Internationalism may be hazardous to your health.
What We Saw Coming
The Claremont Institute's pre-election war games have proven prescient so far.
Welcome, and thanks for subscribing to the Roundup, where you'll receive our summary of The American Mind every week in your inbox. We're looking forward to bringing you the best writing and commentary on the ideas that drive the debate in this pivotal time for our nation.
Before we embarked upon what is now a protracted legal and political battle over the 2020 election and its integrity, the Claremont Institute partnered with the Texas Public Policy Foundation to predict possible outcomes of this unprecedented contest and their likely impact upon the American regime. The effort was conceived as a response to the machinations of the Transition Integrity Project, whose ostensibly bipartisan experts were in fact dedicated to portraying Trump as unable to win legitimate election or accept legitimate defeat—and equally dedicated to legitimizing his defeat by virtually any available means. In reality, as our 79 Days Report found, the more likely outcome is a lengthy period of uncertainty generated mostly by Democrat insistence upon inherently unstable practices such as widespread mail-in voting. This prediction has been vindicated. The report, which foresaw “a Trump lead steadily eroded by mail-in ballot counting,” has proven prescient so far. We remind our readers of it now in order to give guidance for all those who wish to uphold the legitimacy of the American electoral system. “The U.S. Constitution is remarkably resilient in challenging times,” the report notes, “and the American people should give it time to work.” We stand by this and other conclusions found in the report, and we encourage all those who are pursuing constitutional means to ensure that every legal vote is counted.