Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account – free of charge.
By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.
Please enter a valid email address.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
They’re still counting ballots in Pennsylvania and California – or, more accurately, they’re still finding ballots.
Advertisement
In Pennsylvania, three Democratic counties defy their liberal state Supreme Court by counting ineligible ballots. The pool of bad ballots isn’t enough to overturn the election for either President-elect Trump or Sen.-elect Dave McCormick, so why the push by the left to include ineligible ballots?
The reason is simple and sinister: to set bad precedent for future elections.
Republican Sen.-elect Dave McCormick and Democratic Sen. Bob Casey(Getty Images)
In California, a similar effort is underway. There, a couple of U.S. House elections remain to be decided. In California, a state with no effective voter ID requirement, runs its elections almost entirely by mail. State law allows mail-in ballots with no postmark to be counted up to a week after Election Day if the person completing the ballot affixes a date on or before Election Day.
WHY THE MAGA MOVEMENT IS THE 1776 REVOLUTION OF OUR TIME
Advertisement
Thus, if there is a close race that requires “fortification” – the left’s 2020 euphemism for election theft – Democratic operatives need only find a few voters who haven’t voted, “help” them fill out a ballot, and back date the signature – and voila! The late-breaking votes magically skew Democratic.
To the average voter, about 85% of whom support presenting an ID to vote, these mail-in ballot manipulations are shocking. They degrade faith in our election processes.
That the Left pushes election law past the breaking point is understandable on a pure will-to-power basis. But for many on the left, especially the ideological vanguard that has pushed the Democratic Party to the far left, there is another, deeper and more disturbing reason: they don’t view voting as an individual task of a citizen acting on their enlightened self-interest, rather, they see voting as a collective right.
Voting as a Collective Right
Democrats, particularly their critical race theory (CRT)-driven factions, view voting as a collective right rather than an individual one. This ideology prioritizes group identity over individual agency, arguing that elections must deliver racially and socially “just” outcomes, regardless of procedural fairness.
MORNING GLORY: TOP 10 LESSONS FROM THE LANDSLIDE
Advertisement
This view aligns disturbingly with the concept of concurrent majority espoused by John C. Calhoun, the early 19th-century political theorist who served as a congressman, senator and vice president under John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson. The bitter historical irony here is that Calhoun was an ardent supporter of slavery. He would heartily agree with the idea of race determining political outcomes.
John C. Calhoun, the early 19th-century political theorist who served as a congressman, senator and vice president under John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson.
A stark example is California’s ballot trafficking system, which allows paid operatives to pressure voters at their homes, destroying the secrecy and sanctity of the ballot. This system, institutionalized over the past decade, has yielded dramatic gains for Democrats, with union-aligned operatives ensuring ballots are “completed correctly.”
This was brought home to me a week before the election when I participated in a forum on voting rights at a local college. My sparring partner was an officer with the League of Women Voters. Just after declaring the sanctity of the secret ballot, she described, without a hint of irony, helping senior citizens in nursing homes vote by mail. The idea that all those ballots were completed in secret by voters who have lost their mental acuity strains credulity.
NANCY PELOSI IS FINISHED — NO ONE DESERVES MORE BLAME FOR DEMS’ $1B ELECTORAL COLLAPSE
Advertisement
But the CRT lens justifies such measures, framing elections not as neutral mechanisms of choice but as tools to rectify historic wrongs and redistribute power.
Destroying Election Safeguards
The left’s assault on election safeguards predates COVID-19 but gained momentum during the pandemic. Emergency rules, initially billed as temporary, have hardened into fixtures of the electoral landscape. Pennsylvania’s and California’s current ballot-handling controversies are emblematic of this shift.
In Pennsylvania, the deliberate counting of ineligible ballots, despite court rulings, exemplifies contempt for the rule of law. California’s lax standards for mail-in ballots – combined with partisan Postal Service unions – invite abuse. These practices are less about counting every vote than about creating systems vulnerable to manipulation.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
What’s at Stake
Election integrity measures, such as requiring voter ID and restricting ballot trafficking, are derided as voter suppression by CRT adherents. However, these measures aim to preserve the individual’s free and secret vote—a core pillar of democracy.
Advertisement
The battle is not between partisans but between those defending democracy’s principles and those seeking to redefine them.
Left unchecked, these developments risk eroding public confidence in elections. States like Florida and Texas, which have resisted California-style systems, provide a counterpoint, but the trend is clear: Unless systemic safeguards are reinforced, elections will increasingly be determined by paid operatives or left-wing activists, not voters.
As the 2024 elections demonstrate, the stakes are higher than ever. The Left’s collectivist voting philosophy justifies election manipulation under the guise of social justice, jeopardizing the integrity of democratic processes.
To safeguard our republic, Americans must confront these dangerous trends and demand reforms that prioritize the individual’s right to a free, fair and secret ballot.
A truck stops at the United States border Oct. 8 at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection — Jackman Port of Entry near the United States Canada border in Sandy Bay Township. (Joe Phelan/Staff Photographer)
Maine officials are pausing the issuance of undercover license plates after receiving a request for plates from federal border security authorities that comes amid rumors that a wave of immigration enforcement actions could soon be carried out in the state.
Secretary of State Shenna Bellows said Saturday that the Maine Bureau of Motor Vehicles, which is housed in the secretary of state’s office, received a request for confidential, undercover Maine plates from U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Bellows did not say when exactly the request came in.
