"Voter engagement" is a real thing that moves the needle. But I challenge anyone to provide just one similar historical example where voting engagement doubled in 24 months.
Cast aside Emotions. They cloud logical thinking.
This OP is not about one candidate or another.
I personally don't care for the guy.
It's about anomalous math.
Anomalous math is the single strongest evidence demonstrating the 2020 election was stolen. Anomalous;(adj) : inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected.
MAGA won yesterday. Great. But...
It's hypocritical (and retarded) to ignore something one would otherwise give zealous attention to if the result had NOT gone the way we wanted.
"You are watching a movie."
Again, can anyone to provide just one similar historical example where voting engagement jumped 100% in 24 months???
Well, how else are we going to get the Democrats and other normies to support investigation if electoral fraud? We need some Republicans to cheat or else they'll never get on board.
Seems like something interesting is afoot.
This is the prime time for exposure of election shenanigans (by any side) to enlighten the masses.
We need the lefties *to want elections investigated.
The right is already there.
We want the Save America Act passed before the Nov Midterms.
Mike King on Rumble suggested that Trump would be shown to be acting as a controlled puppet of Israel, as the public explanation for why martial law needs to be imposed before the Army publicly steps in.
I think voter fraud by Republicans is an easier avenue for the same objective, but we'll see.
So I looked up the numbers, they’re from ballotpedia, they match. Both sets of numbers are from the GOP primaries that were held in 2024 and 2026. The one thing that may be a pretty big deal, and it relates to the voter engagement that you were talking about. Trump had endorsed Massie in 2022 and hadn’t said anything about him in 2024. In 2024, there was no democrat primary in CD 4 in Kentucky, there were no democrats running for that seat, at all, which means that Massie was a shoo in.
That was the general election. Massive money spent, incumbent needing to be removed, no anomalies related to number of republican voters. Just a massive get out the vote to get rid of the beyond RINO Massie.
The Thomas Massie Primary Turnout (2024 to 2026)
Context: Because Representative Thomas Massie faced no major, well-funded challengers or ran unopposed in many previous cycles, overall voter turnout in his primary was traditionally low.
The 2026 Spike: In the May 2026 Republican primary, Donald Trump personally backed challenger Ed Gallrein, prompting over $32 million in outside advertising to flood the district in what became the most expensive U.S. House primary in history.
The Result: Total votes in the district roughly doubled.
(I used ai to provide that answer. Seems reasonable.)
Can you or anyone provide even one more example where voter turn out jumped over 100% in 24 months?
Where are the critical thinkers?
Yeah, we won. Does that mean we should shut our brain off?
If Massie had just lost to a Democrat because "voter engagement" jumped over 100%, everyone on this board would be throwing a fit.
Get it?
Again, I don't like Thomas Massie. This has nothing to do with him and everything to do with numbers, which are quite stubborn things, as the stolen 2020 election demonstrated.
What percentage of the qualified voters were the actual vote totals? Easy for a normally small percentage to double, if people are fired up. Anybody here think people might have been fired up over the events of the past 2 years? (Everywhere else we are taking vicarious victory laps over all of Trump's endorsements prevailing. We can't be doing that, but say this one is "sus".)
Interesting answer, merf. Now if the left challenges this election that might open the doors for a more thorough search of previous races and how each might have been rigged. The libs would not want to shine a light on their own shenanigans. So maybe no one will look at the elresults for fear of self implication.
Wasn’t there a similar situation when Eric Cantor was unseated by a Tea Party challenger during the 2014 primary? I’ll try to find some sauce, but I recl turnout that year was 30% higher than during the 2012 primary.
True, but still significant because his opponent did it on a shoestring budget.
I also took a look at 2022 when Tom Rice was primaried in South Carolina. There was no primary in 2020 due to Covid. During the 2018 primary there were 45,812 votes cast, he won. During 2022 there were 85,212 votes cast to unseat him. That’s an 86% increase in turnout, so it’s a fair precedent.
