The failed 2018 Georgia gubernatorial run for Democratic star Stacey Abrams is a case study in the double standards applied by Democrats and the establishment media.
We of course know that if Democrats didn’t have double standards, they’d have no standards at all.
But their hypocrisy is particularly appalling when you consider that Abrams lost her race in the Peach State by a larger margin of votes than President Donald Trump is currently behind in the combined battleground states of Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin.
That’s excluding valid questions about voting totals in other key states, such as Pennsylvania and Michigan, where the Trump campaign is digging in for a fight to prove claims of rampant voter fraud and other apparent election irregularities.
While the establishment media was quick to call the presidential race for Democrat Joe Biden last week, and now demand Trump congratulate him and concede, Abrams still hasn’t conceded her gubernatorial campaign — two years after the votes were tabulated.
While Democrats and the mainstream media accuse the president of attempting to thwart Democracy by refusing to concede a contested election, Abrams is still hailed as some sort of intrepid political martyr for refusing to admit her defeat.
Abrams lost the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race by a total of 54,723 votes, according to the final results as reported by Ballotpedia.
In contrast, in the states of Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin, Trump is only down a combined 46,993 votes, according to current data provided by The New York Times.
Do you think President Trump will prevail in the courts to win a second term?
0% (0 Votes)
0% (0 Votes)
Georgia is of course headed for a first-ever by-hand recount, and litigation in the other states will challenge the votes amid claims of widespread irregularities.
But while Trump is guilty in the eyes of the slanted legacy media of harming the democratic process, Abrams is still celebrated for refusing to concede what was a clear loss.
Abrams’ national relevancy can in fact only be attributed to her refusal to accept the will of voters and gracefully admit defeat.
Had Abrams gone away quietly, it’s arguable that nobody would even remember she ran.
But because of her decision to resist the will of voters, she’s celebrated as a credible figure for Democrats, who continually push her as a rising star.
The New York Times Magazine offered a gleaming profile of Abrams all the way back in April of 2019.
The outlet pressed the Democrat on issues such as a potential Senate run and how she was handling her national fame after refusing to accept a loss.
How is The New York Times approaching Trump’s rightful challenge of the 2020 presidential race?
The Times on Wednesday attempted to link Trump to Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko, who controversially won a sixth term in office in August following an election that critics said was rigged.
The Associated Press later reported on protests of Lukashenko’s victory with the following headline: “Over 50,000 march in Belarus against authoritarian leader.”
Trump is being connected to an “authoritarian” international leader over his decision to legally contest the presidential election, while Abrams is apparently heroic for refusing to accept defeat in the gubernatorial race.
In fact, immediately following her 2018 loss in Georgia, The New Yorker profiled her defeat by legitimizing her claims that she was robbed by systemic voter disenfranchisement, and celebrated her for creating a “diverse coalition” of voters which almost saw her become the first black female state governor.
But Abrams lost to Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican, and her refusal to concede elicited no connection to international authoritarians.
Abrams argued, without evidence, that voter suppression led to her defeat, and being she is a liberal Democrat, she was hailed as a positive figure in politics.
Abrams actually said after the loss, “Concession means to acknowledge an action is right, true, or proper. As a woman of conscience and faith, I cannot concede. But my assessment is that the law currently allows no further viable remedy.”
Charles Bethea with The New Yorker summarized the speech, by writing, “Abrams’s unapologetic — and strikingly unconceding — concession speech, which lasted a little more than ten minutes, was pointed in its criticism of Kemp.”
The New Yorker profile of Abrams went on to write off her refusal to concede the race, instead focusing on the historic nature of her campaign.
The same establishment media that celebrates Abrams as a star for losing is now asking Americans to accept its narrative that Trump is engaging in an unprecedented attack on the democratic process.
With Trump’s combined deficit in three states being smaller than Abrams’ singular Peach State loss, we’re now asked to write Trump off as a petty obstructionist.
The establishment media, meanwhile, has rewarded Abrams’ subverting of the will of voters by offering her a pulpit to spew Democratic talking points and by even previously suggesting she should be considered as Biden’s running mate.
It appeared for a while that Biden might even take the bait, although he ultimately chose Sen. Kamala Harris of California, a leftist who, if nothing else, actually won her last election.
While Trump’s challenging of the election results might come up unsuccessful, he owes it to more than 70 million voters who are currently losing faith in the integrity of the country’s elections.
The contrast in how Trump and Abrams have been reported about in the last ten days has shown us again who Democrats and the mainstream media are.
They refuse to apply the 2000 Al Gore standard to contesting an election to Trump.
The media has no interest in fairness or getting to the bottom of widespread reports of election irregularities.
The media wants what it’s always wanted, which is for Trump to be exiled in disgrace.
Abrams, despite losing and making unfounded claims about voter suppression, is celebrated as a historic figure, while Trump is maligned for rightly challenging the results of a murky election.
Trump hasn’t conceded last week’s election results, nor should he, while he exhausts legal remedies to ensure the voting was free, fair and absent of widespread election malfeasance on the part of urban Democrats in swing states.
Should Trump fail to succeed in the courts or with other potential Constitutional avenues to a victory, there is no legitimate doubt he would bow out and move on.
But never forget that Abrams refused to concede an election that was decided two years ago, and the media made her a star for it.
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.