Path 27
Wire

Sen. Cruz Brilliantly Calls Out Left's Double Standard on Signature Matching

Path 27

Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas succinctly pointed out a glaring double-standard on the part of today’s Democrats on Tuesday when it comes to signature verification.

You see, California state officials announced this week that enough signatures have been verified to place the question of whether to recall Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom — and if so, who should replace him — on a ballot.

Did you catch it?

That’s right — California Secretary of State Shirley Weber (who was appointed by Newsom and is a Democrat) has verified 1.6 million of the signatures gathered. Weber rejected almost 20 percent of the original signatures, which was more than 400,000 out of 2 million.

If you’re thinking, “Now, hold up, that’s not right” — you’re not alone.

Trending:
Journalist Suspended After Bystander Video Reveals She Covered Herself in Mud Before Reporting on Devastating Floods

Cruz noticed the glaring double standard too.

“I thought signature verification was vote suppression?” the senator tweeted. “That’s what Dems told us…”


So now Democratic leaders care about verifying voter signatures?

In the days since the 2020 election, they have insisted that it’s nothing short of treason — treason, I tell you! — to recommend further scrutiny into the manner in which ballots were counted in a number of key swing states where irregularities, including insufficient signature verification, were suspected.

When they began the new term with a supermajority in Washington, D.C., they set about enshrining into law virtually all the policies the Republicans have pointed to as potentially contributing to increased voter fraud (i.e., Democratic political victories *cough*).

One of the party’s most fervent advocates for such voter “reform” is none other than Stacey Abrams, who has yet to concede to Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp or cease denying that the election was stolen from her when the two faced off in 2018.

Meanwhile, she has been slamming Georgia’s new GOP-backed election integrity law as having racially motivated limits on mail-in, absentee and early voting.

The left-wing American Civil Liberties Union, using vernacular very similar to that pushed by Abrams and the Democratic Party as a whole (President Joe Biden called Georgia’s law “Jim Crow in the 21st Century”), claims that signature verification laws can disenfranchise disabled, elderly and military voters and even women and trans voters.

“Disenfranchising a voter should not be done lightly,” the ACLU’s website explains (well dang, there go my weekend plans for some lighthearted voter disenfranchisement).

Related:
'I Think it Makes Them Look Guilty': Election Officials Impede AZ Audit, Kari Lake Calls Them Out

“An official without training in signature or handwriting analysis should not reject a voter’s application or ballot until they notify the voter and give them an opportunity to fix the issue. Without proper notice and opportunity to cure, voters, especially voters with disabilities, elderly voters, trans voters, women voters, ESL voters and military voters, are susceptible to being unfairly excluded from the democratic process,” the civil rights group says.

By the way, as a woman, I’m just wracking my brain over here for how I could possibly have a more difficult time correcting an error on a ballot than a man. I mean, is the ACLU suggesting women are less capable of handling such a task?

Just trying to keep up here, guys. Kind of seems a little sexist, that’s all I’m saying.

Do the Democrats have a double standard when it comes to election integrity?

When it comes to the scrutiny with which Democrats would like to have applied to general and state elections or, say, historic recall efforts against one of the party’s rising stars in the biggest blue state in the nation, I don’t think there is any keeping up.

They examine elections when it conveniences them and scream “voter disenfranchisement” when it doesn’t.

You know what they say about the Democrats and double standards — without them (say it with me now) they’d have no standards at all.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Submit a Correction →



loading
Tags:
, , , , , , , ,
Path 27

Conversation