Secretary Of State That Kicked Trump From Maine Ballot Wants 'Better Leaders' In Power To Prevent 'Election Sabotage'

Tyler Durden's Photo
by Tyler Durden
Monday, Jan 01, 2024 - 02:55 PM

The precedent being set by states like Colorado and Maine could change the political landscape of America forever if allowed to go unchallenged.  Removing presidential candidates from the ballot based on unilateral opinion rather than any kind of legally arbitrated decision or criminal conviction is the most slippery of slopes for a number of reasons.  The most dangerous implication being that a handful of officials can decide for the entire population of their states (or the entire population of the country) what leaders they are allowed to vote for based on a "guilty until proven innocent" ideology.

Meaning, all they have to do is make accusations of criminal behavior or criminal intent and then remove a candidate based on those accusations alone

No person or group should have that power.

One could argue that this is already the case and that the two party system filters out candidates on a regular basis.  However, the notion of state ballot removal is a decidedly leftist/Democrat affair clearly engineered to benefit the progressive power structure for many years to come. 

It's not only about Donald Trump - Woke bureaucrats could use this trend in the future to deny ballot access to any conservative candidate on the grounds that they "might" represent a "threat to Democracy."

This is essentially the message conveyed by Secretary of State Sheena Bellows, now well known as the person responsible for single-handedly removing Trump from the 2024 election ballot in Maine. 

She argues "better leaders" must be put in positions of power to prevent "election sabotage" and the end of Democracy.  The hypocrisy is mind blowing, and of course we have to ask:  Isn't it the job of the American public to decide what leaders are "better leaders?" 

Bellows laces her argument with social justice platitudes about protecting minority voting rights, which she insinuates are under threat from "white supremacy."  This is a common claim among Democrats when referencing Republican efforts to require proof of citizenship for voters, which has nothing to do with "intimidation" or race.

The diatribes of woke officials are not as random as they seem.  Each buzzword is carefully chosen to elicit an emotional knee-jerk response and to create false associations.  In this case, Bellows is falsely associating voter suppression with Republicans while Democrats are, in fact, engaging in voter suppression.  Not only that, but she is connecting Republican election suppression (which isn't happening) to racial motivations (that don't exist).      

It's not surprising to discover that this effort is being headed by people with career ties to far-left organizations like the SPLC and ACLU.  It has become exceedingly obvious in recent years that progressive institutions are a driving force behind national division, but they are also directly attempting to manipulate election outcomes.  It's no longer a matter of influencing citizens with arguments or propaganda, they want to dictate the mechanics of the system; elevating themselves as the arbiters of who is acceptable as a candidate and who is not.