Why Isn't The Media Criticizing Jasmine Crockett For Being An 'Election Denier'?

Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) lost her Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Texas to fellow Democrat, Texas state Rep. James Talarico. Believe it or not, Talarico has far more insane beliefs than Crockett, but that's for another day. 

Because while Crockett losing a primary is newsworthy, the loss isn't nearly as noteworthy as her reaction to losing. 

"Unfortunately, this is what Republicans like to do. They specifically targeted Dallas County and I think we all know why," Crockett said Tuesday night, as the Dallas County dispute unfolded and results were still coming in (though Crockett had probably realized by this point she wasn't likely to win). 

"We cannot allow this type of behavior to be rewarded, because so long as they know they can win, even if it means cheating, they will continue to do it," she added, referring to the precinct-voting change and the court fight over extended hours in Dallas County.

Did I hear that correctly? Jasmine Crockett believes that she lost a Democratic primary to another Democrat because Republicans cheated? That is an absurd theory on motive alone.

Texas runs open primaries, meaning any voter can choose either party’s ballot (but not both), so yes, crossover voting is possible in theory. But there is no evidence it happened at a scale that explains Crockett’s loss. Plus, why would Republicans cheat to make Crockett lose? 

Republicans were not terrified of facing Crockett in November. Quite the opposite. NOTUS reported that the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) worked behind the scenes to encourage Crockett to jump into the race because Republicans believed she would be the easiest opponent to beat, calling her the party’s preferred matchup. CBS News also reported Republicans "cheered" her entry, believing she was the more beatable candidate.

For context, the Election Day mess in Dallas County involved precinct-specific voting rules because ballots varied by precinct. That confusion turned some voters away, triggered lawsuits, led a judge to order extended hours, and resulted in the Texas Supreme Court requiring late ballots be separated.

Crockett seemed to imply that all of that was part of some master plan by Republicans, which is laughable. 

Crockett Allegations Expose Media Double Standard

Now for the media part, because that is where the double standard shows itself.

Crockett’s "cheating" line is an allegation of illegitimacy. There is no other way to interpret it. 

It is in the same category of rhetoric the press has spent years insisting is "dangerous" and a "threat to democracy." Yet the left-wing media didn't call out Crockett's "cheating" allegation at all. Instead, all coverage of her loss framed the story as confusion, court fights, and suppression claims, not as election denial from a Democrat.

That's important because when a popular Democrat like Crockett throws out an allegation of a rigged election, the media quickly moves to cover it as her being a "voting rights activist." They certainly didn't position her as some wild conspiracy theorist or election denier.  

After Jasmine Crockett lost the Texas Democratic Senate primary, she suggested Republicans cheated, exposing a double standard in how left-wing media outlets handle election legitimacy claims.

(Jacob Lujan/ for the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal/USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images)

Compare that to the way these same outlets "report" when the target is Donald Trump. Trump has claimed that Democrats "rigged" the 2020 presidential election and that's why he lost to Joe Biden. His claims aren't much different than Crockett's. But the coverage wasn't remotely similar. 

CBS News, in an article titled, "With election deniers running for office, our right to vote is on the ballot," described Trump as "the most prominent election denier in the land." The article sounded alarm bells about the future of American democracy and democratic erosion.

CNN, in 2023, said Trump was "so steeped in his own conspiracy theories" regarding the 2020 election that "it's hard to know whether he can even see his way out of them." Because, remember, claiming that an election is "rigged" or alleging the other side of "cheating" is a "conspiracy theory." At least, of course, when claimed by a Republican. 

ABC News posted a piece titled, "Experts say Trump, election deniers eroding trust in democracy." Surely, ABC News is going to update that piece now with a new headline: "Experts say Crockett, election deniers eroding trust in democracy." Any day now they'll write that piece, right? 

The AP claimed that Trump "flooded the airwaves" with "distortions, misinformation and unfounded conspiracy theories" with his claims about the 2020 election. 

For what it's worth, here's what the AP said about Crockett in its race recap: "Crockett’s campaign said she planned to sue over voting issues in Dallas, and she spoke only briefly on Tuesday night to warn that ‘people have been disenfranchised.’" 

That's it. They used one Crockett quote, and it did not mention her claims of Republicans cheating. Hm, wonder why? 

Jasmine Crockett claimed Republicans cheated after losing her Senate primary to James Talarico. 

(Mandel NGAN / AFP)

The New York Times used this quote from Crockett in its race recap article: "The Democratic Party should absolutely prepare for the worst and get some things litigated right now… People will not turn out because of what’s happened, in my opinion, especially if no one fights for their votes to be counted."

No mention of her election denial comments. Oh, but the Times managed to make sure it hit the most important part of Talarico's victory over Crockett: "Mr. Talarico now faces the task of uniting what proved to be a racially polarized Democratic electorate that is split between him, who is white, and Crockett, who is Black." 

Ah, yes. There must be a clause in the contracts of New York Times "reporters" that race has to play a role in every article. 

The Washington Post quoted the "cheating" line in its March 3 voting-confusion piece (without framing it as Crockett denying election results), but then the outlet left it out of the March 4 results story. Don't worry, WaPo worked skin color into the recap article: "Their race encapsulated a widening debate within the Democratic Party — over whether it makes sense to try to mobilize loyal Democrats and liberals or try to appeal to Republicans — and also took on some racial overtones." 

The Differences Matter, But The Silence Is Still Deafening 

There are differences between Crockett and Trump that must be acknowledged, and I won't pretend to be blissfully unaware. 

Trump spent years telling the country the presidential election was stolen, and those claims became a defining narrative. He also claimed that a presidential election was rigged, which is obviously more consequential than a Democratic primary for a U.S. Senate seat.

Still, the difference in coverage between the two is stark. It's not that outlets aren't being as hard on Crockett as they were on Trump because that's fair, quite frankly. Someone claiming, multiple times, that a presidential election was rigged deserves more media coverage than a U.S. Senate candidate claiming the same thing about a primary. 

However, many outlets aren't even mentioning Crockett's claims about cheating. Forget about labeling her an "election denier" or "conspiracy theorist," most outlets are pretending she didn't even say there was cheating in the first place. 

If "election denial" is truly a civic emergency, then a politician claiming that "cheating" is why she lost an election for a loss deserves heavy media scrutiny. Left-wing media rushed to prove Trump wrong and say that his claims were "baseless lies." They should be mobilized to prove that Crockett's claims are similarly baseless, especially since her claim is that Republicans cheated, even though it would seem Republicans would be more motivated to help her win. 

Either the press believes delegitimizing elections is dangerous, or it only believes it's dangerous when a Republican claims it. When a Democrat says an election was "rigged," apparently that's not even worth a mention in an article. 

There's a reason trust in the media is at an all-time low, and the media doesn't seem overly interested in turning it around any time soon.