Posts
Trump Administration Fires Back After Judge Rejects Challenge to Dirty Democrat Scheme in Key Alaska Senate Race
Democrats apparently decided that one Dan Sullivan on the ballot wasn't enough. So, according to allegations now at the center of a legal fight, they helped recruit another one, hoping Alaska voters would have trouble telling the difference. Now the Trump administration is fighting to make sure the resulting election isn't certified without examining what happened.
A federal judge appointed by former President Barack Obama dismissed a lawsuit Sunday seeking to delay certification of Alaska's Senate election if a Democrat-backed candidate with the same name as incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan siphons away votes from the real deal.
Judge Sharon Gleason rejected a Justice Department lawsuit arguing that the state should not certify the results if voters intending to support the incumbent instead mistakenly cast ballots for Daniel J. Sullivan, the independent candidate Republicans have dubbed “Decoy Dan.”
Gleason's objection was that the Justice Department hadn't provided a specific plan for identifying which voters might have confused the two candidates. Apparently, the prospect of someone deliberately creating voter confusion was less concerning than the prospect of having to investigate it.
“The United States provides no workable plan as to how it proposes to segregate ballots cast for Daniel J. Sullivan on Election Day and then conduct a court-ordered unspecified ‘investigation’ of those ballots in a manner that would preserve voter secrecy,” she wrote.
“Clearly, if this Court were to order that certain ballots will be segregated and subject to a future and as yet unspecified investigation by law enforcement, it would likely result in voter ‘confusion and consequent incentive to remain away from the polls.’ Such late-breaking changes to the election rules are strongly disfavored,” she added.
The case took an interesting turn last week when The New York Times reported that Democrat operatives, including staffers working for Democrat candidate Mary Peltola, were involved in an effort to recruit the second Sullivan. The apparent objective was to siphon votes away from the incumbent Republican in Alaska's notoriously convoluted ranked-choice voting system.
One might think that deliberately recruiting a candidate with the same name as an incumbent senator to confuse voters would merit some attention from election officials. Instead, the Justice Department now finds itself having to fight for the right to investigate the alleged scheme.
The Trump administration isn't accepting the ruling quietly. The Justice Department has already filed an appeal and says it intends to keep fighting.
“Alaskan voters deserve a fair election, not to be misled in an attempt to rig outcomes,” said Justice Department spokeswoman Kiersten Pels.
The department's original lawsuit argued that allowing the election to proceed without addressing the alleged scheme would undermine the integrity of the vote.
“Should Alaska certify any electoral results tainted by the inclusion on the ballot of Daniel J. Sullivan — whose candidacy, Defendant Beecher found, is ‘for the purpose of confusing or misleading voters and compromising the fairness of the ballot’ — the State and its officers will fail in its obligation to protect the integrity of its election,” the suit said. “The United States accordingly brings this lawsuit to protect the integrity of the 2026 Senate election in Alaska.”
Peltola, meanwhile, has denied knowing anything about the effort to recruit the second Sullivan. Her explanation came last week:
“I just want to clear the air,” she said last week. “I knew nothing about any other candidate on the ballot except for me and the incumbent. That is all I have ever known about. I am not interested in tricking voters.”
Well, that settles that. The alleged recruitment effort, the candidate with the suspiciously familiar name, and the New York Times report can all apparently be filed under things nobody on the Democrat side knew anything about.
The Justice Department will now have to make its case on appeal. Alaska voters, meanwhile, are left with an unusual question: If a candidate is recruited specifically because his name might confuse voters, who exactly is supposed to take responsibility when the confusion works?
I hope you will take the time to click on any of the ads on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to simply look. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly, but no pressure. And finally, consider subscribing if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and totally worth the cost.
No comments:
Post a Comment