“I have to see,” President Donald Trump responded Sunday to Fox News anchor Chris Wallace’s question of whether he would accept the results of the 2020 presidential election were he to lose to former Vice President Joe Biden in November. It was the same question Trump was asked in a 2016 televised debate, a question that then-Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton was not asked during that debate, and a question that Biden has not been asked this campaign — and probably will not be asked.
Ironically, the Democrats were the ones who refused to accept the results of the 2016 presidential election, an election in which Trump won despite pre-election polls showing Clinton winning. They complained that Clinton “won” the popular vote (although neither she nor Trump received a majority of the popular vote), and that the Russians had somehow “hacked” the election, despite absolutely no evidence that the Kremlin changed a single vote.
Trump told Wallace, “I have to see. No, I’m not going to just say yes. I’m not going to say no, and I didn’t last time either.”
This is a reasonable response. After all, if it turns out that there is massive voter fraud, perhaps with millions of fake mail-in votes, then it would be unfair to the American people — nevermind Trump — for the election to be stolen without anything being done to contest it. That is what Trump meant in 2016, and that is what he means now.
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
Biden’s campaign responded to Trump’s refusal to give approval to any such shenanigans by saying, “The American people will decide this election. And the United States government is perfectly capable of escorting trespassers out of the White House.”
If the mainstream media were in any way fair and objective, they would now ask Biden the same question, but they likely will not. In their defense, however, Biden is not answering many questions on any subject, choosing to campaign from the basement of his home, with occasional short excursions to small campaign events nearby.
During the October 2016 debate, Trump responded to a similar question by saying that he would “keep you in suspense.”
This time, Trump told Wallace, “First of all, I’m not losing, because those are fake polls. They were fake in 2016 and now they’re even more fake.”
Indeed, Trump trailed by double-digits for much of the 2016 campaign, and it was widely assumed that Hillary Clinton was going to be the first woman to win a presidential election and “break the glass ceiling.” But after the results came in, and Trump carried not only the swing states of Florida and Ohio, he also broke through the Democratic “blue wall” in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, winning all three of those states — states that had not gone Republican for several presidential elections.
This story illustrates the blatant bias of the national media, including Fox News’ Chris Wallace. Why does Wallace not ask Biden if he will accept the results if he loses a disputed election to Trump? Can any person really believe that the Democrats will just merrily accept a close loss to Trump without making sure that Trump had won fairly? They did not just accept the loss last time, and in the Georgia governor’s race in 2018, Democratic Party candidate Stacey Abrams claimed for days after the election that she was the actual winner of that race. And who can forget the devious attempt of then-Vice President Al Gore to reverse the election results in Florida after the 2000 presidential election? Gore did not concede until over a month after the election.
All this talk is yet another reason for retaining the Electoral College. Were a presidential election to be held with the national popular vote as the standard for winning (rather than the state-by-state popular vote as it is now) and a Republican were to win by 4,106 votes nationally, does anyone seriously believe the Democrats would just shake their heads and say, better luck next time?
Of course not. We could expect Democrats to “find” some extra votes in a Democratic enclave such as Chicago or San Francisco, while Republicans might very well do the same in places such as rural Texas or Oklahoma. But with the Electoral College, winning Illinois by another 10,000 votes would not give the Democratic candidate a single additional electoral vote. While the Electoral College system certainly does not eliminate vote fraud, it does contain its impact.
Trump gave the right answer. The Democrats would love to have a pledge from Trump to accept the results, however dubious they may be, just so long as they can claim “we were robbed” when they lose.
Photo: AP Images
Steve Byas is a university instructor in history and government, and the author of History’s Greatest Libels. He may be contacted at [email protected].
