The Mitch McConnell Question.

No sooner did Team Trump make allegations of widespread fraud in the presidential election, than Team Biden people began typing this all over social media:

"If vote-rigging against Trump occurred...THEN WHY DIDN'T MITCH MCCONNELL LOSE, TOO?? CASE CLOSED!!"

I ask, in all seriousness: How can any nation survive with this many dumb people in it?

Don't get me wrong. I'm extraordinarily stupid in all sorts of areas of life. My math sucks, my auto mechanic work sucks, I can't do basic electrical work, I've been pigging out on DQ sandwiches for months and am now fatter and weaker than I've ever been...there are dozens of things I'm inept at.

But how on earth can anyone believe it is valid to infer that "A did not do Y" on grounds that "A did not also do X"?

Plug in some real-world variables here.

Police accuse Jim and Kathy of robbing a Bank of America at 112 Maple Ave, Podunk, Idaho, based on recovered text messages, eyewitness accounts, etc.

Their defense attorney then holds a press conference and says, "A different Bank of America - over in Eugene, Oregon - was NOT robbed last night. Therefore, there is no way Jim and Kathy could have robbed the Bank of America at 112 Maple Ave, Podunk, Idaho".

This "logic" doesn't even rise to the level of laughable.

Another:

An in-store detective apprehends Shawndra after she exits Macy's. He accuses her of shoplifting a $2000 dress and asks her to open her bag. She refuses.

Shawndra's defense attorney then shows up and announces that Shawndra can't possibly be guilty of shoplifting a dress, because - "Look through the window - she didn't steal the rest of the items in the store. All the other stuff is still there!".

Why do I need to type this?

Why does anyone need to try to explain that it is perfectly possible to commit one misdeed, without committing another? Half the country has literally turned into a parody of the old joke about the man accused of committing murder, who produces 99 people at his trial he did not murder, as "evidence" of his innocence.

And just before these doofuses begin on here:

I am not here alleging there was electoral fraud. That's a topic for another post.

I am asking what had to happen to your brain, for you to believe this proposition: "That A did not commit Misdeed X proves he did not commit Misdeed Y"?

Back to the matter at hand:

The first fact is: American electoral processes are the most vulnerable to fraud in the entire First World. That has been true for decades, and I hope that changes now.

The second is: If one wanted to radically change America illicitly, the most bang for the buck would be to target a presidential race, not least because presidents appoint Supreme Court justices, and it is the Supreme Court which now has The Last Word on everything that happens in the country.

Anyway:

That fraud did not occur at all ballot stations doesn't mean it did not occur in a few.

And if there was fraud, I guess we'll find out soon enough.

But in the meantime, will you people please stop typing out the world's dumbest question? (We can call it "The Mitch McConnell Question").

Thanks!