Opinion: Trump Will Certainly Serve a Second Term — and Soon


Elias Giuliano, Contributor

“The Port Press is a publication authorized by the Northport – East Northport Union Free School District.  The articles and opinions stated in The Port Press are solely the opinions of the individual writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Northport – East Northport Union Free School District, Northport High School or any individual affiliated with such entities.”

Since Trump was first elected in 2016, I have hoped for a second term. As that first term neared a close, I became more and more confident that Trump would win. As election day approached, that confidence grew. Remembering the horribly inaccurate polls and predictions of 2016 and Hillary Clinton’s victory, I was positive they’d be just as wrong this time. And now, that election day has passed and Biden has been “declared” the president elect… I am 100% certain Trump will serve a second term. Allow me to explain.


Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, politicians and public officials – predominantly Democrats – have pushed for greater use of mail-in ballots for people who were wary of in-person voting due to health concerns.

Image Credit: CNN

Mail-in and absentee ballots have existed for quite some time in America’s electoral landscape, but nowhere on the scale on which they were seen this time around. Many were quick to point out the dangers and fraud risks associated with an increased inclination toward an indirect system of voting, but the mainstream media – which, may I remind you, is becoming less and less trusted by the American public and has been shown repeatedly to have a more liberal bias – was quick to assure us that mail-in ballots were completely secure.

Many also warned of Trump “falsely” declaring victory, stating that mail-in ballots would come in – and be counted – later than in-person votes, and that these mail-in ballots would shift possible “red mirages” to blue in certain swing states as time went on. And lo and behold, that’s exactly what happened. States such as Pennsylvania, Virginia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia started out solidly red on election night, but shifted blue as the days went on, eventually leading the Associated Press to call the election for Biden on November 7th. So, that’s it. Election over. Biden wins, and Trump is a sore loser, right? 

Not so fast. 


The days after election day (and certainly the days to come after Biden’s perceived victory) have been (and will continue to be) a legal nightmare. Evidence of voter fraud to do predominately with a mail-in ballot influx has been cropping up since around 4 am on November 4th, when the red-trending Wisconsin was suddenly overtaken by a spike of 138,000 votes, all of which were apparently for Biden. (graph shown below). 

The “4 am dump,” as it has been dubbed, from Wisconsin. Trump holds a growing lead which is suddenly overcome by a massive spike. Seems legit… | Image Credit: FiveThirtyEight

From there, the allegations exploded. In no particular chronological order, here are some key examples of what reeks of election fraud:

These and numerous other examples make up what is a clear spate of suspicious activity. Given the sheer volume of such incidents, it should be easy to type in “voter fraud” or other such similar search terms into Google and find plenty of examples for oneself. But the unfortunate – and, honestly, scary – reality is that finding these examples require lots of digging. Mainstream news outlets are slow to report this (if they even do at all), and if they do touch on these issues, often simply write them off or “debunk” them using information given by the very people that would be responsible for this fraud if proven true. Twitter (as it often does) took to censoring conservative search terms on its platform that are nonetheless trending, as illustrated by the image below. 

Twitter forgets to censor typos – you’re telling me that a mistake is trending but the proper spelling isn’t?!

GoFundMe also shut down a page that raised over $200,000 dollars for data analysts to research election inconsistencies – for reasons I, and probably lots of other people, literally can’t understand (actually, I do understand – it’s called corruption). 


Biden’s support base has conclusively proclaimed victory. After all, the election was called – there’s no way it could change now, right?

While that may be true in a normal year, it is likely that many legal challenges will be hurled at states where voter fraud has been alleged, that could wildly shake up this election “outcome.” A recount is certain in Georgia, as election law there stipulates that a candidate can request such action if the difference in vote counts between parties is less than 1% (the difference is .2% in this state). The US Supreme Court has ordered Pennsylvania to segregate and secure all ballots received after 8 pm election night in the state and to count them separately – if they are to be counted at all. PA Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar had already issued guidance requesting this to be done, but Justice Samuel Alito (the author of the order) expressed concern that this guidance was not being properly followed. In response to that 4 am “ballot dump” mentioned above, WI legislatures are set to meet to discuss election security. In Pennsylvania, House Speaker Bryan Cutler is demanding a full audit before the state certifies the resultsPresident Trump issued a statement on November 7th, assuring that “our campaign will start prosecuting our case in court,” highlighting the fact that several GOP poll-watchers were kicked out of count rooms, asking “So what is Biden hiding?” Former Director for Strategic Planning of the National Security Counsel, Rich Higgins, claimed there was enough evidence of fraud to “merit a serious investigation.” Trump supporters also marched on several state capitals over the post-election day weekend.


