When procedures lead to more rejected ballots and fewer voters, what else is there to call it?
While there is an investigation, it doesn’t appear ballots were sold for “$10 a piece”
A special session looms. (And how this is not like the filibuster in the US Senate).
National Review’s Kevin D. Williamson advocates for less democracy in America.
No, Colorado’s voting regulations are not roughly the same as Georgia’s.
How well do single-seat districts lead to representation? (And of what?)
The lack of common understandings and shared assumptions makes political conversations challenging.
The fixes worsen the stated problem (more on Iowa and other states’ attempts to restrict voting).
HR1 is a national approach to expanding voter access. State legislatures are trying to both expand and restrict the vote as well.
A CPAC speaker and the return of the problem of the Heritage electoral fraud database.
The sitting president is asking GA officials to find votes despite the fact that the results have been confirmed thrice.
The absurd notion that the President of Senate is the arbiter and judge of the electoral vote.
Granted, there are more than two. But from a political science/political history POV, these two stick out in my mind.
Wherein I detail evidence of fraud and take the Heritage Foundation’s database of fraud to task.