For weeks after the ballots were counted, supporters of the defeated presidential candidate insisted the election had been stolen. Some alleged a shadowy conspiracy to rig vote-counting machines, throwing out just enough legal votes and manufacturing just enough illegal ones to decide the outcome.

I heard these conspiracy theories many times, and not just from folks on the political fringe. I heard them from prominent North Carolinians who supported the defeated candidate. They were Democrats. It was 2004.

No, voting machines from the company then known as Diebold were not rigged to deny John Kerry his rightful victory. If you are one of those Democrats who repeatedly flogged that story to me back then, or who still believe it to be true today, then you should know I’m just going to tune out your outrage at Donald Trump supporters for espousing a similar conspiracy theory.

The public discourse about elections and election laws has become thoroughly suffused with hyperbole, paranoia and misleading claims. Republicans discount Democratic allegations as fanciful and then make their own fanciful allegations. Democrats act similarly.

In reality, our election system, while exhibiting some correctable flaws, works fairly well. Generally speaking, it has never been easier to vote than it is right now. And, generally speaking, vote counts have never been harder to fake or manipulate than they are now.

The rampant voter suppression about which some Democrats complain so vociferously is simply not evident in election statistics. Neither is the rampant voter fraud about which some Republicans complain so vociferously.

Indeed, the same studies that disprove one tend to disprove the other at the same time. Consider the example of voter-ID requirements. Most scholarly research has found that requiring identification to vote has either a tiny effect or no discernible effect on the number of ballots cast. The vast majority of citizens, in other words, either possess an ID already, make easy use of state programs to get one or have no interest in voting, anyway. Keep in mind, though, that a lack of a significant relationship between ID laws and vote totals also suggests impersonation fraud is very rare. Otherwise we’d see vote totals dip after enactment.

That’s not an argument against voter ID, by the way. It strengthens public confidence at a low cost. Nudged by the requirement, some folks without photo IDs obtain them to vote and then enjoy the ancillary benefits of having ID cards. Moreover, in North Carolina, a photo-ID requirement is constitutionally mandated.

My point is simply that at least the kind of voter fraud an ID requirement might deter does not occur at a scale large enough to tip the vast majority of elections. Nor do most other election irregularities or mistakes.

It is, however, prudent to take reasonable, low-cost precautions against the rare exception. That means requiring identification to cast in-person or absentee ballots. It means forbidding third parties from harvesting and turning in ballots — a potentially abusive practice that Democrats properly criticized in North Carolina’s 9th District race in 2018 but that would be expanded, not curtailed, by the “For the People” bill Democrats are advancing in Congress.

Plenty of Republican activists, and even a few Republican officials, indulge in conspiratorial thinking about elections, too. When I answer their calls or emails, I remind them that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Do left-of-center columnists and political analysts do the same? I don’t see it. I see them lionizing Stacey Abrams, the former Democratic lawmaker who lost Georgia’s 2018 gubernatorial contest by a much larger margin than Trump lost the state two years later. Yet she insisted that she was cheated out of her rightful victory by a GOP-led conspiracy. As far as I know, Abrams refuses even today to concede the 2018 race.

Over-the-top claims about voter suppression and electoral conspiracies are mostly political theater, not serious analysis about the (usually modest) effects of actual policy changes on actual voting behavior.

I know that. I don’t have to like it.

Recommended for you

John Hood is a Carolina Journal columnist and author of the forthcoming novel “Mountain Folk.”

The novel is a historical fantasy set during the American Revolution (

(4) comments


Oh, John Hood. You forgot to mention that John Kerry conceded the next day, didn't spend months in advance predicting a "rigged" election, didn't have the country's most popular media apparatus parroting "stolen" election lies 24/7, didn't hold a rally protesting the "steal," and didn't incite his supporters to storm the inner sanctum of functional democracy in an attempt to overturn the election results. But other than that it's exactly the same thing.

Also, photo ID's and state government issued ID's are not synonymous. The NC voter ID law that was struck down specified that only *certain types* of photo ID would be acceptable; this notably and explicitly prohibited the exact types of photo ID that are much more commonly held by Black folks. I guess that was an innocent coincidence.

The type of voter fraud that would be eliminated by voter ID laws are infinitesimal -- a study from 2000 - 2012 found 10 (ten!) cases of voter impersonation nationwide during that entire time span. Up to 25% of voting age African Americans do not have a government issued ID card. So Hood's claim that the cost is low -- fixing fewer than one annual case of voter fraud while possibly disenfranchising up to 25% of the Black voter population -- is enabling institutional racism at its most obvious. I don't know how he sleeps at night, honestly.


Well said, as always.

How does he sleep at night? Easy. You know what this A-hole makes per year writing up this inane garbage that conservatives eat up without second thought? ~$250k. And that's just his pay for serving as president of the John Locke Foundation. The guy is a complete and utter tool, not a semblance of honesty or integrity within him. He's just smart enough to know you can be a complete and utter idiot and still make bank when being a mouthpiece for conservative "thought." Much like Limbaugh, Coulter, Carlson...


You should really try to be more truthfully informed before posting such a misleading article. Evidence of voter fraud was quite evident, and was even presented to the legislatures in major swing states. And there are also documentaries out about it as well. Ignorance is no excuse, as the saying goes -- and fake media is a poor excuse for truth. And, let me add that suppression of free speech and inquiry is not only anti-American but against the very principles of liberty we all take for granted.


You got any of them sources for these claims?

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.