This topic will not be covered in the Australian lamestream press and I have seen no mention yet in the alternative pro-freedom media. So here is some material to get the ball going:
https://naomiwolf.substack.com/p/so-much-fraud
It seems substack is asking for age-verification ID on this now, which is absurd because there is nothing harmful to delicate kiddies. Clear censorship. But still a good one to watch if the selfie camera is working.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/11/can-pres-trump-beat-the-cheat/
"In the last three Texas gubernatorial elections, Republican Greg Abbott received around 4.5 million votes. The Democrat candidate could only muster around 3.5 million ballots statewide, until this year's jump to 5.2 million! An estimated 9.9 million ballots were cast in the 2026 Texas midterm election, compared to 8.1 million in the 2022 midterms, an increase of 1.8 million. The result was an electoral sweep by the Democrats of all statewide offices. A recent Truth Social post by Trump suggests there was fraud. In response to Trump's post, Kupe Paul on X wrote, "We cracked their cheating algorithm. 85/15 algorithm... for every 1000 Trump votes (most likely during early voting when Dems front-loaded everything) 150 switched to Dems. It's the same pattern in every state that went blue."
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/11/the-2026-election-the-numbers-just-don-t-add-up/
"Some of the data that we're seeing simply doesn't add up. Kevin Bass and others have started looking into the numbers...and they just don't seem kosher:
Yes Republicans showed up They did about average historically Democrats got an unprecedented number of midterm votes https://t.co/cmcEMfiLBc
I had Gemini take the information in Bass's chart and apply the same analysis to midterm turnout going back to 1960. To show the difference between presidential years and midterms, I had it look at turnout in both types of elections.
The data is simply staggering. Over the last 66 years, the average decline for Democrats in midterm elections from the prior presidential election was 22.8%, while for Republicans it was 23.1%.
However, the 2018 midterms were different. While GOP turnout declined by 19.3% from the presidential election, consistent with previous patterns, the Democrat decline from 2016 was only 1.8%, which stands out as anomalous.
In 2026, if the numbers hold, the GOP will again hew to this 66-year pattern, with turnout 25.5% lower than in 2024. Meanwhile, the Democrat turnout in the midterm will be a mere .6% lower than in 2024.
So basically, Republicans voted normally in 2018 and 2016 while Democrats turned out in numbers literally never seen before, and it's not even close.
That simply doesn't hold water. Sure, Democrats hate Trump, but they hated Nixon even more. Nevertheless, in 1970, with Vietnam raging and the Weather Underground leftists carrying out bombings from Berkeley to New York to Chicago, the Democrat decline in turnout from 1968 was 18%.
Our clown vice president said that the 2026 election results were the Iran war that caused this political bloodbath. However, Vietnam was an actual bloodbath, and young people were being drafted, and Democrats still didn't show up in the numbers we're told happened on Tuesday. This time around, where were the millions of Americans in the streets calling for the end of the war—you know, the ones unaffected by a draft, daily casualty counts, and thousands of body bags shown on the nightly news?
They weren't there because, while Americans may not like the higher gas prices, the reality is they aren't picking up the pitchforks. But that kind of passionate, take-to-the-streets response is exactly what we would (and should) expect if we are to believe the numbers we see coming out of Texas and elsewhere.
And in Texas some strange things are going on. In what was, until Tuesday, one of the reddest and most prosperous states in the Union, Democrats suddenly increased their off-year election total by almost two million, or 47% (3.55M to 5.23M). Moreover, they did so in a state where the population grew by fewer than 2 million American citizens between 2022 and 2026. What's more, of that 2M population growth, at least 30% were children, who can't legally vote.
That's about 1.4 million new potential voters. Generally, 65% of American adults vote in any given election, which should mean about 1 million new voters in Texas. But we're supposed to believe that in one of America's reddest states Democrats not only took 100% of the new voters, but drew an additional million voters from the GOP or elsewhere? All while the Republicans showed up in exactly the expected numbers?
And somehow, the Democrat gubernatorial candidate, Gina Hinojosa, someone whom practically no one knew, who had been down by 2 points going into Tuesday, magically ends up winning by 8 points.
None of that flies. And it's not just Texas.
North Carolina, a decidedly smaller state with a mere 11 million citizens, added 1.4 million new voters to the rolls between 2022 and 2024 without proof of citizenship. So, we're told that in a state that grew by approximately 400,000 between 2022 and 2024, they not only signed up 1.4 million new voters in that period, but in 2026 the Democrats won every statewide election and flipped control of the state.
Nationally, in 2010 Barack Obama lost 63 House seats. That year GOP turnout was up 25% from the 2006 midterms and down 14% from 2008. This year the GOP lost about 40 seats, but Democrat turnout was up 37% from 2022 and down just 0.6% from the 2024 presidential election. Again, the numbers simply don't make sense.
But of course we're being told that the reason the Dems had so many votes was that Republicans, unhappy with the GOP, defected. On its face, that's nonsensical. GOP voters are unlikely to flip to supporting a leftist party filled with communists, Islamists, and trans cult supporters simply because gas prices are too high. The truth is, GOP turnout was exactly in line with historical trends.
Virtually every one of these elections is done via voting machines. We know that Silicon Valley is filled with some of the biggest leftists on the planet who also happen to be the most skilled in tech in the world—and most of whom hate Trump. Add to that AI that we already know can hack into pretty much anything, and half the time we only know it because the AI companies themselves tell us. (The victims haven't even figured it out.)
