By Duncan Smith
While Democrats claim Joe Biden is leading President Donald Trump by ‘double digits’ ahead of a massive blue wave arriving in a couple of weeks, rational Americans just need to ask themselves why, if those to claims are true, would the party push so hard just a few weeks before the elections to change balloting laws in their favor.
Because they are.
In just about every battleground state, Democrats have successfully lobbied like-minded state officials and some friendly federal courts to sign off on changes like expanded mail-in balloting and extended mail-in periods in an obvious attempt to skew the votes in their favor.
Simple: If you push for more widespread mail-in balloting, which has already been problematic, you can flood the system with fake ballots and try to steal victories or, at a minimum, make people doubt that Trump and Republicans won ‘fair and square.’
It’s disgusting what these Democrats are doing, but they’re doing it nonetheless so Republicans are having to play defense.
How’s that going?
Well, there have been mixed results.
The GOP has won some and lost some — and no doubt there will be plenty of cases sent to the soon-to-be-full again Supreme Court, that will decide the fate of several elections.
That said, Republicans won a couple of key court battles on Wednesday, as Reuters reported:
U.S. Republicans scored legal victories on Wednesday when a Supreme Court ruling allowed Alabama to ban curbside voting and an Iowa court upheld a law that makes it harder to fix problems with absentee ballot requests ahead of the Nov. 3 presidential election.
The rulings were a setback to Democrats, whose presidential candidate, Joe Biden, is running a close race against Republican President Donald Trump in Iowa, while Democratic Senator Doug Jones of Alabama is seen at risk of losing his seat in the election, imperiling Democrats' chances of seizing control of the Senate.
In Iowa, the state's top court upheld a state law that makes it harder for county officials to process absentee ballot requests that have missing information.
The law requires that officials contact voters directly to obtain the missing information, rather than use the state's voter registration database to fill in the blanks.
Meanwhile, in Alabama, as NPR notes, it was a no-brainer for the U.S. Supreme Court to block ‘curbside’ voting:
At issue was the decision by the Alabama secretary of state to ban counties from allowing curbside voting, even for those voters with disabilities and those for whom COVID-19 is disproportionately likely to be fatal.
Several at-risk voters challenged the ban at the beginning of May. After a three-day trial, a federal district court ruled that the ban on curbside voting violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, and that a policy allowing but not requiring counties to implement curbside voting was a reasonable accommodation under the law.
A federal appeals court upheld the ruling, and the state appealed to the Supreme Court to block the lower court decision from going into effect. Now the high court has granted the state's request for a stay of the lower court orders.
What’s wrong with curbside voting? Nothing — except that if you can ‘vote by curb’ you can vote in person, one way or another since via the Americans With Disabilities Act, polling places, like everywhere else, have to be accessible. And the ‘but there’s COVID!’ defense is lame; if people can riot or go to Walmart, they can go vote.
President Trump is Breaking Down the Neck of the Federal Reserve!
He wants zero rates and QE4!
You must prepare for the financial reset