Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Democratic National Committee’

Leftists Bragged About ‘Fortifying’ The 2020 Election. Now They’re Flaunting Plans To Do It Again In 2024


BY: BRIANNA LYMAN | MARCH 27, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/03/27/leftists-bragged-about-fortifying-the-2020-election-now-theyre-flaunting-plans-to-do-it-again-in-2024/

President Joe Biden at his inaugural address

Author Brianna Lyman profile

BRIANNA LYMAN

VISIT ON TWITTER@BRIANNALYMAN2

MORE ARTICLES

Leftists bragged about how they “fortified” the 2020 election against Trump. Now the same “democracy is at stake” shills are flaunting their plans for 2024, and they sound awfully familiar.

Democrats are already sowing seeds of distrust — and perhaps projection — with an unnamed source whispering to Rolling Stone that Biden “has been worried … that Donald Trump is going to try to steal the election.”

“Biden and his inner circle have been drawing up meticulous plans and creating a large legal network focused on wargaming a close election finish,” wrote Rolling Stone’s Asawin Suebsaeng and Adam Rawnsley, citing undisclosed Democratic operatives who fret about a contested 2024 election. “Team Biden has been conducting war games, crafting complex legal strategies, and devoting extensive resources to prepare for, as one former senior Biden administration official puts it, ‘all-hell-breaks-loose’ scenarios.”

Biden’s legal team is reportedly “preparing legal strategies for scenarios involving recounts that would make, in the words of one Biden official, ‘make Florida in 2000 look like child’s play.’”

Biden’s team has partnered with a “vast network of liberal attorneys and legal groups” that have already drafted pleadings and motions for any kind of election-related fight. Biden’s team is also reportedly working with local law firms to “actively monitor what is happening on the ground” in key swing states like Georgia, Arizona, and Pennsylvania — all of which Biden narrowly won just four years ago, and all of which saw their elections plagued by chaos, scandal, and a lack of transparency in 2020.

A representative for the Democratic National Committee told Rolling Stone the party has also set aside “tens of millions of dollars in a robust voter protection program to safeguard the rights of voters.”

Rolling Stone all but dismisses the possibility that Trump could defeat Biden outright in 2024 — making the bizarre claim that winning would be “almost irrelevant” to the Trump team’s goals — and instead treats a razor-thin Biden victory as the assumed scenario. Noticeably absent from the article is a discussion of what happens if Trump wins narrowly. Would Biden graciously concede? Rolling Stone appears to be telegraphing that he has no plans to.

Campaign Strategy: Bidenbucks and Lawfare

The Biden administration has been working overtime to tilt the balance of the electorate since taking office. One way they’ve done this is by funneling taxpayer dollars into initiatives meant to increase voter turnout — specifically voters who will likely vote blue.

Soon after taking office, Biden issued Executive Order 14019, which directs federal agencies to use taxpayer funds to interfere in elections, including by voter outreach targeted at likely-Democrat voters. The Department of Education, for example, recently released a “toolkit” that gives guidance to K-12 institutions recommending schools “determine if [their] state allows pre-registration for individuals under 18 years old and, if so, identify opportunities for high school students to do so.”

[READ NEXT: 2024 Is Shaping Up To Be The ‘We Were Right About Everything’ Election]

Meanwhile the Department of Health and Human Services’ Indian Health Service began collaborating with left-wing groups like the ACLU and Demos to register new voters, according to a report from The Daily Signal. As my colleague Shawn Fleetwood has noted, “voter registration efforts are almost always a partisan venture.”

Perhaps the cherry on top is Democrats’ use of lawfare to weaponize the justice system against Trump.

Both Trump and Biden have been accused of mishandling classified documents. The former, who can make an argument for having presidential power to declassify documents, has been dragged into court by the Biden Justice Department, which has the goal of putting him in prison at worst and draining his campaign of time and money at best. The latter, who apparently mishandled classified documents while senator and vice president, was allowed to skate after a special counsel declined to prosecute because “It would be difficult to convince a jury” to convict the memory-challenged Biden of “a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”

Déjà Vu All Over Again

Rolling Stone’s glowing feature of the “superstructure” Biden is amassing to control the 2024 election aftermath should sound familiar. During the months leading up to the 2020 election, corporate media, Democrat lawmakers, and left-wing operatives conspired to influence the election, as Time Magazine’s national political correspondent Molly Ball glowingly acknowledged afterward.

There’s every reason to expect the same, and more, in 2024.

Ball acknowledged that when Trump pointed out the 2020 election was rife with election integrity issues, he “was right” that “there was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes.” She described the collusion as “a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information.” But, as my colleague Joy Pullmann pointed out, Trump was lambasted for raising these exact same points. A smear campaign continues to this day by Democrats who seek to use the nonsense pejorative of “election denier” to forestall Trump’s ability to call out their election rigging.

[READ NEXT: Democrats Deployed Their Top Election Riggers To Tip The Scales In 2024]

As Ball approvingly noted, members of the “conspiracy” “got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding” — e.g., hundreds of millions of dollars from billionaire Mark Zuckerberg that were funneled into election offices by left-wing groups. They “recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time,” Ball bragged.

But the mass mail-in balloting scheme was rife with risks that even the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) acknowledged. CISA warned of “major challenges” associated with mail-in voting including the “process of mailing and returning ballots,” “high numbers of improperly completed ballots,” and “the shortage of personnel to process ballots in a prompt manner.”

Then there was Big Tech actively working to stifle negative coverage of Biden, most infamously by censoring the bombshell Hunter Biden laptop story just weeks before Election Day. One study found some Democrat voters in key swing states would not have voted for Biden had they had access to the story alleging Biden’s involvement with his son’s corrupt business dealings.

Ball seemed to applaud this effort, writing how the conspiracy “successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears.”

Meanwhile Big Tech companies like Meta — the parent company of Facebook — are discussing ways to “protect” the electoral system by manipulating algorithms, newsfeeds, and recommendations to users. In 2020, Facebook throttled circulation of the Hunter Biden laptop story.

In addition to peddling lies about Trump and blacking out the bombshell evidence implicating Biden that was discovered on his son’s laptop, corporate media also played a role by being a conduit for Democrat operatives’ narrative that election results should not be expected on election night. Privately, Biden’s operatives had polling data suggesting mainstream polls were not reflecting Trump’s true support amongst voters — indicating that Trump would be decisively winning on Election Day. A top “conspiracy” leader reportedly warned “everyone he knew that polls were underestimating Trump’s support,” Ball explained.

The unnamed individual reportedly went to corporate media networks and got them to push the narrative that election results should be expected to be delayed, which conveniently laid the groundwork for a “surge” of mail-in ballots counted late at night and after Election Day to push Biden over the edge.

“Election night began with many Democrats despairing,” Ball wrote. “Trump was running ahead of pre-election polling, winning Florida, Ohio and Texas easily and keeping Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania too close to call.”

But Ball said the “conspiracy” leader was unphased about the nail-biter results: “he could tell that as long as all the votes were counted, Trump would lose.”

As Pullmann wrote, “Amazing projection skills, right?”

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Saving Democracy from Itself: The Democratic National Committee Moves to Block Third Party Candidates


By: Jonathan Turley | March 26, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/03/26/saving-democracy-from-itself-the-democratic-national-committee-moves-to-block-third-party-candidates/

Below is my column in the New York Post on a reported plan of the Democratic National Committee and allied groups to try to block third-party candidates from the 2024 ballot. The contradiction is stunning as these groups raise money to “save democracy” by limiting democratic choice. In the meantime, the leading third-party candidate Robert Kennedy, Jr. will be reportedly announcing his running mate this week.

Here is the column:

The last time that the Chicago Democratic Convention was held in Chicago in 1968, the resulting riots led to one of the greatest Freudian slips in American politics. Mayor Richard Daley declared “the policeman isn’t there to create disorder; the policeman is there to preserve disorder.” The Democratic National Committee has now added its own gem: the Democratic Party is not here to preserve democracy, it is here to prevent democracy.

That’s because the DNC is seeking to block third party candidates from ballots — Robert Kennedy Jr., Cornell West, and Jill Stein. All three are liberal and are considered a threat to Joe Biden. This effort will likely include any ticket put forward by the No Labels group, seeking a moderate alternative to the two parties.

Mary Beth Cahill, the former interim DNC CEO, and long-time DNC staffer Ramsey Reid  will lead this effort. According to media reports, former Buttigieg campaign aide Lis Smith will lead the effort with another Buttigieg alumni, Matt Corridoni. This effort includes not just a public campaign against Kennedy and Stein as spoilers, but “legal action” to solve the problem by denying voters a choice.

The media does not appear at all alarmed or critical of the effort to limit democratic choice. The Washington Post stated clinically “Democrats are taking third-party threats seriously this time.” Taking it seriously appears to mean using legal means to keep them from the ballots.

It is true that the main political parties have challenged qualification signatures and paperwork in the past. However, the reports indicate a systemic effort geared toward reducing the choices for voters. What is striking is that this is coming from democratic groups and the DNC, which are raising money on the “save democracy” narrative.

The contradiction is spellbinding. On the same sites promising to oppose the third party candidates, the DNC and other groups push the narrative that only the Democrats are working to protect the right to vote.

The Post reports that Democrats have studied the Hillary Clinton campaign and vowed not to allow third party candidates to drain away millions of voters as they did in 2016. Of course, the comparison is particularly telling because in both 2016 and 2024, the DNC chose the least popular Democratic candidates. Polls showed that Clinton was the worst possible candidate for the party, but the Clintons had control over the DNC and state party organizations.

Of particular concern is the fact that Trump beat Hillary Clinton in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan by only 67,000 votes. In just those states, Libertarian Gary Johnson and the Green Party’s Stein received more than half a million votes.

Rather than actually pick a candidate that most citizens want, the DNC wants to replay the 2016 strategy of forcing the choice between two evils in a Biden-Trump choice. That can only work reliably if there is no other choice for citizens tired of the duopoly and the political (and media) establishment. So Kennedy, Cornell, and Stein just have to go.

I am one of those misguided voters. Years ago, I wrote a column saying that I was tired of voting for the lesser of two evils — leaving every election as a moral hazard. I am prepared to vote for candidates from the two main parties in any given election, but I will only vote for the candidate who I believe is the best of candidates to be president. We are played as chumps by a political and media establishment in every election system. Over two decades ago, I pledged to vote for the best candidate, even if they are with a third party.

The DNC is reportedly to be joined in this effort by a well-financed array of groups including the liberal think tank Third Way (which has filed complaints with secretaries of states); American Bridge (a Democratic opposition operation), and Clear Choice (a super PAC composed of “allies of President Biden”). While these groups work to limit the choice of voters, the effort continues in Florida, Georgia, Washington, and New York to keep Trump in court until the election, including a possible trial running up to or even through the election. There is hope that this multi-front effort will be the winning ticket, particularly if the ultimate ticket denies voters any other choice.

The open discussion of these efforts in the media illustrates the contempt for voters, who need to be protected from their bad choices. I have previously compared the underlying assumptions to a type of electoral Big Gulp law. Before they were also struck down, these laws sought to take away the dietary choices of citizens because they were making the wrong choice in the view of experts. Activists are now big gulping the election. Voters cannot be trusted with something as important as democracy.

President Biden has said “make no mistake: Democracy is on the ballot for all of us.” Of course, he could end this effort by denouncing further ballot cleansing (something he refused to do when Trump was removed by the Colorado and Maine ballots). It appears that the last thing that democracy needs is free democratic choice.

Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

The DNC Is Engaged In ‘Unlawful Voter Suppression’ Ahead Of Primaries, New Hampshire AG Says


BY: SHAWN FLEETWOOD | JANUARY 10, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/01/10/the-dnc-is-engaged-in-unlawful-voter-suppression-ahead-of-primaries-new-hampshire-ag-says/

'Welcome to New Hampshire' sign.

The office of New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella issued a cease-and-desist order to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) on Monday after the committee purportedly violated the state’s voter suppression laws.

On Jan. 5, the co-chairs of the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee submitted a letter to the New Hampshire Democratic Party (NHDP) demanding the state party comply with DNC guidance to “take steps to educate the public that January 23rd” — the date set for the jurisdiction’s Democrat presidential primary — “is a non-binding presidential preference event and is meaningless and the NHDP and presidential candidates should take all steps possible not to participate.”

The memo came nearly a year after the DNC passed a new early presidential primary calendar for 2024. The updated calendar, supported by President Biden, sought to make South Carolina the first state on the Democrat presidential primary schedule. While Iowa and New Hampshire, respectively, have historically marked the first electoral contests in the presidential primary process for both major political parties, the DNC’s decision to schedule South Carolina first was, as NBC News described, due to Iowa’s caucuses being viewed as “too white and too undemocratic.”

Someone needs to press the DNC for some definitions, like their definition of “democracy.” They through around the term so much, and the context of what they’re saying does not match the 200 plus years definition of democracy. And while you’re at it, what in the world does, “too white and too undemocratic” mean?

Despite state law mandating New Hampshire host a presidential primary “7 days or more immediately preceding the date on which any other state shall hold a similar election,” the DNC told the NHDP that the Jan. 23 primary scheduled by the New Hampshire secretary of state “cannot be used as the first determining stage of the state’s delegate selection process and is considered detrimental.” The guidance further informed the state party that no “delegates or alternates shall be apportioned” and no “scheduling of events related to the selection of delegates or alternates in New Hampshire may be” based on the Jan. 23 election.

HUH????????

In his cease-and-desist order to the DNC, Assistant Attorney General Brendan O’Donnell underscored how “[f]alsely telling New Hampshire voters that a New Hampshire election is ‘meaningless’ violates New Hampshire voter suppression laws,” and further ordered the organization to stop engaging in such “unlawful” conduct.

“Regardless of whether the DNC refuses to award delegates to the party’s national convention based on the results of the January 23, 2024, New Hampshire [D]emocratic Presidential Primary Election, that election is not ‘meaningless.’ Your statements to the contrary are false, deceptive, and misleading,” O’Donnell wrote. “Telling the public or any person qualified to register to vote or vote in New Hampshire that the [aforementioned election] is ‘meaningless,’ or soliciting NHDP or any other party to make such statements, constitutes an attempt to prevent or deter another person from voting or registering to vote based on fraudulent, deceptive, misleading, or spurious grounds or information.”

O’Donnell further warned the DNC that he reserved the right to pursue further legal action.

It’s worth mentioning that the DNC’s decision to hold South Carolina’s primary before the party’s Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary is designed to benefit Biden. During the 2020 Democrat presidential primary cycle, the Delaware Democrat lost both Iowa and New Hampshire, finishing fourth and fifth, respectively. It was his dominating victory in South Carolina’s primary that put Biden on track to become Democrats’ 2020 presidential nominee.

Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Author Shawn Fleetwood profile

SHAWN FLEETWOOD

VISIT ON TWITTER@SHAWNFLEETWOOD

MORE ARTICLES

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Trump Refused To Prosecute Hillary Clinton. Democrats Have No Such Restraint


BY: JOY PULLMANN | APRIL 03, 2023

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2023/04/03/trump-refused-to-prosecute-hillary-clinton-democrats-have-no-such-restraint/

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton
If it is indeed ending democracy to jail political opponents, let’s be clear about which party is dragging the nation down that route.

Author Joy Pullmann profile

JOY PULLMANN

VISIT ON TWITTER@JOYPULLMANN

MORE ARTICLES

Bill and Hillary Clinton’s long, crooked political careers have been marked by multiple well-established high crimes and misdemeanors. Not the least of these was Hillary’s decision to commit what amounts to multiple felonies by using an insecure private email system to conduct top-secret public business while U.S. secretary of state under Barack Obama.

This criminal behavior that so-called U.S. justice systems openly and repeatedly refused to punish was undertaken to hide treasonous actions. Those include selling political access and favors to foreign adversaries, as journalist Peter Schweizer and others, including The Federalist and members of Congress, have repeatedly and thoroughly documented.

Selling political favors to foreign opponents, including communist China and authoritarian Russia, is clearly treason. The American Heritage Dictionary defines “treason” as: “The betrayal of allegiance toward one’s own country, especially by committing hostile acts against it or aiding its enemies in committing such acts.” The Clintons got filthy rich from it.

Clinton then compounded that with more treasonous conduct when she lost the 2016 election to Donald Trump.

It is by now well-established that Hillary Clinton’s campaign paid various actors to lie to U.S. intelligence agencies about Trump in an operation that eventually essentially negated the 2016 election — including encouraging federal employees’ treasonous behavior and two falsely predicated impeachments — and helped lose Republicans the 2020 election. Her campaign even tacitly confirmed this by paying a slap-on-the-wrist Federal Election Commission fine while still refusing to admit guilt for it a few weeks ago, seven years after the fact.

Did FBI agents ever show up at Hillary Clinton’s house over her clearly criminal and treasonous “documents dispute”? Nope. The FBI’s director instead essentially confirmed she had committed multiple felonies but decided not to investigate or prosecute her for it because she was a presidential candidate for a major political party.

Hillary paid to have Trump falsely smeared as a traitor, laundering the slander through U.S. agencies that are supposed to provide equal justice under the law but now function as weapons to damage Democrats’ political opposition. In conjunction with others in the Obama administration that likely include Obama himself, she colluded with multiple security-state agencies to slander, undermine, hamper, and now threaten with jail time Democrats’ top political opponent.

That’s treason. It’s election erasure. It’s ongoing. And these traitors are all running about totally scot-free, while they jail their political opponents for what at best are misdemeanors, and for which they refuse to prosecute anyone on the left who perpetrates them — from street rioters all the way up to their presidential candidates.

My colleague Elle Purnell pointed out that when Trump countenanced chants of “lock her up” at his rallies over Clinton’s never-penalized repeat criminal behavior, Democrats lost their minds, and insisted this was the stuff of dictatorships, tyranny, and political repression.

“Dictatorships lock up the opposition, not democracies,” said Spygate intelligence official Michael McFaul. “Since when do Americans advocate jailing political opponents?” said top Spygate propagandist Julia Ioffe, then at Politico.

“In a democracy, you can’t threaten to jail your opponents,” Obama said in 2016. “We have fought against those kinds of things.” “In America, we don’t send our political opponents to jail,” tweeted an official Democratic National Committee Twitter account.

The Clintons are clearly traitors willing to endanger their nation for profit, and it would be fully just to prosecute them as such. Yet as president when he had the chance, Trump decided not to pursue it. According to Trump Attorney General Bill Barr’s recently published memoir, “Trump brought up the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails and surprised Barr by saying that he had wanted the matter to be dropped after the 2016 election,” according to a review of Barr’s memoir in the fall 2022 Claremont Review of Books.

“‘Even if she were guilty,’ he told Barr, “for the election winner to seek prosecution of the loser would make the country look like a ‘banana republic.’”

Ever since riding down his golden escalator, Trump has been ceaselessly vilified as a tinpot dictator, an evil supervillain, an authoritarian, the second coming of Adolf Hitler. But Democrats cannot change the facts, which include that Trump had fully legitimate justification to prosecute his horribly corrupt political opponent and refused to do so. They can make no such argument for themselves.

So, if it is indeed the stuff of banana republics and ending democracies to jail one’s political opponents, let’s all be clear about which political party is dragging the nation down that route. And let all in authority who care about equal justice under the law begin fiercely applying Democrats’ standards to them until they stop perverting justice to destroy our country.

The no-holds-barred legal shutdown and prosecution of leftist insurrectionists filling state capitols in support of a transgender child murderer would be one such proportionate response.

Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of six children. Her just-published ebook is “101 Strategies For Living Well Amid Inflation.” Her bestselling ebook is “Classic Books for Young Children.” Mrs. Pullmann identifies as native American and gender natural. Her many books include “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books. Joy is also a grateful graduate of the Hillsdale College honors and journalism programs.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Republicans Can’t Beat Democrats’ Election-Industrial Complex By Adopting Its Strategies


BY: JOSEPH ARLINGHAUS AND WILLIAM DOYLE, PH.D. | MARCH 16, 2023

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2023/03/16/republicans-cant-beat-democrats-election-industrial-complex-by-adopting-its-strategies/

ballot box
The sudden rise of well-funded election activist nonprofits represents a paradigm shift away from persuading and motivating voters, and toward manipulating the election process to benefit Democrats.

Author Joseph Arlinghaus and William Doyle, Ph.D. profile

JOSEPH ARLINGHAUS AND WILLIAM DOYLE, PH.D.

MORE ARTICLES

Over the last several months, a growing number of Republicans, including Donald Trump himself, seem to be having a change of heart about universal mail-in voting and ballot harvesting.

While few Republicans are ready to completely abandon policies that support election integrity and transparency, more and more seem willing to follow the old adage “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em,” and suggest that Republicans become significantly more reliant on universal mail-in voting and ballot harvesting to win elections. There is no worse idea in politics today.

Conservatives do not have the institutional or financial support to match Democrats in election activism and ballot harvesting, nor are they likely to be able to any time in the near future. The advantages Democrats have accrued over the last 20 years in election manipulation and “lawfare” are nearly insurmountable.

But this is not necessarily a portent of gloom and doom. The growing number of ultra-left Democratic candidates are deeply unpopular and would be unelectable outside deep-blue areas under the election norms that prevailed prior to the Covid-19 lockdowns and the 2020 presidential election.

Democrats’ performance in 2020 and 2022 would almost certainly have been far worse under conditions that involved persuading voters to go to the polls on Election Day, rather than relying on a complex web of wealthy nonprofits and armies of election activists to churn out mountains of mail-in ballots, submitted by indifferent voters, during greatly extended early voting periods.

Raw Institutional Power

Republicans need to better understand the vast institutional power that is arrayed against them on the left in the form of lavishly funded 501(c)(3) nonprofits and charitable foundations, along with legions of election lawyers, data analysts, and election activists.

Consider the shadowy Arabella Advisors, a nonprofit consulting company that guides the strategy, advocacy, impact investing, and management for high-dollar, left-leaning nonprofits and individuals. Arabella provides these clients a number of services that enable them to enact policies focused on left-of-center issues such as election administration and “voting rights.”

Arabella Advisors also manages five nonprofits that serve as incubators and accelerators for a range of other left-of-center nonprofits: the New Venture Fund, the Sixteen Thirty Fund, the Hopewell Fund, the Windward Fund, and the North Fund. The New Venture Fund was the second-largest contributor, behind Mark Zuckerberg, to the Center for Tech and Civic Life in 2020. The Sixteen Thirty Fund spent $410 million during the 2020 election cycle, which was more than the Democratic National Committee spent.

These nonprofits have collectively supported hundreds of left-wing policy and advocacy organizations since the network’s creation. In 2020, Arabella’s nonprofit network boasted total revenues exceeding $1.67 billion and total expenditures of $1.26 billion and paid out $896 million in grants largely to other left-leaning and politically active nonprofits.

There is no comparable organization with anything close to this level of financial clout in the Republican world.

Beneath philanthropic foundations and holding companies such as Arabella, there is a world of left-of-center 501(c)(3) nonprofits focused on elections. The Caesar Rodney Election Research Institute has identified at least ten 501(c)(3) nonprofits that we believe played key roles in the 2020 election on behalf of the Democrat Party.

These groups were already in place and ready to implement strategies calculated to give Democrats an electoral advantage long before state-by-state legal barnstorming transformed the norms of American voting systems in the name of Covid-19.

Some of these groups are mainly policy-oriented, focused on increasing Democrat votes by promoting vote-by-mail, ballot drop box initiatives, extended early voting periods, and the relaxation of voting standards such as voter ID. These organizations ranged from local efforts such as the New Georgia Project to national projects like Democracy Works, The Voter Project, and the National Vote at Home Institute.

Another group of nonprofits sprang into action in 2020 to finance the implementation of the Democrats’ election agenda, including hiring new personnel, voter canvassing, ballot harvesting, new election infrastructure such as ballot drop boxes, targeted public relations campaigns, and expensive ballot “curing” efforts.

These organizations, which ended up spending well more than $400 million in 2020, include the now infamous Mark Zuckerberg-funded Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), the Center for Secure and Modern Elections (CSME), and the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR), among others. Once again, there is no similar complex of election-oriented institutions in the Republican world.

Democrats’ ‘Election-Industrial Complex’

These organizations are not arms of political campaigns nor “dark money” partisan advocacy groups, both of which are normal parts of the traditional electoral process. They have nothing to do with persuading voters or “getting out the vote” in the traditional sense, but are instead devoted to gaining an advantage for Democrat candidates by changing election laws, manipulating the election process, and promoting new voting technologies.

This complex web of lavishly funded nonprofits and foundations is not just large and extremely powerful: It is without comparison on the right.

The institutions that support the left’s election activism are so large and so powerful, one might refer to them as an “election-industrial complex.” Election activism is a multi-billion-dollar per year business in the world of Democratic Party politics.

“ELECTION-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX“

The Democrats’ election-industrial complex burst into full view in 2020 with CTCL’s $332 million Covid-19 Response Grant Project, funded almost entirely by Facebook founder Zuckerberg, which was aimed at gaining control of election offices in areas that were critical to Democrat campaigns in 2020 through large, “strings attached” grants.

The bulk of that money was spent in a sophisticated effort to increase turnout among a specific profile of voter in order to benefit Democrat candidates. All large CTCL grant recipients were required to “encourage and increase absentee voting” mainly through providing “assistance” in absentee ballot completion and the installation of ballot drop boxes, and to “dramatically expand strategic voter education & outreach efforts, particularly to historically disenfranchised residents.”

It has yet to sink in among many Republicans that the CTCL, and the myriad other election activist nonprofits they partnered with in 2020 to carry out their plans, represent a substantively different challenge than Democrats outspending Republicans in conventional election spending. 

The sudden rise to prominence of these institutions represents a paradigm shift in the way elections are organized, away from persuading and motivating voters, and toward manipulating the election process, introducing new voting rules, and supporting voting technologies that benefit Democrats and handicap Republicans.

This is the paradigm that many Republicans now propose to embrace, with virtually no institutional or financial support.

Conservatives Must Rebuild Classic Electoral Norms

Conservatives are supposed to be involved in conserving things, and there are few things more worth conserving than the U.S. election system as it has existed throughout most of American history. U.S. elections used to be the envy of the world even 10 years ago, but since then have deteriorated to the point where a large and growing proportion of the population views election results with deep skepticism.

Viewing the grotesque Covid-19 era distortions in the present electoral landscape as an unalterable fait accompli means abandoning our election system to a vast institutional complex that seeks to make the voting booth a relic and Election Day an anachronism.

Even worse, the left’s election-industrial complex seeks to reshape voting into a private activity, to be undertaken at home at the initiative of community organizers and activists, as opposed to a public activity that takes place in a neutral public square, and which relies on the initiative of the voters. In the liberal election utopia, the sanctity of the voting booth and the secret ballot must give way to the collective intimacy of the kitchen table and the oversight of neighborhood political bosses.

For Republican activists to commit to a long-term strategy of universal mail-in voting and ballot harvesting would not only be a losing proposition from a practical standpoint, it would also contribute even further toward the transformation of our political system away from the control of civically engaged voters, and toward the consolidation of control in the hands of a small cadre of partisan activists and community organizers, as well as their numerous partners in the nonprofit world and administrative state.

There is a larger argument to be made, that universal absentee ballots and ballot harvesting must be opposed, not just from a practical standpoint, but also from a moral and philosophical point of view.  We will have much more to say in the future about how universal mail-in ballots represent an objectively disordered way of deciding elections, which must therefore be unconditionally opposed.  

Joseph Arlinghaus is the president and founder of Valor America, a conservative federal election SuperPAC founded in 2016 to use the latest social science research and randomized controlled election experiments that revolutionized the Democratic election world after 2005. He serves on the advisory board to the Caesar Rodney Election Research Institute. William Doyle, Ph.D., is research director at the Caesar Rodney Election Research Institute. He specializes in economic history and the private funding of American elections.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

87,000 New IRS Agents Will Join Union That Gives 100% Of PAC Funds to Democrats


BY: VICTORIA MARSHALL | AUGUST 10, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/08/10/87000-new-irs-agents-will-join-union-that-gives-100-of-pac-funds-to-democrats/

Internal Revenue Service

Democrats just doubled the size of a major Democratic war chest. Yes, remember those 87,000 new IRS agents that will be added to the federal payroll thanks to the Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act (a misnomer if there ever was one)? The vast majority of those agents will likely join and pay dues to the IRS’ public sector union, the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU).

Per Americans for Tax Reform, the union gave 100% of its Political Action Committee (PAC) funding to Democrats for the 2022 cycle, including $30,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, $30,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and $30,000 to the DNC Services Corporation, a group dedicated to “coordinating party organizational activities.”

It also gave 98.79% of its federal candidate spending for the 2021-2022 cycle to Democrats, most notably House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). The NTEU specifically prioritized donating to key Democratic battleground races, such as donating $5,000 to Raphael Warnock’s Georgia Senate race and $10,000 to Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.). 

And that’s not all. In 2019, it was reported that IRS employees spent 353,820 hours of taxpayer-funded union time (TFUT) on the job. That means during a normal workday, instead of assisting taxpayers with filing their taxes, IRS agents spent hours working for an entity that spends 100% of its PAC funding on Democrats. This is an organization where if you call them, you have a 1-in-50 chance of reaching an actual human being. Those 353,820 hours could have been used to help taxpayers instead of strengthening a public sector union. 

As Aaron Withe, CEO of Freedom Foundation, put it, taxpayer dollars are being used to “double the size of an agency that has already weaponized itself against those taxpayers it deems its political opponents.”

By doubling the size of the IRS, Democrats are doubling the number of dues the NTEU receives, dues that will be funneled to bankroll Democratic political campaigns. NTEU dues range from $16 to $23 per pay period. If all 87,000 new IRS agents were forced to unionize, the number of dues collected would amount to at least $33,351,168 per year — all ripe for the taking by Democrats. How clever.

Victoria Marshall is a staff writer at The Federalist. Her writing has been featured in the New York Post, National Review, and Townhall. She graduated from Hillsdale College in May 2021 with a major in politics and a minor in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @vemrshll.

Author Victoria Marshall profile

VICTORIA MARSHALL

VISIT ON TWITTER@VEMRSHLL

MORE ARTICLES

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

DNC Chair Tom Perez: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ‘the Future of Our Party’


Reported by Joshua Caplan | 3 Jul 2018

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/03/dnc-chair-tom-perez-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-the-future-of-our-party/

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the winner of the Democratic primary victory in New York's 14th Congressional District, speaks during press interviews, Wednesday, June 27, 2018, in New York. Ocasio-Cortez, 28, upset U.S. Rep. Joe Crowley in Tuesday's election. , Wednesday June 27, 2018, in New York. (AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews)

AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews

Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez told progressive radio host Bill Press Tuesday that Democratic-socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is “the future of our party.”

Transcript as follows:

PRESS: “There was a primary in several states — your state, home state of Maryland — and also up in New York, where the fourth most powerful Democrat in the United States Congress — Congressman Joe Crowley — was knocked out by a young woman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Twenty-eight years old, never ran for office before. Big progressive — calls herself a Democratic Socialist, actually. Sort of like Bernie Sanders did. She was a Bernie Sanders supporter. And in Maryland, Ben Jealous — another strong progressive wins the nomination of governor. What’s this tell you about where the Democratic Party is going today?”

PEREZ: “Well, my daughters —I have three kids — two of whom — one just graduated college, one is in college and they were both texting me about their excitement over Alexandria. She represents the future of our party. She ran a spirited campaign. I have great respect for Joe Crowley. Joe Crowley is a good Democrat — one of the sponsors of the Medicare for all bill.”

Ocasio-Cortez is a dues-paying member of Democratic Socialists of America’s New York City chapter, which recently called to “abolish prisons” and “abolish profit.”

The candidate has not endorsed or disavowed on those far-left goals, but her campaign platform does call for abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), establishing universal guaranteed employment, and single-payer healthcare — i.e., “Medicare for all.”

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

New DNC Chair Tom Perez Booed At Reboot Tour


waving flagdisclaimerReported by Photo of Peter Hasson Peter Hasson | Associate Editor | 9:16 PM 04/17/2017

URL of the original posting site:  http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/new-dnc-chair-tom-perez-booed-at-dnc-reboot-tour/#ixzz4ed9nTyqs

REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

New Democratic National Committee chair Tom Perez received a rude welcome at the DNC’s “Come Together Fight Back” tour stop in Portland, Maine.

“Regardless of why you showed up today, you showed up for a reason. Something compelled you to find the space and time to be here, and I want you to ask yourself what that reason is,” Claire Cummings, a leader of the Maine Young Democrats, told the crowd.

“Maybe it’s because you love a certain senator from Vermont,” Cummings said, referring to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. The crowd roared with approval at the mention of Sanders’ name and started chanting his name.

“Maybe you came though because you’re curious about the new DNC chairman and the future of the Democratic party,” Cummings said, referring to Perez.

 

This, time, however, the crowd reacted with boos and a few scattered cheers, prompting Cummings to react with surprise before continuing.

Perez, the former Obama labor secretary who is regarded as belonging to the Democratic establishment, defeated Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison — a left-wing Bernie Sanders supporter — in February for the DNC chair. The DNC chair race was largely emblematic of the party divide between moderate, pro-Hillary Clinton Democrats and left-wing, pro-Sanders progressives.

WATCH:

Follow Hasson on Twitter

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Struggling DNC craves tax dollars for convention


waving flagBy Stephen Dinan – The Washington Times – Sunday, December 13, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/13/dnc-craves-tax-dollars-for-convention

Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who is also a congresswoman from Florida, has drafted a bill to restore money that both parties used to receive from the federal government to help defray the costs of running their quadrennial conventions. (Associated Press)Already struggling with finances, the Democratic Party has drafted a plan to have taxpayers help pay about $20 million for next summer’s nominating convention, reversing a change Congress approved just a year ago.

Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who is also a congresswoman from Florida, has drafted a bill to restore money that both parties used to receive from the federal government to help defray the costs of running their quadrennial conventions.

The Congressional Budget Office revealed the move in a letter released Friday, which said Ms. Wasserman Schultz’s proposal to tap a presidential campaign fund would likely mean each party could get about $20 million in taxpayer money to help with costs.

The DNC is facing tough financial circumstances. The latest report shows it had just $4.7 million in cash on hand as of Oct. 31, less than the $6.9 million in debts the committee reported. By contrast, the Republican National Committee reported $20.4 million in cash, offset by $1.9 million in debts.

Neither the DNC nor Ms. Wasserman Schultz’s congressional office returned messages seeking comment on her plans.

Republican National Committee spokeswoman Allison Moore said the party doesn’t need the help.

“We support no taxpayer funding as long as there’s an alternate way for us to raise the funds to mount a successful convention,” she said in an email.

It was only last year when lawmakers nixed money for the conventions, deciding the political parties and their presidential nominees — who each raised $1 billion in 2012 — didn’t need help from taxpayers anymore. Congress instead called for the money to be used to finance research on children’s diseases at the National Institutes of Health.

Months after the change, however, the two parties began to worry that they wouldn’t be able to pay for their conventions. Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress struck a deal to raise the contribution limits so donors could give nearly $100,000 to convention funds, in addition to other contributions, whose limits were also raised.

Republicans appear to have done better under the new rules than the DNC, which has a troubled financial picture. It has raised $51.2 million this year through Oct. 31 but spent $53.4 million — a bad balance in the year before major elections.

The RNC has raised $89.3 million and spent $74 million. It has stockpiled $20.4 million in cash.

The CBO said Ms. Wasserman Schultz’s legislation would tap into the Presidential Election Campaign Fund — the money taxpayers can earmark on their annual filing forms to help defray the costs of presidential campaigns — and make it available to political conventions.

President Obama and his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, rejected public financing in 2012. Both candidates decided that they didn’t want to comply with the strict spending limits, which they feared would crimp their ability to flood the airwaves with ads.

That has left the presidential fund with about $290 million. The CBO said that, based on spending in the 2012 conventions, each party likely would get about $20 million under the congresswoman’s proposal.

Based on previous conventions, that would amount to about a quarter of the total cost.

The ban on funding for conventions doesn’t apply to security money. Congress has earmarked about $50 million to help defray costs to state and local law enforcement for securing each convention site since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Democrats will gather next year in Philadelphia, and Republicans will hold their convention in Cleveland.

Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

BREAKING: Obama Issues Chilling Threat to Christians Across America… Spread This Everywhere


URL of the original posting site: http://conservativetribune.com/obama-issues-chilling-threat/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=TeaPartyNewsletter&utm_campaign=AM1&utm_content=2015-09-29

 Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

Once Pope Francis boarded a plane back to the Vatican, President cp 11Barack Obama wasted not time getting back to business as usual — attacking religious freedom. On Sunday night, at a Democratic National Committee-sponsored event in New York City billed as an “LGBT gala,” Obama took to the podium and warned Christians across the country that their religious freedom means nothing in the face of gay rights.

“We affirm that we cherish our religious freedom and are profoundly respectful of religious traditions,” the POTUS said. “But we also have to say clearly that our religious freedom doesn’t grant us the freedom to deny our fellow Americans their constitutional rights.”

Obama patronized Christians and Christian groups about their “genuine concerns,” but ultimately suggested that the issue was being pushed by Republicans who were simply using the concerns to acquire more votes.tyrants

“America has left the leaders of the Republican Party behind,” Obama said during his anti-Christianity speech. He’s made quite a few of those now.Obama Muslim collection

Obama then launched a series of verbal assaults on several GOP presidential candidates, including Dr. Ben Carson, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. “I’m sure he loves the Constitution — except for Article III,” Obama said in a sarcastic tone, referring to Huckabee. “And maybe the Equal Protection Amendment. And 14th Amendment, generally.”

After thoroughly trashing Christians everywhere and essentially promising that their religious liberty would not be recognized under his rule, he called for the LGBT community to remain vigilant and assured them he would continue to fight for “progress.” If this isn’t a clear warning sign for American Christians, we don’t know what is.Big Gay Hate Machine

H/T Breitbart

words of another christian hater tyrants The Lower you go B2A_FvyCMAE14px Alinsky affect In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

President Obama Asks Liberals to Watch the GOP Debate so They See Them Ruin his Hard Work


waving flagPosted by    August 4, 2015

URL of the original posting site: http://www.youngcons.com/president-obama-asks-liberals-to-watch-the-gop-debate-so-they-see-them-ruin-his-hardwork
Obama-Mean

If you thought only Republicans would be watching the GOP debate this Thursday, let me be the first to tell you: Masses of Obamabots will be tuning in from their very own debate watch parties!

Earlier today President Obama ensured that Fox News would receive the entire nation’s attention during the Cleveland debate after he sent an email to the Democratic National Committee requesting that fellow liberals watch the televised event.

From Cleveland.com:

Democrats need to “listen carefully to what the Republican candidates for president say, and then hold them accountable for trying to undo all of the hard work we’ve done to move this country forward,” Obama said in an email message sent today by the Democratic National Committee. 

“I can’t overstate what an important difference you can make by doing this.”

All the hard work? The Golfer-in-Chief actually says stuff like that with a straight face. To be quite frank, Mr. President seems a little bitter…

“I’m gonna bet that they’ll all promise to repeal the Affordable Care Act,” he writes. “They’ll all tell us that even though they aren’t scientists, we shouldn’t believe in the science behind climate change. They’ll all want to reverse course on immigration reform and marriage equality.

“They’re going to deny all of the progress we’ve made together over these past six years,” he adds.

“But here’s the thing: While these Republicans may have bad ideas, they’re still smart politicians. They know how to make policies that will take us in the wrong direction sound like they might actually be pretty good ideas.”

Regardless of the motive behind Obama’s email, I think the Democratic viewers may be enlightened by the debate. Perhaps they’ll finally understand the logic behind some of our policies. Wouldn’t THAT be a miracle?

Thank you for the publicity, Mr. President. I know Fox appreciates you driving more viewers their way.Indenification of Obama

H/T WZ

More Evidence Alinsky affect freedom combo 2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Tag Cloud