It doesn't take a great leap to think that the machines and the rolls have been manipulated, particularly when some jurisdictions have more registered voters than adult citizens.
Taking all of the above into account, the claims seem absurd on their face. It's possible, but improbable to the point of straining all credulity, to accept what we're being told: namely, that 91% of counties (available data) moved toward the Democrats while 8% moved towards the GOP. (raw data here)
Add to all of that, because of the Herculean efforts of @DataRepublican, we know for a fact that a coup has been in the works for years and includes flag-level retired military, federal and state officials, Democrat lawfare experts, and billionaire moneymen.
The reality is, America does not have secure elections. Nothing even close. Sadly, of all the failures of the GOP over the last two years, none has been more destructive to the Republic than their failure to pass the SAVE America Act. When combined with the lack of prosecutions of those involved in the coup of 2020, the GOP has been nothing short of derelict.
The President has two months until Congress changes hands. He should spend that time doing two things simultaneously. 1) Use every tool, anvil, and shotgun in his arsenal to get the Senate to pass the SAVE America Act. 2) Investigate the election that just took place. Hire the DOGE team to use every tool available to ferret out what really happened on Tuesday, and if they identify the smoking guns, indict the traitors and work with the existing Congress to have special elections to fill the affected seats.
He may fail at both, but he must try. The alternative is basically saying that crooks can keep the money they stole from the bank if they manage to make it out the door without anyone seeing them. That's a world in which the most skilfully dishonest people win every time. That flies in the face of the rule of law. There is literally nothing President Trump could do that would be more beneficial for the American people and the Republic. This will be his legacy. Nothing else matters..."
https://chroniclesmagazine.org/web/why-i-deny-elections/
"I spent almost 30 years supporting, monitoring, and assessing foreign elections, beginning in 1992 as a UN District Electoral Supervisor in Cambodia's transitional election, and ending in 2021 as Director of the Center for Democracy Rights and Governance in the first Trump administration. As a top professional in my field, I know how to assess election integrity better than virtually any lawyer, government official, journalist, talking head, or politician.
I believe that none of the Democratic candidates elected last Tuesday should be considered legitimate, because they were elected after promoting non-transparent processes intentionally designed to prevent effective monitoring and verification. When we encountered this sort of managed obfuscation overseas, it was considered a clear indication of a corrupt election, and we must apply the same standards to assess the credibility of elections at home as we do abroad.
A large majority of Americans, both Republican and Democrat, support voter ID, and voter ID is a standard security feature of election processes in all of the world's other electoral democracies. Yet the Democrats reject voter ID in their policy platform and fight it through relentless lawfare in clearly politicized courts.
Accurate voter rolls are the foundation of legitimate elections because excess names on a roll can be used to cast illegal votes in many different ways, and America's voter rolls are the most bloated and least accurate in the world. Cleaning rolls and conducting voter roll audits are normal administrative and security procedures in all of the world's other electoral democracies. But in the U.S., the Democrats consistently oppose cleaning or auditing voter rolls. When anyone suggests it is necessary or tries to clean the rolls, Democrats fight ferociously against it in the politicized courts.
The Democrats have long advocated for early voting and have convinced most Americans that early voting is a good thing, but from a security standpoint it's a nightmare. Any break between voting and counting compromises the transparency of the vote. When ballots (both cast and uncast) float around unmonitored for weeks, it becomes impossible for poll watchers and the general public to observe and verify the polling process.
Postal or mail-in voting has always been the least secure voting method (as President Jimmy Carter noted in the 2005 report of the Bipartisan Commission on Election Reform). When it was limited to a few absentee ballots for overseas soldiers, the risks were manageable and acceptable. The Democrats' recent success in enacting universal mail-in voting has corrupted our entire election process because mail-in voting undermines the security and secrecy of the vote. Because it does not occur in a controlled environment (a polling station), it enables vote theft, ballot- or drop-box stuffing, vote buying, and voter intimidation by families, communities, or employers.
Prominent Democrat and Republican leaders have publicly blamed election losses on hacking of machines for decades, cyber experts have warned of the security vulnerabilities of the machines for decades, and a large portion of the voting population believes machine results are routinely manipulated. Still, the Democratic Party now promotes, as a matter of policy, demonstrably insecure, nontransparent, and unmonitorable machine voting and counting processes, and vociferously opposes in the courts and in the far-left media any return to cheaper, faster, more transparent, and more verifiable manual voting and counting.
Taken together, these weaknesses in our election processes offer no upside beyond a minor increase in convenience—but that convenience comes with massive drawbacks. They make our elections more expensive and, because they are also made unverifiable, they have led a majority of voters (both Democrat and Republican) to doubt the legitimacy of our elections.
Given these negatives, a reasonable person might wonder why Democrats (and some Republicans) argue so hard for preserving these innovations. That person might conclude, as the president did in a speech on election integrity on July 16, 2026, that the only reason you wouldn't do election reform "is because you want to cheat."
From my perspective as an election assessor, the Democrats' promotion and implementation of these insecure election processes looks like a comprehensive strategy to enable election manipulation. Their use in our elections makes the process unverifiable, and the candidates elected last week who promoted these processes or opposed reform should probably be considered illegitimate until new, verifiable elections can be held.