A North Carolina Court of Appeals ruling, decided along party lines, favors Republican Supreme Court candidate Jefferson Griffin, despite his loss to Democrat Allison Riggs. This decision challenges over 65,000 votes, disproportionately affecting young and Black voters, potentially overturning the election results. While 60,000 challenged votes were upheld, thousands more remain contested, jeopardizing the integrity of the election. The outcome could establish a Republican supermajority on the state Supreme Court and severely undermine voter confidence.
Read More
The Ohio Republican Party’s deliberate obfuscation of Issue 1, aimed at preventing fair electoral districting, exemplifies a pattern of manipulative behavior. This follows the conviction of Ohio’s former Republican House Speaker and party chairman for a massive bribery scheme. The author, a long-time Ohio resident, argues that this corruption and disregard for voter understanding renders the Republican Party unworthy of his vote. He urges Ohio voters to carefully consider the implications of electing Republicans, particularly for statewide offices. The author concludes that the party’s actions necessitate a change in leadership to restore integrity to Ohio’s government.
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
A North Carolina appeals court controversially overturned over 60,000 votes in a state Supreme Court race, a decision potentially setting a precedent for future election challenges. Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin, who lost by a narrow margin, targeted ballots with minor registration issues or lacking strict photo ID from overseas voters, disproportionately impacting Democratic-leaning areas. This ruling, if upheld, would effectively institutionalize election denial and provide a blueprint for overturning future elections, raising serious concerns about the integrity of the democratic process. The decision has sparked outrage and legal challenges, with experts arguing it violates federal due process principles and sets a dangerous precedent.
Read More
A lawsuit filed by the Democratic Party challenges President Trump’s executive order aiming to seize control of election administration from states. The Democrats argue the order is unconstitutional, exceeding the President’s authority and potentially disenfranchising voters. The order seeks to restrict mail-in voting, control the Election Assistance Commission, and mandate stricter voter registration requirements. Legal experts warn the order could significantly disrupt elections and suppress voter turnout. The lawsuit alleges the order stems from Trump’s unfounded claims of voter fraud.
Read More
A proposed ban on barcodes on ballots, potentially driven by a desire to slow down vote counting, presents a complex issue with significant implications. The idea seems to stem from a belief that delaying the vote count could create opportunities for political manipulation and unrest. This delay could provide more time to challenge the legitimacy of the count, potentially leading to a chaotic situation where claims of fraud are amplified and used to undermine the election outcome.
This strategy plays into a broader pattern of undermining faith in democratic processes. By intentionally slowing down the process, the intention might be to sow discord and distrust, enabling the exertion of influence on the final result.… Continue reading
Trump signs an executive order mandating proof of U.S. citizenship to vote. This action immediately sparks a firestorm of debate, raising questions about its legality, its practicality, and its potential impact on the upcoming elections. Many immediately point out that the Constitution assigns the power to regulate elections to the states, not the federal government. This executive order seems to directly contradict this established principle of states’ rights, a point often emphasized by those who support the order’s intended goals.
The practicality of the order is also heavily questioned. Many wonder how such a requirement would be enforced, especially considering the diverse documentation Americans possess, and the variations in how states manage voter registration and verification processes.… Continue reading
President Trump’s new executive order, imposing a proof-of-citizenship requirement for voter registration and threatening penalties for states counting late ballots, has sparked immediate backlash from Democrats and voting rights advocates. Legal experts deem the order unlawful, an abuse of executive power potentially disenfranchising millions of voters, and a blatant attempt to reshape election administration. The ACLU and other prominent legal groups have pledged to challenge the order in court, anticipating extensive legal battles. Critics argue the order is an unconstitutional power grab designed to undermine the 2026 midterm elections.
Read More
President Trump’s sweeping executive order seeks to dramatically expand federal control over elections, potentially disenfranchising millions of voters. The order attempts to restrict voter registration, punish states allowing late-arriving ballots, and utilize federal databases to review state voter rolls, ostensibly to combat rare instances of non-citizen voting. This action is expected to face immediate legal challenges, with several Democratic officials already vowing to sue. The order also directs changes to voter registration procedures and voting system certifications, significantly altering the EAC’s role. Critics argue the order is a politically motivated attempt to suppress voter turnout.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood