Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

In case you haven’t figured it out from the glut of political ads out there, 2026 is an election year. Didn’t we just have one 2 years ago?

With an impending election looming on the horizon, attention is brought back to the topic of voter ID. Congressional Republicans have introduced the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, a.k.a. the SAVE Act as a means to rile up their base…I mean address the problem. Of course, Leftists disagree with it because it riles up their base…I mean it will cause fundamental damage to our democracy.

Allow me to cut through the bullshit with…well, my own bullshit.

the SAVE Act

What the Left thinks it means – a racist and sexist voter ID to address a rare occurrence

What it really means – a voting law that has issues, but is trying to come from a good place

One of the fundamental concepts of America (at least until recently) is the concept of the voice of the people being heard, whether it be through a protest or at the ballot box. In the latter case, it’s essential we trust the process so we can trust the results, even if we don’t like them. I’ll be the first one to tell you I didn’t enjoy some of the previous Presidents, but I accepted their victories as legit. Yes, there were always a few cranks out there who claimed elections were rigged, but most of the time they were ignored.

Then the 2020 shitshow happened.

Not only did we have to deal with the insanity of government overreach in the name of protecting people from COVID (unless you were an elderly person in New York State, that is), but we had what can only be called a hinky election. There are a lot of other things it could be called, but I’m trying to stay family-friendly here. And if you don’t like it, go fuck yourself.

Even if you aren’t inclined to believe the election was stolen, there are too many questions without suitable answers even almost 6 years after the fact. How did someone like President Brick Tamland go from getting less than 1% of the vote in the Iowa Caucuses to getting more of the popular vote than Barack Obama without him doing anything more than…being Brick Tamland? At the time, Donald Trump had a 43% approval rating, so it’s hard to believe there was so much anti-Trump sentiment that it would sway the vote.

Unless bullshit was afoot.

It was after the 2020 clusterfuck that Republicans redoubled their efforts to institute voter ID laws, suggesting there were dishonest players out there who were gaming the system. You know, like ACORN. In response, the Left did what they always do: lie their asses off. The Left went from saying voter fraud doesn’t happen to it being rare to it’s only Republicans doing it.

But as inconsistent as their message has been, they are consistent on one thing: they are against voter ID. Their stated reasons are laughable enough, including it being racist and sexist, but the actual reason is much simpler.

It means the Left can’t cheat as easily.

That’s why the Left is bound and determined to tell us blacks and women are incompetent and can’t get their shit together well enough to obtain the documentation the SAVE Act says is needed to prove citizenship. And just what is that documentation? I’m glad you asked because otherwise this would be a much shorter Lexicon entry.

– a valid photo ID
– a US passport
– a birth certificate showing your legal name at birth (because, duh, birth certificate)
– additional documentation (marriage license, divorce decree, etc.) as needed in some circumstances

While the Left focuses on how few people can access these documents, I do take issue with these requirements as they pertain to women. Although it’s not an impossible task, especially if you’re as organized as my wife, it’s still a hassle for people who haven’t had an issue voting prior to the SAVE Act to have to jump through hoops like trained poodles to exercise their voting rights.

And what about trans people? This is going to seem odd coming from me, but it’s still a valid issue for me. To prove you’re who you say you are, you have to produce documentation of a life you no longer lead, which can bring back some painful memories, as well as emotional scarring. I don’t have to dig their lifestyle to defend their right to vote.

Of course, voter ID isn’t the only matter addressed in the SAVE Act. There are aspects impacting voter registration, maintaining accurate voting records, and other forms of red meat for Red voters. This is where it gets complicated for me. I understand the reasoning and appreciate what the SAVE Act is trying to do because, let’s face it, there’s a whole lot of shady shit going on.

Where I part ways with the Right is how many implications haven’t been completely thought through yet. Just with the two examples I came up with above, I can see how this has the potential to backfire on the Right. I know the Left is going to call you (and by extension me) misogynistic, transphobic, and the like, but you don’t have to give them ammunition.

On the other side of the fence, the Left doesn’t really have much to offer in opposition. Between denying there’s a problem and relying on the “racist” and “sexist” labels, you’re not giving people a reason to take your side. Especially considering the absolute fucking morons you’re trotting out to do it. You’re literally making the job easier for Republicans by being so fucking bad at fighting it. Come up with something new, for the love of God, or whatever deity you pray to these days.

Even though it’s flawed, the SAVE Act does have some elements worth preserving. And you know if the Left is shitting bricks over it, it can’t be half bad.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Election integrity has been a pretty hot topic in recent years. (Candidate integrity, on the other hand, not so much.) To address this, the House of Representatives voted on the SAVE Act, or as the kids like to call it the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act. The short version is it updates existing legislation and includes ways for people to prove their citizenship so they can vote.

Which means Leftists are upset over it. Of course, it’s a day ending in “day” so they’re already upset about something. But this time, they’re pulling out all of their favorite shits…I mean hits. It’s sexist, racist, anti-trans, and, this is a new one, a poll tax because people might have to pay to get documentation.

