The WaPo's Spin on Stacey Abrams' Sudden Voter ID Flip Flop Is Something Else

Late last week, Stacey Abrams and Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock both did rather dramatic flip flops on voter ID. It was a deeply calculated move, done as a show of support for the compromise election reform bill proposed by Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), which includes elements of voter ID.


Both Abrams and Warnock had previously stated their staunch opposition to voter ID, which was in line with what most elected Democrats and radical activists on the left feel about the subject (even though even a majority of rank and file Democrats support voter ID). Court battles have been waged for years in states across the country over GOP-led voter ID legislation, with Democrats declaring war on Republican efforts to make our elections more secure.

But in doing an about-face on the issue, both Abrams and Warnock blatantly lied when asked by the media about their changes of heart, both of them stating in so many words that they had “never” opposed voter ID and that it was just something made up by their Republican opponents with which to bash them (the irony here in them making such a claim simply cannot be overstated, I should note).

How is the media reporting on Abrams’ and Warnock’s dramatic change of heart? By proclaiming it’s merely an “evolution” in thinking, as the Democrat apologist newspaper the Washington Post “reported” today:

From reporter Aaron Blake’s article:

But regardless of what happens with the bill, Manchin’s proposal has moved the needle in one significant way: signaling a softening by key Democrats on voter ID.


There is some real nuance in these past comments — and nuance in voter ID proposals, which Republicans have in the recent past sought to gloss over…


But even accounting for that and the idea that opposing GOP voter ID bills isn’t the same as opposing all voter ID, what we saw last week was a significant rhetorical concession from some key Democrats.


Throughout the article, Blake sought to have it both ways, casting Abrams’ and Warnock’s previous positions as being nothing close to the hardline ones they’d been portrayed as, describing them instead as “nuanced.” On the other hand, he characterized their flip-flop as a “significant rhetorical concession.” But how could it be a “significant rhetorical concession” if their position wasn’t any different from previous ones they’d take on the issue, at least according to the WaPo?

The great pains Blake took to avoid calling them liars are obvious. This simply further proves the point that there is virtually no lie a Democrat can tell or statement they make for which supposedly “respectable” news outlets like the Washington Post will not run interference for them at some point.

This was not “nuance,” it wasn’t a “softening,” and it wasn’t just a “significant rhetorical concession.” They flat out did 180s on their prior positions against voter ID, positions which they used to smear Republicans as “racists” over, using racially-loaded language like “Jim Crow 2.0” to hammer home the point and manipulate voters.

As I’ve said before, Georgians should make sure Democrats pay a big political price at the ballot box in 2022 and 2024 for their willful deception, which is costing voters in the state far more than Georgia’s voting law ever will.

And as for the Washington Post, democracy does indeed die in darkness – the kind of darkness they leave readers in when they don’t tell them the truth and instead publish fawning puff pieces like this:


I rest my case.

Flashback: New Poll on MLB Moving All-Star Game Shows Warning Signs for Democrats in More Ways Than One


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos