Will Democrats accept election outcome?

OPINION:

As someone who came of voting age when Election Day was just that, not “election weeks” or even “election months,” I don’t support early voting.

But since we have to play the hand we’re dealt, I went to cast my ballot on Oct. 19 at an early-voting site in Fairfax County, Virginia, wearing a pro-Trump T-shirt.

I was stunned when, out of the blue, with no provocation other than the T-shirt, an older woman — obviously an unhinged liberal Democrat — blurted out “I hate you!” and “Burn in hell!”

Never mind that she didn’t know me or anything about me. She just knew that, as a supporter of former President Donald Trump’s bid to return to the White House, I was the earthly embodiment of Satan, and she saw herself as an exorcist.

That woman was and is clearly suffering from a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome. To respond in kind would have been pointless, so I didn’t. I said, “I love you, too,” and left it at that.

Trump Derangement Syndrome is a real affliction, one so widespread among liberals that it might be deserving of its own chapter in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Now-retired radio host Michael Savage summed it up succinctly in the title of his 2005 bestselling book, “Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder.”

The diagnostic manual, now in its fifth edition, hasn’t been updated since 2013 — two years before Mr. Trump emerged on the political scene. The sixth edition is clearly overdue.

The woman at the polls — whom I overheard telling other people that she was 77 — could well be the poster “child” for Trump Derangement Syndrome.

The pharmaceutical industry should consider investing in research and development to find a cure — or at least a palliative — for Trump Derangement Syndrome. Someone should likewise start a charity fundraising group to help pay for the care and treatment of syndrome sufferers, running TV ads soliciting donations of $19 a month, the way St. Jude Children’s Hospital and the Easter Seals do.

All kidding aside, Trump Derangement Syndrome provides an unlikely window into the double standard of the legacy media regarding election-related violence.

In both the presidential and vice presidential debates and throughout the presidential campaign, Mr. Trump and his running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance, Ohio Republican, have been repeatedly asked by what Mr. Trump calls the “fake news” media whether they’re prepared to accept, unconditionally, the outcome of the election if they lose.

Asking that presumes that election results should be accepted in advance — sight unseen — even before voting has concluded, much less before the first ballot has been counted or any voting irregularity has been adjudicated.

The presumption of the question, moreover, is that the Republican ticket’s supporters will erupt in violence if the Democrats win.

But the legacy media, as far as I know, have not once asked Vice President Kamala Harris or her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, whether they and their supporters would likewise respect the verdict of voters if they lose.

Will Democrats and their supporters — like the woman who hates me and wants me to burn in hell — refrain from violence and accept defeat if Mr. Trump triumphs?

There’s ample reason to believe they won’t accept that result with equanimity, especially given the liberals’ current “by any means necessary” mentality.

Democrats and the liberal media won’t let anyone forget the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, which they still blame on Mr. Trump, but they would rather you not remember any of this:

“Demonstrations turned violent in the nation’s capital as protesters clashed with police, damaged vehicles, destroyed property and set small fires in a chaotic confrontation, blocks from Donald Trump’s inauguration Friday,” Washington’s WRC-TV reported on Jan. 20, 2017. “At least 217 people were arrested,”

But not all of the 2017 Trump inauguration protest fires were small. A Pakistani Muslim immigrant businessman lost a $90,000 stretch limousine to vandals.

“First, protesters smashed the windows, forcing the car’s driver to flee. Then, the car was spray-painted with an anarchy symbol and the slogan ‘We the People,’” The Washington Post reported. “Not long after protesters hurled rocks at police, who appeared to respond with flash-bang grenades, the limo was set ablaze, black smoke filling the sky near the time President Trump entered the White House.”

As recently as Oct. 15, in the unlikely setting of a Q&A before the Economic Club of Chicago, Mr. Trump was again asked, this time by Bloomberg News Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait, “Will you commit now to respecting and encouraging a peaceful transfer of power?”

Mr. Micklethwait noted at the outset that the Economic Club and Bloomberg News had also invited Ms. Harris for a similar interview but that she had declined so far.

It’s unlikely at this late stage of the campaign that Ms. Harris would sit for an hourlong interview for Mr. Micklethwait’s group, but if she did, it’s even less likely that she would be asked whether Democrats and their supporters would commit to “respecting and encouraging a peaceful transfer of power.”

If Ms. Harris had been asked that, however, she would surely have answered, “Yes, of course we will.”

But after my encounter with that Trump Derangement Syndrome sufferer, I am not convinced.

• Peter Parisi is a former editor with The Washington Times.