A recent poll indicates a significant 15-point lead for Hungary’s opposition party over Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party. This substantial advantage sparks both hope and skepticism regarding the upcoming elections. The sheer magnitude of the lead is encouraging for those yearning for a change in leadership, especially considering Orbán’s controversial alignment with Russia and his increasingly authoritarian style of governance.
However, the optimism is tempered by a deep-seated apprehension about the integrity of the electoral process. Many express concerns that Orbán, known for his strong-arm tactics and history of manipulating elections, will employ underhanded methods to maintain his grip on power. The possibility of illegal activities, such as voter suppression or manipulation of vote counts, hangs heavy in the air, fostering distrust in the fairness of the upcoming election.… Continue reading
Arizona Representative Abe Hamadeh has requested a federal investigation into Runbeck Election Services, alleging improper handling of ballots in multiple western states during the 2024 election. His letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi cites credible reports of blank ballots being improperly mixed with returned ballots at a Runbeck warehouse, raising concerns about election integrity. The request seeks to determine if security protocols were followed and the potential impact on election results. The DOJ has yet to respond, while concerns regarding election integrity persist following the closely contested 2024 presidential election.
Read More
A lawsuit alleging voting discrepancies in Rockland County, New York’s 2024 election is proceeding to discovery. The nonpartisan SMART Legislation group claims statistical anomalies and affidavit evidence contradict official results, particularly concerning the Senate race and exhibiting improbable patterns in presidential vote counts. While the lawsuit won’t alter the certified presidential outcome, it raises concerns about election integrity, fueled by reports of altered voting machines and a missing testing lab. A hearing is scheduled for September 22 to consider a request for a full hand recount.
Read More
Rockland County, New York, has initiated a legal challenge to the Presidential and Senate election results, citing significant irregularities. The county’s complaint alleges that the official tallies contradict sworn statements from voters who claim they cast ballots for independent Senate candidate Diane Sare, indicating a discrepancy between reported votes and actual votes cast. This discrepancy raises serious questions about the accuracy of the election process within the county.
The challenge extends beyond the Senate race; the presidential election results also present concerning statistical anomalies. The complaint highlights multiple districts where a substantial number of voters selected Democratic Senate candidate Kirsten Gillibrand, yet zero votes were recorded for the Democratic Presidential candidate, Kamala Harris.… Continue reading
The Supreme Court’s consideration of a GOP challenge to mail-in voting represents a significant threat to the accessibility and integrity of the electoral process. This challenge isn’t about a wholesale ban on mail-in voting, a system successfully used for years in several states, including Utah, a traditionally Republican stronghold. Instead, the focus is narrower, targeting the validity of ballots postmarked by the election deadline but arriving later.
The timing of this challenge is highly suspect, surfacing prominently after a presidential election loss. This raises questions about the sincerity of the GOP’s concerns. It appears to be a strategic maneuver aimed at suppressing votes, disproportionately affecting those who rely on mail-in ballots due to logistical barriers or circumstances beyond their control.… Continue reading
The Republican Party is pursuing a multi-pronged strategy to restrict voting access, potentially culminating in a one-party state. Central to this is the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act,” requiring stringent proof of citizenship for voter registration, and a presidential executive order mandating similar measures and allowing federal oversight of state voter rolls. A federal judge partially blocked the executive order, citing separation of powers, but the SAVE Act remains a significant threat, potentially disenfranchising millions of eligible voters. The Supreme Court, with its conservative majority, holds the ultimate power to determine the constitutionality of these measures.
Read More
President Trump’s executive order, aiming to influence future elections, is largely considered a power grab and faces significant legal challenges due to its potential unconstitutionality. Legal experts cite concerns about disenfranchisement, particularly impacting low-propensity voters, a group increasingly vital to the Republican party. The order’s provisions, including challenges to mail-in ballots and data sharing with potentially partisan entities, raise serious questions about election integrity and fairness. A court has already blocked a key element of the order, highlighting the considerable legal hurdles it faces.
Read More
A North Carolina federal court issued a preliminary order directing election officials to comply with a state court ruling that could disenfranchise thousands of military and overseas voters in a contested state Supreme Court election. However, the federal court also blocked election certification pending a ruling on the state court remedy’s constitutionality. This action risks undermining election legitimacy, mirroring concerns raised in *Bush v. Gore* regarding the premature announcement of questionable vote recounts. Legal experts argue the state court’s actions violate the 14th Amendment’s due process clause by retroactively changing eligibility rules and potentially disenfranchising voters who complied with existing law. The optimal course is to resolve the constitutional questions before attempting to collect further voter information.
Read More
The SAVE Act, narrowly passing the House 220-208, requires proof of citizenship for voter registration. Four Democrats joined Republicans in supporting the measure, which has previously failed in the Senate. Supporters argue it protects American elections, while critics contend it could disenfranchise millions. The Act includes provisions to accommodate name changes, aiming to mitigate concerns about voter access.
Read More
The House passed the “SAVE” Act, a restrictive voting bill requiring in-person proof of citizenship for voter registration, a measure projected to disenfranchise millions, particularly women, minorities, and rural residents. The bill’s passage was along party lines, with four Democrats joining Republicans in support. While framed as combating non-citizen voting, critics argue it disproportionately impacts eligible voters lacking readily available citizenship documentation. The bill’s future remains uncertain, facing an uphill battle in the Senate where a filibuster is anticipated.
Read More
Matt Underwood 
John Q. Hosedrinker