It’s also analogous to the Massie defeat because it’s another example of what happens when a sitting Congressman gets on the wrong side of President Trump and MAGA.
I said earlier Massie is not the kind of guy to concede if he believed he was cheated, especially so early in the evening. His internal polling and his campaign staff at each polling location were telling him he wasn’t going to win.
I live close to the his district and can also say there were reports through the day that based on what they were seeing at polling locations 2016 turnout was double what it was during the 2024 primary. It was an update by the Cincinnati Enquirer.
KY 4th district accounts for about 17.6% of KY total pop. Using this number we can roughly extrapolate that the est. Registered Republican voters in the 4th district is about 228,800, and based on real numbers from January this year it's 308,742 voters from https://ballotpedia.org/Kentucky's_4th_Congressional_District_election,_2024 results.
So, given this set of numbers, the total people who got out and voted in the primary is about 34% of the total gop voting number at worst and 46% at best, depending on the denominator you want to take. Is this an anomaly when you look at the wider lens view?No.
Okay so what is the explanation for doubling voter turnout for the primaries between a 2 year gap? Well as u/gnuguy highlighted, Massie was basically not being opposed by Trump in 2024, and was in 2026.he was heavily opposed by Trump actually, and the fighting has been fierce. This is a significant anti RINO year for the Gop because of Trump banging the Maga drums, and he's actively arguing specific people should be moved out of politics, like he did with Massie and others.
Also as to the OP, u/JohnTitor17, asking has voter engagement increased like this before:
San Diego mayoral elections: Turnout rose from 290,192 in 2014 (off-cycle) to 619,549 in 2020 (on-cycle), more than doubling after aligning with statewide elections.
Los Angeles city elections: Experienced a 400% increase in voter participation when shifting from an off-cycle to an on-cycle primary in 2020, with 604,000 more ballots cast compared to 2015.
But let's address your actual question: one similar historic example of at least a 100% increase in primary turnout in 24 months, right?
Well I got it beat by miles at a state level: CT has massive swings every couple years for primaries, and has done since 2000, both up and down. I saw the following shifts up that break the claim "this never happened before":
from 2014 at 3% to 16% in 2016 (over 5x increase), and
So yes, John, I can find evidence this happened elsewhere in america, and tbh it's largely based on on-cycle vs off-cycle periods, and whether or not a particular period or region has a lot of news on it. And let's be frank, the primaries in KY have been getting a LOT of attention. It's not an anomaly. It's rarer in some places, perhaps, but it's not unheard of. And it sure as hell isn't fixing the vote for certain, as this post seems to imply.
Please, chill bro and don't make accusations your ass can't cash with your checkbook. I know big changes make us all go a bit "huh that's peculiar", but here's what actually happened.
reached only 34% of the actual number of gop voters in the district (or less than half @ 46% if you use my steelmanning estimated voter count)
is not beyond the bounds of reason in other state primaries in history between 2 year periods
is really not a massively unexpected result given the trump hate for Massie, and a relatively close race at 9% in gaps.
If item 1 was over 90%,sure I'd be massively sus. If the gap was over voter turn out for the general election too, that would be a wait a min moment. But it wasn't. So breathe boyo, before you go off the rails accusing trump of rigging games like these.
There are more anomalies that stand out and are worth questioning: the sparsely attended victory party; the "most expensive primary race" narrative; Gallbraith transparently refused to debate; Massie had many well attended events while his opponent did not. In fact it's suspiciously close to a (smaller scale) mirror of the Biden-Trump dynamic, right down to the digs at the opponent at the concession speech. And the numbers are still anomalous, especially since this election is the off-cycle that usually has lower turnout. I agree with you on the math not being very convincing on its own, but together with the other circumstantial items, it seems primed for investigation.
The real tell will be if it blows up in the media or not.
Thanks Lupinate most of that was very informative.
So breathe boyo, before you go off the rails accusing trump of rigging games like these.
Where did I accuse Trump of rigging anything?
This is a reading comprehension issue. You completely misunderstood the premise of the speculation in the OP. But your lack of understanding doesn't excuse you for the disgraceful and cowardly act of making up things I never said nor insinuated and putting words in my mouth.
Here's one for ya...
In the future, LIARS will be looked upon by society as beneath prostitutes and sodomites.
Did you read my and others' comments? u/Mr_A's comment hit the nail on the head. u/WhyAserverWasBuilt understood.
Breathe, John, breathe. I'm not trying to attack you, yeah? I'm not trying to lie about your position here, or imply something if that wasn't your intent. I simply misunderstood what point you were trying to make with this OP, okay? I'll explain what I was seeing from any accusations of fraud in this race in a minute, but please, relax fren.
I won't claim that it's my fault that your title literally says this is all we'd be talking about if a Democrat would have won it, which implies some kind of fraud happened as that's how they always win. However, if the intent of the OP wasn't to imply Trump is rigging the games he won (and lets be frank his endorsements won 37 races with zero losses here, which people can argue is an actual anomaly in politics), then I am sorry for the accusation.
You also kept hammering home a point that was not actually an anomaly in and of itself as something requiring investigation at a point where Trump is backing Gallrein to the hilt. I put that and the title together and got 3 from 1+1, as reading back through the comments you are suggesting other avenues, which tbh I still don't see as fully viable, but you didn't accuse trump of malfeasance directly. Clearly i got the wrong end of the stick there with your point, so my bad and I do apologise for coming to that conclusion. it really wasn't clear to me that your point was to just investigate Gallrein and not some wider apparatus at play here.
Now, with the apologies out of the way for insinuating something you didn't say, and working from the perspective of it being the candidate alone who did something dodgy, logically it still backfires on Trump beyond just hard as he supported the guy. It becomes an optics war loss of epic proportions.
Trump would be accused of enabling the cheating implied here purely through the fact he endorsed Ed Gallrein. Trump would be the one accused of rigging things against Massie (and others) even if he didn't. It makes Massie look less RINO, and makes Trump look like he's stacking Congress if Ed cheated.
It would also:
validate the narratives against him as some kind of tyrant out to end the careers of those who speak out against him, like Massie did.
likely weakens the admin hunts for real criminals like Obama.
turn the investigations into Russia gate and 2020 fraud into accusations of witch hunts believed by both sides
likely would push people to vote against Trump entirely in the midterms,
push people away from supporting trump's policies
trigger 2 years of impeachment hearings. Again.
From an optics war perspective, this would be nightmarish. For all our sakes, I do hope there isn't any fraud happening here, and given the data I provided in the prior comment, I doubt there is (thankfully).
You said it warrants further investigation, and you're welcome to that opinion. But the optics of it being a moment of fraud by Gallrein does more harm than good to both MAGA and Trump in the optics war he's been fighting since 2016.
Now, if your actual point was that this is a flash point to force the save act through as per u/WhyAserverWasBuilt 's and u/Mr_A 's implications, well I'm not seeing that dog hunting well either. The reasons for this are:
it's at least temporarily backfired from those who are all now lame duck members of congress as the GOP has gone full anti trump,
Trump has already issued several election integrity based EOs on major cheating vectors like mail-in ballots.
Dominion voting was bought out by a former Republican election official, so i doubt that vector will play for the dems anymore.
Occam's razor: Gallrein' s primary reason for winning (at least in the eyes of the masses) is most likely his endorsement by Trump, particularly given the 37 and 0 record he's enjoyed in this primary.
It is also in my opinion that it is highly unlikely any traction will happen on a deep dive investigation for this candidate's primary performance, as it is more of a party matter than an formal midterm election matter. The former might get a cursory look, but most people, like me, will see this win as MAGA cleaning out one of many RINO incumbents. They won't presume a MAGA candidate is cheating, something which (as I've already argued) will cause problems for the whole movement and turn this single campaign into even more of a wedge issue than it already was.
