Why the Left hates election integrity and the secret ballot

They’re still counting ballots in Pennsylvania and California – or, more accurately, they’re still finding ballots. 

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.

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

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

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

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. 

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.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM CHUCK DEVORE