Recent legal actions by Democrats to remove third-party candidates from ballots in Georgia and other states have raised questions about their commitment to democratic principles. Critics argue that these moves contradict their self-proclaimed role as defenders of democracy.

On September 13, two candidates, Cornel West and Claudia De la Cruz, were disqualified from Georgia’s ballot following a lawsuit filed by Democrats. The challenge centered on alleged discrepancies in their paperwork. Despite similar challenges, Green Party candidate Jill Stein was able to maneuver around these lawfare attacks and remain on the ballot.

Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger had earlier approved the candidates, only to see them challenged by Democrats. Raffensperger has expressed frustration with “partisan activists” trying to influence the election, emphasizing his dedication to upholding voter rights.

De la Cruz criticized the Democratic Party’s actions as an attempt to restrict voter choice and undermine democracy. She argued that the party’s legal maneuvers are designed to suppress alternative viewpoints that might challenge their dominance.

This legal battle mirrors broader Democratic efforts to control third-party candidate access. In Michigan, Democrats successfully removed West from the ballot, and similar actions have been seen in other states. Efforts to keep Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on or off ballots — depending on who he endorses for president — reflect ongoing strategic manipulation by Democrats.

Former Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich has labeled these actions as evidence of a “cartel” mentality, accusing Democrats of undermining democratic processes to maintain their political advantage.