As for my opinion? Going back to the optics war point: Trump backed these candidates to showcase that the GOP is compromised & working against America. And by God did that work given the results & the fallout of these primaries. People in the GOP who were doing their best fence sitting operations to stall and delay are now openly against Trump and are publicly refusing to push his plans. This will incense his base and show that the uniparty does exist to everyone. That was the intent with the undercutting of so many high profile incumbents at once in my eyes.
Come the midterms, Trump's EOs on election integrity will impact the midterms the same way the save act was planned to, along with the redistricting issues being addressed by the SCOTUS. I expect whole states will go not just red wave, but will likely be full MAGA now thanks to trump endorsements. We're likely to see a lot of sore arses in Congress until November / next year, but that will just further incense the base to rise up and vote in a mid term. We will probably see massive turnout again and the left will have no more levers to pull as a result.
So yeah... Once again, I'm sorry for insinuating something you didn't mean, but I still think this isn't an example of malfeasance of any kind, simply because such an act would be the fox in the hen house moment for Trump. If the big guy is in charge like we know he is, then there is a reason for Gallrein to be in the running rather than Massie. Perhaps because he is a Former navy seal who might support tribunals for traitors? That would be nice, wouldn't it....
April, 2026 Commonwealth of Kentucky - State Board of Elections
Voter Registration Statistics Report
Page 1 of 6
Congressional Districts
Dem Rep Other Ind Libert Green Const Reform Soc Wk KY Prty Male Female Registered
Well I'm no genius, but perhaps this will force Massie bootlickers to fight the result, arriving at the same conclusion that most people with an above average IQ did 6 years ago?
"Voter engagement" is a real thing that moves the needle.
But I challenge anyone to provide just one similar historical example where voting engagement doubled in 24 months.
Cast aside Emotions. They cloud logical thinking.
This OP is not about one candidate or another.
I personally don't care for the guy.
It's about anomalous math.
Anomalous math is the single strongest evidence demonstrating the 2020 election was stolen.
Anomalous; (adj) : inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected.
MAGA won yesterday. Great. But...
It's hypocritical (and retarded) to ignore something one would otherwise give zealous attention to if the result had NOT gone the way we wanted.
"You are watching a movie."
Again, can anyone to provide just one similar historical example where voting engagement jumped 100% in 24 months???
Well, how else are we going to get the Democrats and other normies to support investigation if electoral fraud? We need some Republicans to cheat or else they'll never get on board.
Critical thinking. Thank you very much Mr_A
Seems like something interesting is afoot.
This is the prime time for exposure of election shenanigans (by any side) to enlighten the masses.
We need the lefties *to want elections investigated.
The right is already there.
We want the Save America Act passed before the Nov Midterms.
Mike King on Rumble suggested that Trump would be shown to be acting as a controlled puppet of Israel, as the public explanation for why martial law needs to be imposed before the Army publicly steps in.
I think voter fraud by Republicans is an easier avenue for the same objective, but we'll see.
So I looked up the numbers, they’re from ballotpedia, they match. Both sets of numbers are from the GOP primaries that were held in 2024 and 2026. The one thing that may be a pretty big deal, and it relates to the voter engagement that you were talking about. Trump had endorsed Massie in 2022 and hadn’t said anything about him in 2024. In 2024, there was no democrat primary in CD 4 in Kentucky, there were no democrats running for that seat, at all, which means that Massie was a shoo in.
Maybe Trump did this on purpose to get them to pass the Save the Vote Act?
That was the general election. Massive money spent, incumbent needing to be removed, no anomalies related to number of republican voters. Just a massive get out the vote to get rid of the beyond RINO Massie.
According to public FEC data, Ed Gallrein had only 70 donors FROM Kentucky.
