There are so many frustrating aspects of this clip from CNN’s Newsnight, but let’s get to the main issue: what the Harris surrogate/Democratic Party mouthpiece/shameless gaslighter said:
I find it ironic where, in 2020, Republicans were screaming at the top of their lungs when people were changing rules because we were in a once-in-a-lifetime global pandemic and we needed to do it to accommodate voters …I want to remove politics from this and talk about people being actually able to exercise the franchise. And it is disenfranchising North Carolina voters right now that they believe they can start voting today and they are not. That is how confusion is disseminated in communities. That is how mis and disinformation starts, that is how you start to see narratives that our system is not working, when you start to let politics play into the role of when people should be able to start voting. Follow the rules. He was on the ballot, he wanted to run, he decided he didn’t want to run, he should have made that decision 6 months ago, but disenfranchising voters is not right.
The issue being discussed is a Democratic Party that was once fighting to keep Robert Kennedy Jr. OFF the ballot in states where the party thought he would draw votes away from Biden is fighting to stop him from removing his name from the ballot because he has dropped out of the race and endorsed Donald Trump. NOW they want him on the ballot because they think he will take votes from Trump.
Yesterday, Michigan’s majority Democratic Supreme Court ruled that RFK Jr. has to stay on the Michigan ballot. Requiring Kennedy’s name to appear on the ballot, the two conservative dissenters wrote, was “improperly and needlessly denying the electorate a choice between persons who are actual candidates willing to serve if elected” and might have “national implications.” (Well, yes, that’s the plan!) In North Carolina, Kennedy was allowed to remove himself from the ballot, since, you know, he isn’t running any more.
I can see the justification from a technical legal viewpoint for preventing Kennedy from removing his name if the deadline for doing so in a state has passed. The argument made on CNN, however, is not just unethical as a matter of ethics estoppel, it is hypocritical, intellectually dishonest, hilarious projection and a throbbing example of the Left’s addiction to Yoo’s Rationalization, “It Isn’t What It Is.“
I shouldn’t even have to explain what’s wrong with the shameless CNN panel member’s statement, but for any morons who are lurking out there, I guess I will:
1. She actually says that her party’s efforts to keep Kennedy on the ballot now after it fought to keep him off the ballots before isn’t “politics.” The whole panel should have laughed her off the set.
2. Keeping a candidate on the ballot who isn’t running protects “the franchise,” she says. That is, duping inattentive voters into wasting their votes by casting them for someone no longer running is, in this woman’s Bizarro World logic, protecting their right to vote for someone who isn’t a candidate. Voters already have that option, however: it’s called a write-in vote. What the CNN liar is arguing for is trapping unwary citizens into helping Kamala Harris win.
3. Because taking Kennedy off the ballot would cause a few days delay in getting absentee and mail-in ballots to voters, it would be “disenfranchisement.” In other words, not being able to vote a full two months in advance is the equivalent of having one’s vote taken away.
4. The woman is arguing that a non-candidate should remain on the ballot, tricking citizens into voting for him, while taking a non-candidate off the ballot would be “disinformation” and cause “confusion” as well as “narratives that our system is not working.” And she’s so adamant about it, even though this makes no sense whatsoever. Right: the public will feel the system is working perfectly when they see votes tallied for a non-candidate in a close election.
5. Follow the rules? FOLLOW THE RULES? This Democrat is a shill for a party that ignored its own rules to block opposition (including RFK Jr.) to their incumbent President, presented him as the winner of rigged primaries in a Presidential debate, dumped him by back-room maneuvering when he revealed that his metal competence had been deliberately hidden from the public, then replaced him at the top of the ticket without employing any democratic methods at all.
6. “He should have made that decision 6 months ago” ought to be a sentence banned by law from ever escaping any Democrat’s lips from now until the stars turn cold.
A note of frustration: I am forced to publish “Johnny MAGA”‘s tweet (I do not follow Johnny MAGA, and would never follow anyone with that handle) because 1) I could find no YouTube link to the clip 2) No mainstream media source flagged this disgusting display of hypocrisy 3) the two sources that did note the incident didn’t mention the name of the shameless Democratic gaslighter, and 4) I couldn’t find the transcript of that Newsnight episode on the CNN site. This shouldn’t be so hard.
Yet it is an important moment for voters to see, consider and understand. For this is a party that really and truly thinks we are morons, and that it can win elections by doubletalk, lies, smoke, mirrors, and throwing dust in our eyes.
Ethics Alarms 
Seems ripe for a perfect ‘split the baby’ compromise: leave RFK on the ballot so no delays occur, but tally all votes for him under the candidate he endorses.
If we had ranked-choice voting, then if RFK was eliminated his votes would be tallied under the respective candidates that the voters designated. That would neatly resolve the issue.
The only thing ranked choice voting does is make it impossible to remove the corrupt establishment from office. It perpetuates the status quo, and the status quo is corrupt. There are only 2 real parties in the U.S., and they are both bent on destroying the commoners. Filling up the field with 10 establishment politicians and letting 1 non-establishment politician run with ranked choice voting guarentees the establishment will always win. It is a magicians trick to fool people into thinking they have a say in their government. No thanks.
I agree that ranked choice voting on its own is insufficient to solve our democracy’s problems, and that we will need people to actually do the work of democracy as well as put forth competent and integritous politicians as candidates.
That said, where do you get the idea that ranked choice voting would make it harder for a good politician to win than in the current system? In our first-past-the-post system, people are afraid to vote for outsiders because then the “wrong” insider might win. With ranked choice voting, people are free to vote for an outsider as their first choice, because if the outsider is eliminated then their vote goes to the “right” insider. There’s no downside to voting your conscience. You won’t be wasting your vote.
If ranked choice voting really cemented the establishment, why don’t we already have it? Why is the establishment trying to discourage it? Or do you mean that if forced to adopt ranked choice voting, the the establishment will co-opt it to create the illusion of consensus and allow every election winner to claim a mandate from the majority? If so, I agree that would be dangerous. That’s why I’m working to help people do the work of democracy that takes place before anything comes up for a vote.
Ranked choice voting would still make the work of democracy much easier by allowing alternative candidates with fresh ideas to be viable and receive more real votes that reflect how much people actually favor them.
Does that all make sense?
The North Carolina Supreme Court Ruling was very specific in its damning of what happened. You can read the ruling here (235P24 – Kennedy v North Carolina State Board of Elections, et al.). The court was very clear about what happened after the state KNEW about the withdrawal and was properly notified and yet it continued the ballot preparation process and subsequent printing. The court stated quite clearly in the order that “We decline to grant defendants extraordinary relief when they are responsible for their own predicament.” The state very intentionally continued the ballot preparation process and printing even after it was properly notified by RFK to remove his name.
I am sure there is a loophole here that got addressed, but why isn’t Biden on the ballot in Michigan?
-Jut
He’s a Democrat. A Democratic Congressman missed his deadline to file for reelection and he didn’t have the number of signatures required to file, but they let him run anyway. Rules are for Republicans and little people.
The political left won’t take responsibility for their own problem creating actions and then turn around and blame the problem on everyone else. As for the foolish woman in that video clip, the following applies to her argument…
It’s amazing how many times the political left and their supporters continue to spew their nonsense thus proving my statement correct.
Is there any doubt that they would have no problem removing Kennedy from the ballot if he had endorsed Harris?
It’s an interesting thought experiment, but unresolvable in some aspects.
Suppose Kennedy had endorsed Harris — presumably both Michigan and North Carolina, with Democratic governors would have had him off the ballot post haste.
The unresolvable question is: Would either of the state Republican parties have sued to have him remain on the ballot?
The Michigan Supreme Court is Democratic controlled, the North Carolina Supreme Court (by a margin of a few hundred votes in 2022) is Republican. How would they have ruled if the state GOP had sued to keep Kennedy on the ballot?
I’d like to think that there would not have been lawsuits in this instance and if there were, that Kennedy would end up off the ballot — but. We can argue about it, but we just cannot know.
Oops, sorry, I was thinking of the 2020 race for Chief Justice that was decided by 401 votes out of over 5 million cast, giving the Republicans a sweep of all the statewide judicial offices and 4-3 control of the Supreme Court.
The 2022 races were not as close, and the GOP picked up another Supreme Court seat.
All this could be simplfied and overcome by NOT allowing these prolonged voting season. We need to return to election DAY. One Day one vote.
The response is simple:
If we were so very deeply concerned that voters might be disenfranchised by having only 55 days to vote instead of 60, perhaps Michigan Secretary of State, Jocelyn Benson, might have found the time to pull her head out of her ass and remove RFK’s name from the ballot when he requested it be, as opposed to making him go through the performance of suing her, particularly when his request was uncontroversially valid. That would probably have saved five days.