Pro-Terror Extremist Voters: Pro-Terrorism Voters

Pro-Terror Extremist Voters in the U.S. Election (full series)
Harris | Trump | Third Parties
Pro-Terrorism Voters

Pro-Terrorism Voters Could Decide the Election—and They Know It

The unsettling truth is that the pro-terrorism seditionists’ political strategy is based on solid logic.

Regardless of who wins, these extremists can credibly claim to be responsible for the outcome as long as it’s very close. It won’t be hard for them to find both Democratic and Republican operatives they can seduce with promises of increasing electoral prospects. Even PSL’s De la Cruz could claim to hold some of the keys to victory in a very tight election.

De la Cruz fails to register a single percent in polls but several swing states were decided by less than 1 percent in 2016, including Michigan (0.23 percent), Wisconsin (0.77 percent), Pennsylvania (0.72 percent), and New Hampshire (0.37 percent), as well as three swing states in 2020: Arizona (0.31 percent), Georgia (0.24 percent), and Wisconsin (0.63 percent).

In 2016, the Green Party represented by Jill Stein won 1.07 percent of the vote nationally and a share of the vote totals in three swing states that was significantly larger than Trump’s margins of victory: Michigan (1.07 percent to 0.23 percent), Wisconsin (1.04 percent to 0.77 percent) and Pennsylvania (0.82 percent to 0.72 percent). It could be argued that, hypothetically, if Stein hadn’t run in 2016, Hillary Clinton would been elected president.

In 2020, the Green Party represented by Howie Hawkins received only 0.26 percent of the national vote. However, it threatened Biden’s victories in Arizona (0.24 percent to Biden’s 0.31 percent victory margin) and Wisconsin (0.26 percent to his 0.63 percent).

Polls nationally and in swing states currently show Stein with support ranging from 2 percent to less than 1 percent. West scores between 1 percent and 0 percent in national and swing state polls. It sounds negligible but it matters.

The picture is even scarier when considering what polling data reveal about the potential election-deciding benefits of mobilizing extremist voters.

A poll conducted in September 2017, during a time with much less extremism than we see today, found that 8 percent of American adults strongly support or somewhat support the Antifa terrorist movement and 8 percent said they support white nationalism. Neo-Nazism was supported by 4 percent, a figure that would be a subsect of the white nationalist pool. That means a total of 16 percent backed some of the worst anti-American extremists in the tamer year of 2017.

Measurements of cumulative white and non-white racism were also alarming. A shocking 16 percent supported banning interracial marriage. It also discovered that 4 percent strongly disagreed with the statement that all races are equal, and 2 percent strongly disagreed with the anti-segregationist statement that all races should be free to live wherever they choose.

To put all of this in perspective, Hillary Clinton won the national popular vote in 2016 by only 2.1 percent and Biden won the national popular vote in 2020 by about 4.5 percent.

The RealClearPolitics national polling average indicates that the 2024 presidential election victory margin will probably be no more than 4 percent.

That a consolidated bloc of pro-terrorism, anti-American extremists could effectively seize control of American elections is a scenario that sounds so apocalyptic that it can exist only in unhealthy minds engaged in too much doomscrolling.

Yet the numbers show that such a scenario is quite realistic.

And the Hamas-supporting protests organized by groups of differing radical ideologies and devoted to a wide range of social justice causes previously disconnected from the Middle East conflict shows that such a consolidation is in process.