Massie had 1545 donors living in Kentucky.
https://www.fec.gov/data/candidate/H6KY04171/
https://x.com/grok/status/2056738638994506133
For the most current raw data, check the official FEC candidate page (H6KY04171) or itemized receipts for Gallrein for Congress.
If you know how to read the FEC data, you'll concede the point.
AIPAC Majic I tell you. 😀😀😀
🤣🤣
The Thomas Massie Primary Turnout (2024 to 2026) Context: Because Representative Thomas Massie faced no major, well-funded challengers or ran unopposed in many previous cycles, overall voter turnout in his primary was traditionally low. The 2026 Spike: In the May 2026 Republican primary, Donald Trump personally backed challenger Ed Gallrein, prompting over $32 million in outside advertising to flood the district in what became the most expensive U.S. House primary in history. The Result: Total votes in the district roughly doubled. (I used ai to provide that answer. Seems reasonable.)
Can you or anyone provide even one more example where voter turn out jumped over 100% in 24 months?
Where are the critical thinkers?
Yeah, we won. Does that mean we should shut our brain off?
If Massie had just lost to a Democrat because "voter engagement" jumped over 100%, everyone on this board would be throwing a fit.
Get it?
Again, I don't like Thomas Massie. This has nothing to do with him and everything to do with numbers, which are quite stubborn things, as the stolen 2020 election demonstrated.
Just wait, we’re not done in Texas, yet.
Ye gods, there is a first time for everything.
What percentage of the qualified voters were the actual vote totals? Easy for a normally small percentage to double, if people are fired up. Anybody here think people might have been fired up over the events of the past 2 years? (Everywhere else we are taking vicarious victory laps over all of Trump's endorsements prevailing. We can't be doing that, but say this one is "sus".)
I think something is potentially cooking here.
Ideally the push to investigate election fraud would come from the left. And if it were revealed in an instance like this it'd be wins all around.
Interesting answer, merf. Now if the left challenges this election that might open the doors for a more thorough search of previous races and how each might have been rigged. The libs would not want to shine a light on their own shenanigans. So maybe no one will look at the elresults for fear of self implication.
Wasn’t there a similar situation when Eric Cantor was unseated by a Tea Party challenger during the 2014 primary? I’ll try to find some sauce, but I recl turnout that year was 30% higher than during the 2012 primary.
30% is a universe away from 100%
True, but still significant because his opponent did it on a shoestring budget.
I also took a look at 2022 when Tom Rice was primaried in South Carolina. There was no primary in 2020 due to Covid. During the 2018 primary there were 45,812 votes cast, he won. During 2022 there were 85,212 votes cast to unseat him. That’s an 86% increase in turnout, so it’s a fair precedent.
It’s also analogous to the Massie defeat because it’s another example of what happens when a sitting Congressman gets on the wrong side of President Trump and MAGA.
I said earlier Massie is not the kind of guy to concede if he believed he was cheated, especially so early in the evening. His internal polling and his campaign staff at each polling location were telling him he wasn’t going to win.
I live close to the his district and can also say there were reports through the day that based on what they were seeing at polling locations 2016 turnout was double what it was during the 2024 primary. It was an update by the Cincinnati Enquirer.
Okay some critical thinking with actual numbers then:
So, given this set of numbers, the total people who got out and voted in the primary is about 34% of the total gop voting number at worst and 46% at best, depending on the denominator you want to take. Is this an anomaly when you look at the wider lens view? No.
Okay so what is the explanation for doubling voter turnout for the primaries between a 2 year gap? Well as u/gnuguy highlighted, Massie was basically not being opposed by Trump in 2024, and was in 2026.he was heavily opposed by Trump actually, and the fighting has been fierce. This is a significant anti RINO year for the Gop because of Trump banging the Maga drums, and he's actively arguing specific people should be moved out of politics, like he did with Massie and others.
Also as to the OP, u/JohnTitor17, asking has voter engagement increased like this before:
But let's address your actual question: one similar historic example of at least a 100% increase in primary turnout in 24 months, right?
