is either compromised because of the perception that Biden and the Democrats stole the election, or it is compromised because the Democrats believe that the Republicans stole the election through the Supreme Court. That’s a lose–lose scenario in terms of American peace.
There is a scenario, however, where peace can be maintained, one in which the courts decide that an election needs to be redone. It shouldn’t happen everywhere; that, as stated, would set a bad precedent for the future. But it should happen in all states in which there is concrete evidence that the voting process has been compromised. And it should happen in such a way that all the established rules — the rules of the election process — are followed.
If we want to maintain American peace, it seems that this is the only way forward.