Remember the progressive
Secretary of State project?
The Secretary of State Project originated
due to the culmination of frustration, anger, bitterness and overall resentment
Democrats felt towards Republicans in the wake of President George W. Bush’s
re-election in 2004. Still plagued with memories of Katherine Harris and
Florida from the 2000 presidential contest, Democrats placed the blame for
Senator John Kerry’s loss squarely on the head of former Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell,
who ruled that provisional ballots in the state would not be counted if they
were submitted in the wrong precinct, a decision upheld by the United States
Court of Appeals. Bush’s victory in the state – a relatively slim 118,000+
votes – gave him the necessary electoral votes (twenty) to cross the victory
threshold of two hundred and seventy.
Democratic founders of the SoS Project saw conspiracy in Blackwell's
decision, insisting that those individuals who were elected on the principle of
upholding and enforcing election laws were, in fact, political operatives. But
rather then push for reform so that the offices of the Secretaries of State
reflected a level of neutrality, perhaps making it so holders of those
positions were elected on a nonpartisan basis, they instead sought to implement
an aggressive agenda exactly the same in nearly every respect that they had
just accused Republicans of performing.
Through the strategic process of
placing specific candidates, ones that met a certain liberal or progressive criteria
set down by the organization, in positions of power that oversaw and
administered state elections, the Democratic Party would be "better
positioned than in the previous elections to advance traditional Democratic
interests," particularly when it came to the administration of election
laws.
. . .
The SoS Project has not been active
since 2010. It spent just over $50,000 in 2012 and its website was taken down.
The SoS Project may be gone technically,
but it seems to be operating under different auspices. Paula Bolyard’s report at PJ Media shows
that Ohio voters may yet be vulnerable to progressive, uh, cheating:
Ohio SoS Candidate Who Moved to Keep Trump Off 2020 Ballot
Vows to 'Impact' Election if She Wins
Ohio has long been known as a
battleground state because it often plays a pivotal role in deciding
presidential elections. Although the state has a mere 18 electoral votes,
Ohio is often a barometer of the nation's political mood. A down-ticket race
that hasn't garnered much national attention — but should — is the contest to
be Ohio's next secretary of state. Two state lawmakers, Republican Frank LaRose
and Democrat Kathleen Clyde, are vying for the position that the Democratic
candidate has said could impact the 2020 presidential election.
Kathleen Clyde, who, as a member of
the Ohio House introduced the TRUMP Act last year to try and force
President Trump to release his tax returns, has vowed to play a role in the
2020 presidential election should she win next Tuesday. Clyde, who did not
return PJM's request for a comment, said in February, “It is a very powerful
and important position, impacting the presidential election because
of our importance as a battleground state and the redistricting process”
[emphasis added]. She explained, “It matters who runs the elections in this
critical state.”
LaRose, 39, is a combat veteran and
U.S. Army Special Forces Green Beret, who earned a Bronze Star for his service
in Iraq. The father of three has served in the Ohio Senate since 2011. Clyde,
also 39, has served in the Ohio House since 2011. A lawyer by trade, Clyde,
according to her website, is a "dedicated defender of voters and voting
rights" who "wants to take her life’s work to the Ohio Secretary of
State’s Office to secure and modernize Ohio elections so every Ohioan’s vote
counts."
A Baldwin-Wallace University poll earlier this month showed
the race in a dead heat, with LaRose and Clyde deadlocked at 32.6 percent. A
Libertarian candidate, Dustin Hanna, had 7.2 percent, while nearly a third of
voters were undecided, likely owing to the fact that neither candidate had
statewide name recognition going into the contest.
The fact that impacting the
election is on Clyde's mind "should give every Ohioan great cause for
concern," LaRose told PJM. "Let me be clear. The secretary of state
does not get to impact Ohio's election, the voters do." LaRose added that
if he's elected to be Ohio's next chief elections officer, he "will run
fair elections, assuring that the voices of Ohioans are heard."
But Democrats clearly have a
different idea. That's why Democrats far and wide — from Hillary Clinton to
Elizabeth Warren to Eric Holder to Tom Steyer — are focusing their attention on
the race and pouring pallets full of cash into it.
Grant Schaffer, LaRose's campaign
manager, told PJM, "We're facing an unprecedented wave of out-of-state
spending in the secretary of state's race.
National figures like George Soros,
Donald Sussman, Eric Holder, Tom Steyer and his wife, Elizabeth Warren, Joe
Biden, and Hilary Clinton have all made large personal investments in the
race." All, he said, "have publicly stated interests in defeating
Trump or want to run for president themselves." He said outside groups
like OMG-WTF and iVote are
targeting the race.
If the money is pouring in from out-of-state
to promote Clyde’s campaign for SoS, that’s bad news for Ohio. And the Libertarian
candidate usually splits the conservative vote.
# # #
