This July, the FCP published a scathing piece I had written lambasting the tactics of the “Gang of Four” Democrats in the House and their careening to the left.

For those of you who follow the podcast, you have likely watched my transition as a skeptic about anti-pragmatic policies reverse, in large part due to the positive influence of constant introspection into contemporary attitudes, policies, and realities. I was as shocked as anyone that my moderation, something which I personally believe derives from my objectivity about the substance and effects of specific policies, could in just a few months turn into advocacy for shattering the status quo. In rereading my own writings, analyzing the current American body politic, and watching how the debates made the candidates jump like circus animals to make promises that they later backtracked on, there is only on realistic conclusion: America needs radical change or it will implode.

To be frank, I stand behind what I wrote, which I think is best summed up in the following quote, “Giving credence to extremism, not of ideology, but extremism of tactics, is harmful to our democracy.”

In echoing what our contributor Jordan has said since the beginning of the Democratic primary process, ideological extremism can be instrumental in beginning the political process, naturally a process of debate and negotiation, from a new starting point, representing a shift in the status quo of political acceptability. Therefore, ideological extremism, in this time, is simply necessary in order to make headway in a system where the economy and social system is so irreparably broken, the two parties are so far divided, and political mandates are only seen by the winning side as meaningful in any election. The tactics of personalizing politics should certainly be decried, but that is not the focus in this primary season. What is the focus now, lies in one word, electability.

Electability is a socially constructed fraud, perpetrated by the elites and the mainstream media to perpetuate the status quo.

This week, the USA Today published several articles, mirroring dozens of others in various other media outlets, miscategorizing the election polls and results to make it appear as if Biden will be the inevitably nominee, and this is a positive thing for most Americans, as he has the best chance to defeat Trump in a general election. These are both patent lies.

In fact, this whole charade should seem very familiar. In 2016, the Democratic primary was stolen from Bernie Sanders by an elite-driven, corrupt, anti-democratic election process that valued party elites over the amount of primary votes that each candidate received. Acting under the notion that Hilary Clinton, because of her “moderation” was a more acceptable candidate, the elites, vanguard party style, effectively stole the primary election from the American people, and gave the nomination to Clinton. She ultimately lost, in contravention of nearly all the published studies up to that point.

This should provide us two meanings.

The first is that modern polling is fatally flawed. Nearly all mainstream projections misinterpreted and failed to predict the result of the 2016 elections. This went back as far as the “electability” matchups between Clinton and Sanders as primary candidates against the Republican contenders. In fact, the polls changed massively over time, and the ultimate results of the election bore no resemblance to the so-called modern methodologically sound polling that predicted landslides for Clinton in a matchup. The polls were, therefore, either poorly constructed, which should make us doubt why we should believe them this time, or, deliberately manipulated, in order to convince voters to support the elites’ preferred candidate, the one selected as more “electable.”

Second, electability is entirely socially constructed, malleable, and has no basis in objective reality. It therefore can change at any time, and exists only as relative to another candidate in an election. Electability is also only relative and not absolute. It exists differently for each candidate, and the relationship between each candidate and moderates, independents, anti-Trump Republicans, disillusioned blue-collar Democrats, and nearly any other voting bloc conceivable can change depending on the context of the daily news. Therefore, it should not be relied upon under any circumstances in making crucial decisions.

What took place in 2016 was a coup. The mainstream media as well as Democratic party elites, frightened of a disturbance to the status quo, therefore fed the American people a lie in order to convince them to support their chosen candidate, the “electable” one, ultimately, in order to manipulate their primary votes. They elected Donald Trump.

Polling released by Gallup and Yougov have both shown that for a very large percentage of primary voters, “electability,” a fraudulent misnomer fed by elites to shift votes, is one of their largest considerations when choosing a primary candidate. “Electability” didn’t stop Republicans from choosing Trump, and it didn’t stop Trump from winning the electoral college in 2016.

Rational, thoughtful voters need to think carefully this primary season. Do you want your vote decided by a pollster, or a backroom party big-wig, because he or she constructed some fraudulent variable to make you too scared to vote for the person you truly agree with on policy matters?

Policy is and should be regarded as the paramount consideration when choosing any leader. To choose on any other basis is an act of sheer cowardice.

Pragmatism in voting has a place, but when polling is so distorted and inaccurate, and when there is so much political volatility that such a nebulous and potentially nefarious variable is purported to be more important than the ultimate aim of politics, policy, the noise should be ignored: electability is a lie.

If we do not make our choices clear, if we don’t elect an exciting and vibrant candidate that can provide the shift in status quo that America needs, why should we expect independents, disillusioned Democrats, and even moderate Republicans to switch their votes? If you still doubt this, observe how they voted in 2016 for Clinton. If you want 2020 to look the same, then by all means, do what the elites tell you and see where it lands America.

Ari B