In my last column on the integrity of elections, “The Software ‘Glitch,’” I warned that in order to restore voter confidence, future elections would have to prohibit the Demos’ fraudulent bulk-mail balloting schemes and ballot harvesting, as well as ensure the identity of voters and the reliability of the software used to tabulate those votes.

Regarding legitimate concerns about the software, to paraphrase Soviet tyrant Joseph Stalin, it is less important who votes and most important who counts the votes. The protagonists of today’s socialist Democrat Party, who have increasingly adopted the tyranny model for governance, are disinterested in election integrity for obvious reasons. Disinterested, that is, unless their candidate loses, as in the case of Hillary Clinton in 2016.

It turns out that Democrats were concerned about election software security before they weren’t.

In March of 2019, Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and three other Demo senators wrote the manufacturers of vote-counting hardware and software. They protested: “Your companies provide voting machines and software used by 92 percent of the eligible voting population in the U.S. … The integrity of our elections remains under serious threat. … The integrity of our elections is directly tied to the machines we vote on — the products that you make. Despite shouldering such a massive responsibility there has been a lack of meaningful innovation in the election vendor industry and our democracy is paying the price.”

This, of course, was a layup to propagate the Russian-collusion fabrication, but a far more likely and accessible scenario than Russia hacking election software is state and local partisans on our soil altering election software to favor or disfavor a candidate.

In December of last year, Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren (MA) were among Demo senators again warning about the integrity of election equipment and software in another letter to manufacturers.

They warned, “We are particularly concerned that secretive and ‘trouble-plagued companies,’ owned by private equity firms and responsible for manufacturing and maintaining voting machines and other election administration equipment, ‘have long skimped on security in favor of convenience,’ leaving voting systems across the country ‘prone to security problems.’”

As examples of election hardware and software problems, they noted: “In 2018 alone ‘voters in South Carolina [were] reporting machines that switched their votes after they’d inputted them. … In addition, researchers recently uncovered previously undisclosed vulnerabilities in 'nearly three dozen backend election systems in 10 states.’ And [a] Democratic candidate’s electronic tally showed he received an improbable 164 votes out of 55,000 cast in a Pennsylvania state judicial election in 2019. … These problems threaten the integrity of our elections.”

In October of last year, infamous Demo Rep. Adam Schiff, in testimony about election security, declared: “It’s still all too vulnerable. … I continue to think that our voting machines are too vulnerable. … And the bigger danger than voting machines, which in and of themselves are vulnerable, is it’s easier to influence how people vote than the votes once they’re cast.”

Schiff inadvertently referenced the Democrat Party’s Leftmedia propagandists, who wield enormous “influence” on “how people vote.”

Just before the 2020 election, Demo Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee declared: “Researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that ballot-recording machines and other voting systems are susceptible to tampering.”

Beyond the certainty of bulk-mail ballot fraud and the potential of electronic vote-tabulation fraud, there are other issues raising questions about this year’s election results.

One of those is the fact that 19 “bellwether counties” have, historically, voted for every presidential election winner since 1980 — which earned them the title of “bellwethers.” This year, Donald Trump won 18 of those 19 bellwether counties, yet Joe Biden has been declared the victor.

Another issue relates to how Americans vote. A majority of voters reported they were better off under Trump administration policies than they were four years ago. And exit polling indicated the economy was the most important issue. Historically, presidents who have majority support on the economy win elections.

Again, these issues of election integrity must be resolved if future election results are to be believed.