“These requests in light of rumors of ICE deployment to Maine and abuses of power in Minnesota and elsewhere raise concerns,” she said in a written statement. “We have not revoked existing plates but have paused issuance of new plates. We want to be assured that Maine plates will not be used for lawless purposes.”
Advertisement
A spokesperson for Bellows said Saturday that additional information was not immediately available, including how many plates were requested and whether CBP has made such requests in the past.
A media contact for CBP did not immediately respond to questions from the Press Herald on Saturday night seeking details of the request and the agency’s response to the secretary of state’s pause on the issuance of new undercover plates.
The action comes as rumors have been circulating that Immigration and Customs Enforcement could expand its operations in Maine cities. The suggested raids have not yet materialized and the federal government has not shared details.
Federal authorities earlier this week placed an order for cold weather gear for U.S. Customs and Border Protection in Houlton.
At least one other federal law enforcement agency has raised concerns about the pause on undercover plates.
Advertisement
Ryan Guay, a supervisory deputy U.S. Marshal for the U.S. Marshals Service District of Maine, said he went Friday to register the agency’s fleet of vehicles via email with the secretary of state’s office and was told the state is not offering “covert status” for federal agencies.
In the past, Guay said the Marshals Service has been able to obtain undercover plates in order to carry out law enforcement operations. The marshals service is a federal agency that supports the judicial branch, including by executing federal court orders, providing security for the judiciary, managing federal prisoners and apprehending criminals.
Guay said he was surprised to learn of the change and was not told it is temporary. He said he was not given a specific reason for the change and said it poses a safety risk for the marshals service.
“This is a drastic change from historical precedent that gives us great concern,” he said. “We often do sensitive investigations or deal with protected persons, and we don’t want to advertise that they’re affiliated with us.”
Guay said Saturday that he was trying to figure out next steps for his agency.
Advertisement
“I’m engaged with our national office and offices around the country to kind of figure out what to do, as this is not a common occurrence at all,” he said.
Alex Bregman’s failed contract negotiations with the Red Sox have entered into a debate around a Massachusetts city’s selection of a new ambulance provider, ending a 25-year partnership with a previous company.
The city of Medford is set to transition to Cataldo Ambulance on Monday, following weeks of back-and-forth with the City Council, which requested that leaders pause the move until more information and transparency were provided.
City Councilor George Scarpelli has advocated for the city to stick with Armstrong Ambulance, a company that he says provided “impeccable” service for the past quarter century, instead of bringing in Cataldo.
During a meeting last week, Scarpelli compared the city’s discussions in selecting a new ambulance provider to Bregman’s contract negotiations with the Red Sox.
Advertisement
“Those people that follow the Red Sox — Alex Bregman was going back and forth while the Chicago Cubs gave a better deal. He’s gone now,” Scarpelli said. “Well, at least they went to the Red Sox and said, ‘What is it? Can you do this?’ And the Red Sox said, ‘No. We’re not gonna give you a no-trade clause. We’re not gonna put that in.’”
“It’s no different,” the city councilor added.
Bregman signed a five-year, $175 million deal with the Cubs last week, after he opted out of the three-year, $120 million contract that he signed with the Red Sox last February.
Unlike the Cubs, the Red Sox refused to offer Bregman, who turns 32 in March, a full no-trade clause. This was a top priority for the veteran third baseman, who sought a stable long-term home to raise his two young sons.
“Literally, the first second free agency really opened, it felt like we knew the Cubs wanted our family to be here,” Bregman told reporters in Chicago on Thursday. “We had a lot of conversations over the course of the first three months of the offseason. … It was pretty evident they wanted me to be here.”
Advertisement
In Medford, controversy swirled after Mayor Breanna Lungo-Koehn and other officials announced before the new year that the city had entered into a three-year contract agreement with Cataldo, breaking away from Armstrong.
Officials reiterated that the city didn’t terminate a contract with Armstrong and that the last agreement with the company expired in November. Concerns ranged from inadequate response times to a claim that the company refused to pay $75,000 in annual reimbursements owed to the city.
Nina Nazarian, the mayor’s chief of staff, emphasized that officials continued talks with Armstrong while beginning negotiations with Cataldo last spring.
“Honestly, I wish we weren’t here today. I think you all know that,” Nazarian told councilors last Tuesday. “I want to state that we frankly just didn’t want this to drag on. I also want to state very clearly that we didn’t want to cast shade on Armstrong Ambulance, but here we are.”
City officials have also highlighted how they expect service to improve through Cataldo as the company provides resources in responding to mental health and substance use emergency calls.
Advertisement
Scarpelli said he found it “alarming” that contract negotiations reportedly didn’t involve the fire and police chiefs, the city’s dispatch supervisor, nor the mayor. He claimed that the city’s outside legal counsel, KP Law, spearheaded discussions.
“That’s all I ask for: Everybody sit back at the table. We wouldn’t be here right now,” Scarpelli said. “We would clarify and clean up certain issues.”
Adrianna Smith scored 32 points and Maine made 11 3-point shots Saturday in a 73-51 women’s basketball win over New Hampshire in Durham, New Hampshire.
Smith was 12 for 23 from the floor, including 4 for 4 from 3-point range. She also had nine rebounds in Maine’s 11th straight win over the Wildcats.
Olivia Alvarez made four 3-pointers and finished with a career-high 16 points for Maine (9-10, 4-2 America East). Asta Blauenfeldt and Sarah Talon each added eight points.
Maddie Cavanaugh scored 17 points and Lucia Melero had 10 for New Hampshire (6-12, 0-5).