Well I got it beat by miles at a state level: CT has massive swings every couple years for primaries, and has done since 2000, both up and down. I saw the following shifts up that break the claim "this never happened before":
from 2014 at 3% to 16% in 2016 (over 5x increase), and
from 13 % in 2018 to 43% in 2020 (3.3x increase),
all as per data I found from https://statesunited.org/resources/voter-turnout-since-2000/.
So yes, John, I can find evidence this happened elsewhere in america, and tbh it's largely based on on-cycle vs off-cycle periods, and whether or not a particular period or region has a lot of news on it. And let's be frank, the primaries in KY have been getting a LOT of attention. It's not an anomaly. It's rarer in some places, perhaps, but it's not unheard of. And it sure as hell isn't fixing the vote for certain, as this post seems to imply.
Please, chill bro and don't make accusations your ass can't cash with your checkbook. I know big changes make us all go a bit "huh that's peculiar", but here's what actually happened.
If item 1 was over 90%,sure I'd be massively sus. If the gap was over voter turn out for the general election too, that would be a wait a min moment. But it wasn't. So breathe boyo, before you go off the rails accusing trump of rigging games like these.
There are more anomalies that stand out and are worth questioning: the sparsely attended victory party; the "most expensive primary race" narrative; Gallbraith transparently refused to debate; Massie had many well attended events while his opponent did not. In fact it's suspiciously close to a (smaller scale) mirror of the Biden-Trump dynamic, right down to the digs at the opponent at the concession speech. And the numbers are still anomalous, especially since this election is the off-cycle that usually has lower turnout. I agree with you on the math not being very convincing on its own, but together with the other circumstantial items, it seems primed for investigation.
The real tell will be if it blows up in the media or not.
Here's a link to the ultra-conspiracy guy whose theory I brought up in my other comment. https://rumble.com/v7a4uh0-trump-and-zionists-qrush-rep.-thomas-massie-staged.html
Thanks Lupinate most of that was very informative.
Where did I accuse Trump of rigging anything?
This is a reading comprehension issue. You completely misunderstood the premise of the speculation in the OP.
But your lack of understanding doesn't excuse you for the disgraceful and cowardly act of making up things I never said nor insinuated and putting words in my mouth.
Here's one for ya... In the future, LIARS will be looked upon by society as beneath prostitutes and sodomites.
Did you read my and others' comments?
u/Mr_A's comment hit the nail on the head.
u/WhyAserverWasBuilt understood.
Breathe, John, breathe. I'm not trying to attack you, yeah? I'm not trying to lie about your position here, or imply something if that wasn't your intent. I simply misunderstood what point you were trying to make with this OP, okay? I'll explain what I was seeing from any accusations of fraud in this race in a minute, but please, relax fren.
I won't claim that it's my fault that your title literally says this is all we'd be talking about if a Democrat would have won it, which implies some kind of fraud happened as that's how they always win. However, if the intent of the OP wasn't to imply Trump is rigging the games he won (and lets be frank his endorsements won 37 races with zero losses here, which people can argue is an actual anomaly in politics), then I am sorry for the accusation.
You also kept hammering home a point that was not actually an anomaly in and of itself as something requiring investigation at a point where Trump is backing Gallrein to the hilt. I put that and the title together and got 3 from 1+1, as reading back through the comments you are suggesting other avenues, which tbh I still don't see as fully viable, but you didn't accuse trump of malfeasance directly. Clearly i got the wrong end of the stick there with your point, so my bad and I do apologise for coming to that conclusion. it really wasn't clear to me that your point was to just investigate Gallrein and not some wider apparatus at play here.
Now, with the apologies out of the way for insinuating something you didn't say, and working from the perspective of it being the candidate alone who did something dodgy, logically it still backfires on Trump beyond just hard as he supported the guy. It becomes an optics war loss of epic proportions.
