The Ballot Access Wars

How the Democrats use the law to manipulate ballot choices, and what Kennedy must do to win

By Nikos Biggs-Chiropolos, The Kennedy Beacon

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s decision to leave the Democratic Party should have ended the party establishment’s efforts to minimize his campaign. Instead, the toughest battle between Kennedy and the Democratic party could just be getting started. 

While we have learned that the Democrats will fight as hard as they can to keep so-called outsider candidates from being taken seriously in their own primaries, the party also has a history of fighting to keep candidates off the ballot in general elections.

While Biden may claim that the Democratic Party stands for voting rights, the party has also opined that its platform represents “the soul of America.” Proving the maxim that actions speak louder than words, the Democratic Party’s actions show that it certainly feels entitled to all Green candidate votes and at least half of Libertarian and other independent candidate votes. Not surprising, considering its history of manipulating the legal system to minimize competition for its preferred candidates. 

Democratic  Party methods of manipulation include filing lawsuits to prevent third-party candidates from appearing on the ballot in elections and changing laws in Democrat-controlled states to reducing candidate eligibility in the first place.

For months, the Democratic establishment refused to acknowledge Kennedy’s candidacy for its own primary. Now party leaders are watching his campaign closely, fearing that Kennedy could take votes from incumbent Joe Biden. 

During a recent episode of The Daily, the New York Times podcast (ominously titled “The Spoiler Threat of RFK Jr.”), the hosts said as much, exploring how Democrats fear that third-party candidates can take away would-be Democrat votes and help their Republican opponents, particularly in key “purple” states that can almost single-handedly tip the electoral college vote one way or the other. And a Times op-ed expressed outrage that Kennedy would even dare run in this election, as apparently his mere presence on the ballot meant “screwing [it] up.”

These fear-mongering narratives show that the establishment and its corporate media allies are doing everything possible to minimize Kennedy’s candidacy and brand him as a “spoiler” rather than a serious contender. 

However, as The Hill reported, Kennedy’s surging poll numbers prove that Democrat establishment efforts to brand him as unviable are not resonating, so the logical next step will be to keep him off the ballot altogether wherever possible. Recent history shows that the party has taken this exact approach, particularly in key states, to prevent other candidates (most commonly representing the Green Party) from appearing on voters’ ballots.

Candidate ballot requirements vary from state to state, but generally include nearly automatic access for candidates who represent parties that have gained significant voter share in previous elections and petition requirements for others. 

Petitioning typically requires getting thousands of signatures from registered voters in a particular state. While smaller political parties such as the Green Party and the Libertarian Party often do not appear on ballots in every state in every election, they have easy access in some states due to previously capturing significant voter share. 

Independent candidates, however, must start from scratch. And while Kennedy’s poll numbers indicate that he has the support needed, these requirements can be arduous. Democrats often take advantage of this hurdle by using their enormous financial advantage to challenge candidates they perceive as even small threats with legal battles. Examples of this “lawfare” strategy include lawsuits that focus on details such as clerical errors or access fees with the goal of deeming these candidates, and their petitions, invalid.

In 2020, Democrats successfully kept Green Party candidates off ballots in states such as Texas, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their methods vary, but typically focus on draconian minutia. For example, in Wisconsin, the Green Party Presidential ticket gathered 3,737 signatures, substantially more than the required 2,000. However, Howie Hawkins’ vice presidential candidate Angela Walker had moved during the election cycle and many of the signatures listed her previous residential address. Despite the Hawkins/Walker campaign claiming to have notified the Wisconsin Election Commission (WEC) of Walker’s change of address, the WEC ultimately barred the Hawkins/Walker presidential ticket from the ballot. This decision was rendered following a challenge from the state’s Democratic Party that focused on invalidating all of the nearly 2000 signatures that were associated with Walker’s previous residential address. 

A similar situation occurred in Pennsylvania where a state supreme court — that included partisan judges — blocked Green Party candidates from the ballot citing paperwork “defects” related to the party having changed candidates earlier in the election cycle. In Texas, the Democratic Party lawfare strategy centered on filing fees, which the Texas Tribune reported that the state’s Green Party ultimately could not afford and it was thus forced to withdraw from the general election.

In addition to manipulating the ballot access laws and procedures, the Democrats and their media allies rely heavily on propaganda to deter independent-thinking voters from considering any candidates other than those from the two major political parties. For example, New York Magazine published an article with similar language to the aforementioned Times piece about Kennedy, which claimed that Green Party presidential candidate Howie Hawkins appearing on the ballot in Wisconsin could “screw up” the state’s election. 

Other prominent voices such as MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow furthered the same notion by claiming the Green Party being on the ballot was  a ”scam.” Similar scenes took place in Pennsylvania, where local newspapers issued headlines calling to “blame the Green Party” for ballots being delayed due to Democrat-led legal challenges over access. All this language propagates the idea that any non-Democrat or Republican candidate violates some sort of unwritten rules of democracy by appearing on the ballot, even though Democrats repeatedly insist that their party stands for empowering voters and saving democracy.

Meanwhile, Reason reported that Democrat-controlled New York State has recently changed its laws to remove the hard-won ballot access for third parties and independent candidates. These new laws were slipped into a Covid emergency pandemic budget bill, which therefore effectively removed the opportunity to challenge the legality of, or at least debate, the proposed new requirements. These new rules increased signature requirements enormously, from 15,000 to 45,000 for independent candidates. New York State Democratic Party chairman Jay Jacobs argued that any “legitimate” party should be able to raise enough money and signatures to meet these requirements, and that the new rules would root out “sham parties.” Here “legitimacy” means having powerful corporate donors who can buy ballot access. In other words, the Democrats seem to think ballot access should be limited to Democrat and Republican candidates only and any challengers are unacceptable.

Bolstered by these Covid-era efforts, the Democrats continued to ramp up their efforts in 2022 to the point that even the Wall Street Journal ran a piece calling for Green Party ballot access. This time, efforts focused on North Carolina, which notably hosted one of the most fiercely-contested Senate elections in the country. As Axios observes, the Democrats gained a “win” by keeping Greens off the ballot; their candidate ultimately suffered a loss in the general election. 

More recently, Democrats have been busy in Montana with efforts to control ballot access, attempting  to keep both the Green Party and the No Labels Party off the ballot. Their tactic against the No Labels Party employed their draconian minutia strategy, arguing that the No Labels Party paperwork had been filed too early. This particular attempt failed, but it shows that the Democrats will target any candidate they perceive as a threat, particularly one who would appeal to their voter base.

And when Democrats cannot block their opponents altogether from being on ballots, they have also fought to manipulate ballot choices by promoting fringe Republican candidates, as reported by NPR. They have helped fund these extreme candidates, even while expressing horror at their ideas, because they assume such candidates will be easier to defeat in the general elections. 

The above specifics reveal the hypocrisy endemic in the Democratic Party. Democrats claim to stand for democracy, but will do anything it takes to manipulate elections in their favor and shield their historically unpopular incumbent, as shown in Gallup polls, from meaningful challenges. 

Kennedy must be ready for more fights ahead if he is going to appear on the ballot in all fifty states. But having a viable chance depends on amassing the financial resources necessary to win the inevitable legal hurdles that the Democratic Party will use to derail him.