Peggy Noonan, a former Reagan speechwriter and editorial columnist for the Wall Street Journal, represents in many ways, the pre-Trump Republican Party. As such, she has made it quite clear she resents the Trumpetarian upstarts that have influenced the party and yearns for the good old days of losing with what she finds to be grace and class.

The April 3, 2022 edition of the WSJ has an illustrative piece penned by Noonan, “Nixon’s Example of Sanity in Washington.”

She starts by recalling examples of past examples of political extremism and gives some illustrations of today’s partisan divide such as outrageous attacks on Justice Kavanaugh and even the private emails of Ginny Thomas, the wife of Justice Thomas, who expressed fears about the last election being a fraud. She says of Mrs. Thomas, “This is a person who lives in the heart of the Washington establishment and had no proof for any of the wild things she was saying. But when you are a conspiracist, every way you look is a grassy knoll.”

Clearly, Noonan thinks there is nothing, nothing at all to any claims the election was stolen, or perhaps purchased by Mark Zuckerberg. To suggest that elections have not honest, is apparently like questioning whether the Pope is Catholic.

But in reality, elections have been stolen and many people would agree that the current Pope does not think like a Catholic. She seems completely unaware of the many anomalies and illegalities, especially in Wisconsin, Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania, that have been recently uncovered. Nor does she even hint she has read Mollie Hemingway’s book about the role of Big Tech and Zuckerbucks in the last election.

Ignorance is either bliss or material for another column.

For Noonan, the January 6^th Capitol riot, is an “insurrection”, fully buying into the Democratic Party’s description of that event.

Then she shifts to the election of 1960 and admits that the bare difference in the vote, of 1/6^th of one percent, was likely due to election fraud in Illinois and Texas, which gave Kennedy the victory.

Mayor Daly and the mob-dominated unions provided Illinois for the Kennedy side of the ledger.

Then she follows with, “As for Texas, everyone knew what Robert Caro later established, that Lyndon B. Johnson, Kennedy’s Vice President, had the state wired, with credible charges of ballot-box fraud going back to 1948.”

So, it would seem fraud has occurred in the past, but not in the present.

Then, she really gets at her point. Nixon refused to contest the election because he felt that given the Cold War raging, the country could not stand the risk of division. So even lacking the context of a Cold War with a nuclear threat, Nixon is now an example to all Republicans. Avoid political division even if the other guy is stealing the election results.

She points out that almost all liberal historians, who generally despised Nixon, “speak with respect of this chapter in his life.”

She closes with, “Why can’t self-professed patriots love America like that now-maturely, protectively?”

Clearly, the “self-professed patriots”, are Trumpetarians are of the worst kind. You know, the kind of Republicans that complain when billionaires insert themselves into the election process and suppress all news and opinion from getting on social media or on the major TV networks. That kind of riff-raff that doesn’t “love” America.

Why is it mature and protective of America to be silent about election fraud? How on earth does that “protect” our electoral system and love America? She admits fraud occurred and praises losing candidates who did nothing to contest the results. But to “protect” the system, the best response is silence?

If elections are rigged, what is the point of politics?

For Peggy it seems, whether it be electoral mischief in Minnesota with Norm Coleman (which helped swing Obama Care), or knocking off Alaska’s Senator Ted Stevens with bogus charges, the job of Republicans is to suck it up and take their beating. If you complain, you are not a statesman but a conspiracy theorist.

Ms. Noonan seems to have some sort of psychological aversion to fighting back even when fraud has been established.  But it would seem, it is gauche to fight fraud when it occurs. It should only be established thirty or forty years later by historians. Those who knew for decades and did nothing about it are to be praised as statesmen.

Like a battered wife, the correct response for her to the signs of fraud is not to call for investigations but to quietly take the beating and come back to the electoral system bruised and bloody, and give the relationship more time to inflict more beatings. If you just keep taking the beatings, historians will finally love you.

Historically, she agrees that fraud has taken place. She denies any fraud in recent elections. But get this: where fraud has been established, the best thing is to capitulate to those who committed the fraud.

The proper role of a Republican is to support the election of any Democrat who wins through fraud. Don’t complain, and for heaven’s sake, do not investigate. It just is in bad taste.

Mr. Trump has done some wonderful things and said a number of stupid things. But what many admire is that he did not lie down to the establishment in Washington. He fights.

While personally, we are still waiting for all the information to come in, enough is already available to question the last election. At least some Republicans are trying to see that information gets out so voters can decide and then writing legislation to stop election fraud. Noonan is against both getting the information in a contemporaneous way where it will be of some practical use, and then doing anything about it.

Get it? Not only don’t investigate but if the evidence is found, capitulate for the sake of political stability and reverence for the “system”. Going along with fraud demonstrates class and maturity. How else can Republicans curry favor with historians? Getting that approval from historians and writers is more important than getting the actual winner in office.

Democracy means power is derived from the consent of the governed, through voting. It is quite legitimate to ask who voted, were they qualified to vote, did they vote once, were the votes tampered with, and were the votes counted correctly. Peggy cannot seem to chew gum and walk at the same time. But, she can write a silly column.

In corporate America, people who count money get audited all the time, in fact, audited results are required. But for Noonan, people who count votes should always be trusted, even though fraud has occurred before. It is not right to steal someone’s money but it is OK to steal their vote?

Peggy Noonan does not feel election integrity is worth fighting over. It is divisive and in poor taste to do so.

She really does represent the mindset of the Republican Party prior to Trump.

To others, it shows naivete and cowardice.