No.Nonsense.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. I am not an election denier. I am not someone who cries election fraud every time the count doesn’t go my way.

But even I will admit that something is off with the vote counts for the California primaries.

California has always been an outlier in elections because of their cage match voting system where the top two vote-getters are the ones that move on to the general election regardless of party affiliation.

In a state where roughly 40% of voters are registered Democrat, 25% Republican, and 45% independent, 36 million residents usually only have a single party choice thanks to their election rules.

Article One, Section Four of the US Constitution establishes that the states hold the power to determine the rules of their elections. Since established, the US Supreme Court has protected the states’ rights to have a wide latitude in determining the course of their own elections.

For California, their rules are an anomaly when compared to the rest of the states. With that said, they have been affirmed in their rules by the judiciary.

The first issue is that they mail every registered voter a ballot with which they can choose to vote by mail rather than in person. This was a prevalent practice during COVID when large gatherings of people were discouraged. But that was a one-off and should not have determined the rules going forward. Mail-in voting presents greater opportunities for fraud as well as prolonging the count and delaying certification of the results because ballots are accepted up to seven days past Election Day with nothing more than a date of Election Day. And, no, the law does not specify that it must be postmarked by Election Day but that the ballot itself is dated for that day. Voting by mail should be reserved only for extenuating circumstances where the voter is physically unable to appear in person.

This current primary is significantly highlighting the flaws in the status quo of California’s elections. In the governor’s race, Republican Steve Hilton was in the lead all the way through election night. Now a week after the elections as the mail in votes continue to be counted, all of the progress has been for Democrats Xavier Becerra and Tom Styer. As it stands today, Becerra surpassed Hilton to take the lead. It appears that Hilton will hold the second place position and proceed into the general election, but just barely. It has been two decades since California elected its last Republican. The throw-down elections came into play with a rules change in the California assembly in 2012, one year after the last Republican governor left office.

The effect of this voting system becomes even more apparent when we look to the Los Angeles mayoral race. At the finish of election night, Democrat Karen Bass and Republican Spencer Pratt were in a dead heat with Nithya Raman a distant third. Once the mail-in ballots were counted, Bass remained flat, staying in the lead. Raman soared by 33,000 votes or a 40% increase, to overtake Pratt and take the second place position and securing her a spot in the general election in November.

Analysts have looked at these numbers and stated they are statistically impossible to have one candidate remain static, another decline, and a third to surge that significantly with mail in ballots. What’s more, how could she have little to no name recognition outside of her district, lose her own district, but gain such numbers outside of her district? As Vizzini from The Princess Bride famously said, “Inconceivable!”

What is happening with the rules as they are in California is that those in the middle or on the right are given no good options for whom to vote. It’s like saying you can choose the Reese’s Cup with the caramel or the Reese’s Cup with the jelly. They both suck because they’re not real Reese’s cups.

California has Democrats dominating both sides of the US Congress and both sides of their state assembly. The Democrats have 42 representatives in the US House with only eight Republicans and two vacant seats. They hold both Senate seats. In their State Assembly Democrats hold 60 seats to the Republicans’ 20. In the State Senate, it’s Democrats, 20 and Republicans, 10.

In case my right-leaning friends want to say New York is no better, Democrats represent 48% of the electorate with Republicans at 23% and Independents 29%. Their State House has 103 Democrats and 47 Republicans. The State Senate is 41 Democrats and 22 Republicans. The US House is 19 to seven with both Senators as Democrats. Even with the disparity, they are still a closer representation to the populace.

Now to address the arguments I will inevitably get from my left-leaning friends that Texas and Florida are a similar dynamic in reverse, let’s run the numbers.

In Texas, voters do not register by political party so these estimates are based on voting records. The models show 47% Democrat, 38% Republican, and 15% Independent. The US Senate has one of each party. The House is 25 to 12 in favor of the Republicans. The State House is 88 to 62 with Republicans in control and the State Senate is 18 to 12 in favor of the Republicans.

Now let’s move onto the other Republican stronghold of Florida where the breakdown of voters is 41% Republican, 30% Democrat, and 29% Independent. In the US Senate, both Senators are Republican. The US House has 20 Republicans and eight Democrats. The Florida State House is 84 to 34, Republicans and the Senate is 15 to 12, Republicans.

Before anyone gives me the argument that it’s not a fair representation of the people in these other states, I would argue the distinct difference is that the voters had clear choices in two separate ideologies and chose accordingly, an option the voters of California don’t have. It could further be argued that partisan gerrymandering could account for the disparity in the control of the parties and that argument would be a valid one.

My point in all of this discussion is to say that we need a better system to reflect the will of the people. I agree with the electoral college because it seeks to balance out these disparities so that the poles of the country are not determining the future of flyover country. Mob rule popular voting is not the answer because every election would be determined by the most populated states. But the most populated states still need to make it fair for the minority class within their states.

I don’t want nationalization of elections as it would violate every tenet of what our Founding Fathers intended. But there has to be a better way.

As it stands right now, the dumpster fire that is the current California election is lighting the way to much needed change in the system. Every vote must count or we cease to be the free and fair country we were intended to be.