Trump would be accused of enabling the cheating implied here purely through the fact he endorsed Ed Gallrein. Trump would be the one accused of rigging things against Massie (and others) even if he didn't. It makes Massie look less RINO, and makes Trump look like he's stacking Congress if Ed cheated.
It would also:
From an optics war perspective, this would be nightmarish. For all our sakes, I do hope there isn't any fraud happening here, and given the data I provided in the prior comment, I doubt there is (thankfully).
You said it warrants further investigation, and you're welcome to that opinion. But the optics of it being a moment of fraud by Gallrein does more harm than good to both MAGA and Trump in the optics war he's been fighting since 2016.
Now, if your actual point was that this is a flash point to force the save act through as per u/WhyAserverWasBuilt 's and u/Mr_A 's implications, well I'm not seeing that dog hunting well either. The reasons for this are:
It is also in my opinion that it is highly unlikely any traction will happen on a deep dive investigation for this candidate's primary performance, as it is more of a party matter than an formal midterm election matter. The former might get a cursory look, but most people, like me, will see this win as MAGA cleaning out one of many RINO incumbents. They won't presume a MAGA candidate is cheating, something which (as I've already argued) will cause problems for the whole movement and turn this single campaign into even more of a wedge issue than it already was.
As for my opinion? Going back to the optics war point: Trump backed these candidates to showcase that the GOP is compromised & working against America. And by God did that work given the results & the fallout of these primaries. People in the GOP who were doing their best fence sitting operations to stall and delay are now openly against Trump and are publicly refusing to push his plans. This will incense his base and show that the uniparty does exist to everyone. That was the intent with the undercutting of so many high profile incumbents at once in my eyes.
Come the midterms, Trump's EOs on election integrity will impact the midterms the same way the save act was planned to, along with the redistricting issues being addressed by the SCOTUS. I expect whole states will go not just red wave, but will likely be full MAGA now thanks to trump endorsements. We're likely to see a lot of sore arses in Congress until November / next year, but that will just further incense the base to rise up and vote in a mid term. We will probably see massive turnout again and the left will have no more levers to pull as a result.
So yeah... Once again, I'm sorry for insinuating something you didn't mean, but I still think this isn't an example of malfeasance of any kind, simply because such an act would be the fox in the hen house moment for Trump. If the big guy is in charge like we know he is, then there is a reason for Gallrein to be in the running rather than Massie. Perhaps because he is a Former navy seal who might support tribunals for traitors? That would be nice, wouldn't it....
April, 2026 Commonwealth of Kentucky - State Board of Elections Voter Registration Statistics Report Page 1 of 6 Congressional Districts Dem Rep Other Ind Libert Green Const Reform Soc Wk KY Prty Male Female Registered
4 Congressional District 205372 311007 42253 37264 3441 505 280 38 136 23 287875 312172 600319
311007 registered repubs in the 4th district. Massie got slammed by his own party. No election anomalies here.
I'm getting really sick of seeing some of the posts and comments on here.
You're asking us to show you something when we know the elections have been rigged year after year after year and for decades.
You cannot trust any of the damn numbers.
E x a c t l y
So who rigged it, democrats, Republicans or both? It can be both, just saying. It was a battle of the riggers, potentially.
in 2007 it occured to me that every election was rigged
because elect election comes down to a democrat and a republican
Doesn’t matter who the democrat is
Doesn’t matter who the republican is
There shall be one democrat and one republican
Really?
Have you heard of the UNIPARTY.
Amen.
Well I'm no genius, but perhaps this will force Massie bootlickers to fight the result, arriving at the same conclusion that most people with an above average IQ did 6 years ago?
Kinda makes me wonder if they threw out thousands of votes for Massie's opponent back in 2024!
Because Massie didn’t get anywhere near that many votes. Democrats provided a lot of fraudulent votes and he still came up short.
Does Kentucky have closed primaries or can Democrats pick a Republican ballot? Just curious.