It seems that Democrats might be trying out a new rhetorical strategy for opposing voting laws being considered or passed in various states. Amid demands from voters to do more to protect election integrity, Republican politicians have proposed a wide array of measures to ensure that fraud and voting discrepancies are limited as much as possible. But according to failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, this amounts to a continuation of the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Non-Hyperbolic Hyperbole

In a June 14 appearance on MSNBC’s TheReidOut with media activist Joy Reid, Abrams struck a rather hysterical tone in describing the voting laws being discussed across the country. During her rant, she made sweeping accusations, suggesting that Republicans are threatening democracy and trying to suppress the votes of the oppressed. She began:

“We have got to pay attention to the fact these laws do things. One, they are anti-voter. They are designed to stop voters the Republicans found inconvenient in this last election. Namely, young people, people of color, the disabled. Number two, these are anti-election worker bills. They are designed to get good people to abandon their post. To criminalize those who still want to do their job and to replace them with those who will undermine the administration of elections. Three, they are designed to subvert democracy.”

Stacey Abrams

Abrams added: “The challenge is, to the extent we have secretaries of state, who support and suborn this behavior, they are hastening the demise of our democracy, and this is not hyperbole. This is exactly what happens across the world when, you know, past, long-standing democracies start to erode.”

But Abrams didn’t stop there.

She continued on about how the GOP is supposedly destroying America’s democratic process. “It begins by undermining how people feel not about the democracy that they have but about the administration of that democracy. And what this is intended to do to convince voters that it is not worth the effort, to your point, about being GOP TV,” she argued.

Abrams claimed Republicans are trying to “convince those who decided to show up for the first time” that it is “not worth it.”

The former gubernatorial candidate pointed out that some senators are in danger of losing their seats in 2022 and made the questionable connection between voting laws and the “insurrection.” She said:

“We know there are a number of U.S. senators who stand to lose their elections in 2022 if we do not protect our democracy. But we also have to remember that, beyond each individual candidate, it’s about who we are as a people, as a nation, are we willing to lose our nation to those who had the failed insurrection in January and decided to franchise it to every single state? The insurrection is continuing, and we have got to stop it in its tracks.”

Is This the New Strategy?

The Democrats and their close friends and allies in the activist media have leaned heavily on the Capitol riots as a talking point for the past five months. They have used every opportunity to bring up the events of Jan. 6 and wield them as a club against their political opposition. In light of this, it is no surprise that someone like Abrams would couple what happened then to election-integrity measures.

Could this be an indication of the next persuasion tactic leftists will use to push their agenda? It is possible, especially if they are banking on the assumption that most of the nation has not moved past the riot. The success of such a move requires that most Americans are still fixated on Jan. 6, which is likely why the activist media and Democratic politicians try to keep it in the news as much as possible. Their failure to establish a 9/11-style commission to further investigate might have made them even more desperate to keep the Capitol kerfuffle alive in the minds of the public.

With a Biden administration frantically seeking victories to tout, the Democrats have to do whatever they can to distract from the president’s failures. Will it work?

~

Read more from Jeff Charles.