‘BOO-HOO’: Cackling Kamala Borrows Trump’s ‘Too Big to Rig’ Line in…

Kamala Harris has spent years telling the country that election skepticism is a threat to democracy. This week she decided the rules no longer apply to her.

The former vice president, still promoting her postelection memoir “107 Days,” used a video message to declare that Republicans “are cheating” and that Democrats need to turn out in numbers “too big to rig.” It is the same phrase Donald Trump used throughout his 2024 campaign, back when Harris and her allies in the media mocked him for it as paranoid and dangerous.

The trigger for her outburst was the Supreme Court’s decision to lift a nationwide injunction that had blocked the Trump administration from tightening mail in ballot rules ahead of the 2026 midterms. The ruling allowed the White House to move forward with an executive order aimed at cleaning up mail voting procedures, something election integrity advocates have pushed for since 2020.

Rather than engage with the substance of the policy, Harris chose theater. Her video, stitched together with a noticeably high number of jump cuts, urged supporters to vote by mail before the option supposedly disappears. Critics online immediately noted the irony of a politician who spent four years insisting the 2020 and 2024 elections were beyond scrutiny now warning her own supporters that the system is rigged against them.

This is not an isolated incident. In a Zoom call with Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff that was later leaked, Harris told Democratic organizers that the Trump administration was working to “cheat and intimidate voters” in Georgia. She praised the people on the call for “not letting the cheaters win,” language that would have drawn immediate condemnation from the same commentators who spent years calling Trump’s fraud concerns a threat to the republic.

The hypocrisy is not subtle. When Trump and his allies raised concerns about ballot harvesting, signature verification, and chain of custody issues in 2020, Harris and the entire Democratic apparatus treated those concerns as an attack on the foundations of American government. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, cheating accusations are apparently a legitimate campaign strategy.

Georgia has been a particular target of her rhetoric. The state has spent years implementing reforms such as photo identification for absentee ballots and tighter drop box regulations, measures that were passed after the 2020 election exposed real vulnerabilities in the system. Harris has repeatedly framed these commonsense safeguards as voter suppression, despite record turnout in the state in subsequent elections.

Her broader argument, that Trump’s mandate from the 2024 election is somehow illegitimate, has also resurfaced during her book tour. Harris has told audiences from New York to Atlanta that Trump “does not have a mandate,” pointing to the margin of victory as evidence that voters did not truly endorse his agenda. This is a curious argument from a candidate who lost that election decisively across the Electoral College and saw Trump improve his standing with nearly every demographic group compared to 2020.

Trump won the popular vote outright in 2024, the first Republican to do so in twenty years. He carried all seven swing states. Exit polling showed him making historic gains with Hispanic voters, young men, and even some Black voters, a coalition shift that took Democratic strategists by surprise. None of that fits neatly into a narrative of a stolen or illegitimate election, which may explain why Harris has pivoted instead to attacking the legitimacy of his mandate rather than the count itself.

Conservative commentators were quick to pounce on the “too big to rig” video. Turning Point USA spokesman Andrew Kolvet mocked Harris for lacking an original thought, while commentator Shawn Farash noted she was “still stealing Trump’s ideas.” Others pointed out that the same media figures who spent years fact checking Trump’s rigging claims into oblivion have offered little pushback on Harris using identical language.

That asymmetry is the real story here. When Trump raised concerns about mail in voting procedures in 2020, he was branded an existential threat to democracy by nearly every major outlet. When Harris uses the exact same framing four years later, aimed at an actual policy change implemented by a sitting administration, the coverage has been comparatively muted.

It is worth remembering that Harris herself was part of an administration that spent years dismissing election integrity concerns as fringe conspiracy theories. Her own Justice Department pursued legal action against states that tightened voter ID laws. Her campaign surrogates regularly compared election skeptics to insurrectionists. That history makes her sudden conversion to “vote before they rig it” messaging difficult to take seriously as anything other than political convenience.

The Trump administration’s mail ballot order itself is fairly modest in scope. It directs federal agencies to work with states on verifying voter rolls, tightening deadlines for ballot receipt, and standardizing signature matching procedures. These are the kinds of reforms that election integrity groups on the right have called for since the chaos of the 2020 count, when mail ballots arriving after Election Day became a major point of controversy in several states.

A federal judge has already moved to block parts of the order, illustrating how contested this territory remains in the courts. But the underlying policy goal, ensuring that ballots are verified and processed under clear and consistent rules, is hardly the sinister plot Harris describes.

Republicans have noted that Harris’s sudden concern about election “rigging” conveniently arrived only after her side lost the ability to write the rules unilaterally. When Democratic controlled states expanded mail voting windows and loosened ballot harvesting restrictions ahead of 2020, that was treated as expanding access. When a Republican administration tightens those same rules four years later, it becomes an attack on democracy itself.

The 2026 midterms will be the real test of whether this rhetoric has staying power. Democrats are clearly betting that stoking fear about voting access will drive turnout, much the way Republicans leaned on fraud concerns in prior cycles. Whether voters buy it this time, especially after watching Harris and her party dismiss identical concerns for years, remains to be seen.