So, is the SAVE Act the second coming of racist voting laws or a step towards more secure elections? And is this another lame segue into a Lexicon entry? The answers are coming up!

the SAVE Act

What the Left thinks it means – a Republican bill that disenfranchises voters by making it more difficult for people to vote

What it really means – a Republican bill that requires voting adults to be, well, adults

According to the bill itself, there are a number of methods of identification that will work to prove citizenship for the purposes of voting, ranging from a drivers’ license with REAL ID to a birth certificate to a marriage certificate and so many others. And even if you don’t have that documentation handy (which, realistically, you should, kids), the bill provides for a way to attest to your citizenship so you can vote. Should be a slam dunk, right?

Not quite.

The Left have been able to convince some of our fellow talking meatbags that requiring identification to vote is a bridge too far. It’s just way too complicated, expensive, and inconvenient to get identification, let alone use it to vote. And as Leftists love to tell us, voter fraud isn’t a thing. Until it is. Then, it’s not that big of a deal because it’s so rare.

That’s what we call “moving the goalposts,” kids.

The fact there’s voter fraud at all concerns me, regardless of who does it. One of the bedrock principles America has is we get to vote for our leaders. Granted, the last few Presidents don’t really speak highly of our ability to find good leaders, but the point remains. Voter fraud erodes that bedrock to the point we don’t even know if the candidate with the most votes will be the winner after the dust settles.

And no, Mrs. Clinton, you don’t fall into this category. No matter how hard you protest, you lost the Presidency because the popular vote isn’t what decides who gets to be President. Now, put on your Make America Great Again hat and shut the fuck up.

At the core of the Left’s assertion regarding voter identification is a belief some people are incapable of fulfilling the task of obtaining the necessary documentation for a myriad of reasons: age, inconvenience, cost, and so on. And, yes, these can be barriers, but they aren’t insurmountable if you’re willing to put in the work.

Cue Maynard G. Krebs.

And I’m only half-joking about that. Leftists are always down for making it easier to vote, mainly because that’s how they can game the system. When you set expectations higher than “must be solid matter,” it irks the Left because it makes them have to do actual stuff to overcome it. You know, like farming out voter fraud efforts to a Leftist organization with ties to our good friend Uncle George Soros.

But I’m sure that would never happen, amirite?

Although they’d be hard pressed to admit it, underneath the Left’s efforts to beat back anything even remotely related to election security is a very bigoted assumption: the less fortunate can’t advocate for themselves. To the the Left, these folks are incapable of much, so they need champions to speak for them. Enter the Leftists! Only they can defend the rights of those poor souls to do nothing constructive for themselves!

That’s mighty white of them! Often, quite literally!

However, by doing this, the Left treats the less fortunate as lessers in every aspect. This reduces these adults to children, incapable of doing anything without Leftists. And what confuses me more is there are people willing to be treated like children because it’s easier than being a ward of the state than a participant of it. I guess I’m just wired differently, what with me being a fan of Atlas Shrugged, “The Prisoner,” and personal freedom.

And, oddly enough, freedom is one of the ways the Left tries to convince people the SAVE Act will curtail theirs. That’s by design. By pumping up the fear, the Left whips up a frenzy, albeit an incredibly uninformed one. There’s a good possibility those who think they’re going to be negatively impacted already have all they need already. If they don’t, there are options that may or may not involve money and aren’t that inconvenient.

But the Left doesn’t want you to know that. They want you to be afraid.

And what’s more, the SAVE Act has only just passed in the House. The Senate still has to take it up, so if you’re affected by it or think you are, you have time to get that documentation or help someone else get it.

But the Left doesn’t want you to know that. They want you to be angry.

Is it just me, or does anyone else see a pattern forming here? It’s almost as if the Left want people not to learn about the SAVE Act and would rather gas up a mob because…well, that’s a good question. Purposely misleading people typically doesn’t end well once the people find out. And with the favorability ratings of the Democrat Party hovering just above that of STDs, they’d better hope people don’t find out anytime soon.

That’s not to say I’m completely happy with the SAVE Act. There are some unintended (or possibly intended) consequences that will affect women, trans people, and anyone else who has had to deal with name changes. It’s already a hassle to get even basic information and documentation updated (thank you, bureaucracy), but to add that hurdle to a Constitutionally protected right? That’s a Bridge to Nowhere too far.

The solution is somewhere in the middle. To balance out the need for election integrity and the need to protect the rights of eligible voters, there should be a way to identify eligible voters that can be cross-referenced with a database that can be updated regularly. Maybe a card of some kind, one that confirms a voter is registered…

Nah, nobody would be dumb enough to invent that. Forget I said it.

All that said, the SAVE Act has good intentions and is attempting to solidify trust in our elections. Maybe the Senate can make some adjustments to address the concerns I raised. Only time will tell if the SAVE Act will be an asset or a liability.

Oh, and before I forget, the answer to my second question is yes.