With such an intense dichotomy emerging from this election, it is fair to say that a legal battle is likely to ensue. Americans are likely to have deja-vu back to the 2000 election between George W. Bush and Al Gore, though the Supreme Court case that decided that election (the aptly titled Bush v. Gore) was based on inconsistencies regarding only a few hundred votes solely from Florida; this time around, however, the areas of uncertainty are much broader.

Judge Robert Rosenberg of the Broward County Canvassing Board analyzes a “dimpled chad”: a portion of a punch card not fully punctured (Nov. 2000) | Photo Credit: NPR (Getty Images)

Ultimately, when all is said and done, I truly, really, certainly believe that Trump will declared the rightful victor of this election. This is due to several factors.

First of all, the US Supreme Court will likely end up resolving a legal disagreement between lower courts, which will probably end in Trump’s favor. An 8th Circuit decision ruled that an extension of ballot deadlines was unconstitutional because it was issued by MI’s Secretary of State, when such an action can only be undertaken by a state’s legislature. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, on the contrary, granted PA’s Secretary of State the ability to extend the ballot receipt deadline to Nov. 6th, as long as those ballots were postmarked by Nov. 3rd. Whenever a lower-court split like this occurs, the only court able to resolve such a discrepancy is the Supreme Court of the US. SCOTUS has so far declined to rule on this legal grey area – which many left-leaning news sources portrayed as a loss for Republicans – but it is extremely probable that they will rule on this now that the official election has concluded (the Court likely held out because they did not want any decision in Trump’s favor to be moot, or invalid due to an issue already having been resolved prior to a decision, if he were to win). This is especially true considering SCOTUS already got involved in PA’s ballot-counting process, further showing their interest in hearing such a case. With the conservative majority on the Supreme Court (cemented further by the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett to the bench to replace the late Justice Ginsburg), it is highly probable, if not certain, that such a decision would go in Trump’s favor.

SCOTUS may also end up deciding on another issue: the fact that Republican poll-watchers were kept out of counting facilities, while others were let in with far fewer obstructions. I mentioned this in passing above, but perhaps I should have emphasized more, because this could end up being a very important issue – with the possibility of a big victory for Republicans. Bush v. Gore was actually decided primarily with reference to the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment, which could end up making a return in decisions relating to this election. The clause, which mandates equal treatment of all individuals in similar situations, was used to rule Florida’s inconsistent methods of recounting similarly-cast ballots unconstitutional. SCOTUS may soon apply a similar rationale to rule excluding certain poll-watchers while allowing others into counting locations unconstitutional.  

Another possibility is that a disputed election will lead to neither candidate achieving 270 electoral votes (the necessary number to win), which will result in a contingent election occurring. In the context of a presidential election, all states would be required to cast a single vote each, with every state reaching their decision based on a concurrence between all of their House of Representatives members. Though the Democrats hold a national majority in the House, Republicans have held state-level majorities in most states – something further solidified by their gains in 2020 congressional elections. 


Like I said, I have grown increasingly certain that Donald Trump will serve a second term over the past few days. I’d go so far as to say that, at this point, I am 100% certain of this fact. There is ample evidence of voter fraud occurring in Biden’s favor, and top officials are actively investigating allegations.

But you will never hear about any of this from mainstream news sources, who are too preoccupied with gloating over “victory” to see any potential challenges. Or perhaps they do recognize these challenges, but wish to continue to proclaim supposed triumph so as not to jeopardize their agenda. The sad reality is that there are still too many Americans that believe that, if something doesn’t reach the front page of CNN or the New York Times, it is not meaningful or important.

The same people that claimed “Russian Collusion” for 3 years with zero hard evidence are shockingly quiet about actual and severe harm being done to tried and true American institutions. Only time will tell, but as it stands now, the only way I predict Trump will leave office is after his 2-term limit has been reached.

I leave the reader of this article with one final thing to consider: the proceeding image, in which incumbent Harry Truman, after being re-elected in 1948, holds up an issue of the Chicago Tribune proclaiming his opponent’s victory. If the media could deceive back then, imagine what they are doing now.



UPDATE (NOV. 10th)

US Attorney General William Barr has authorized the DOJ to begin officially investigating voter fraud, citing “substantial allegations.” This comes after even more evidence of voter fraud has emerged. In Wisconsin, for instance, evidence of a “glitch” similar to the one in MI having switched Trump votes to Biden votes has emerged.

Further solidifying the possibility of a victory for Trump in the US Supreme Court is the fact that there are now 3 sitting Justices who all, prior to being on the court, played a heavy role in Bush’s legal defense during the 2000 election controversy – including the newly-appointed Justice Barrett. Bush was the Republican candidate, as well as the eventual victor in that election.