In the wake of the critical 2024 elections, a recent WalletHub study sheds light on voter power across the nation. While some states emerge as key battlegrounds, others hold less sway in determining the outcome of presidential and Senate races. For New Mexico, the data reveals a mixed but intriguing picture of voter influence.
Senate Power Rankings: New Mexico in the Top 10
In the Senate rankings, New Mexico ranks 10th with a Voter Power Score of 51.63. This places the state firmly in the upper echelon of influence among the 33 ranked states. Vermont, Wyoming, and North Dakota take the top three spots, highlighting the outsized impact smaller states often enjoy due to equal Senate representation.
New Mexico’s relatively high ranking in Senate influence stems from its smaller population relative to its two Senate seats. While larger states like California (ranked 33rd) and Texas (32nd) see their individual voters’ impact diluted, New Mexico’s voters carry significantly more weight per capita. This dynamic underscores the importance of New Mexico’s participation in shaping the composition of the Senate, where every vote could determine critical policy decisions in the coming years.
Presidential Rankings: A Swing but Less Powerful State
In the presidential election rankings, New Mexico’s Voter Power Score is 65.01, placing it 14th among the 49 ranked states and Washington, D.C. While this score highlights a moderate level of influence, it’s worth noting that the top-ranking states, such as Nevada (201.78) and North Carolina (186.29), are all considered fiercely contested battlegrounds.
New Mexico’s middle-ground position reflects its historical voting patterns. Although the state has swung between parties in past elections, recent trends show it leaning Democratic. As a result, New Mexico’s role in deciding presidential outcomes has lessened compared to pivotal swing states like Georgia and Wisconsin. However, its influence still surpasses larger, more predictable states like New York (ranked 33rd) and California (42nd).
The Broader Context: Why Voter Power Matters
The WalletHub study highlights disparities in voter influence stemming from the structure of the Electoral College and Senate representation. For example, while Senate races afford smaller states like New Mexico a greater say, the presidential election’s winner-takes-all system in most states diminishes the influence of those not in highly competitive regions. Nonetheless, New Mexico’s relatively strong performance in both rankings underscores the importance of voter turnout and civic engagement in the state.
Methodology
WalletHub calculated Voter Power Scores based on factors such as population size, number of electors, and win probabilities. The study incorporated data from the U.S. Census Bureau, YouGov, and other sources.
In a strange turn of events, far-left Democrat New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver accused state Rep. John Block (R-Alamogordo), the editor and founder of the Piñon Post, of making threats and harassing her via X, formerly Twitter, cooking up a conspiracy after he asked her about implementing voter ID in the state. She later declared she was going dark on the platform following backlash after she laughed at constituents about voter ID, changing her account “@NMSOSMaggie” to private, although the use of her title makes the page public — a violation of law, according to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Toulouse Oliver’s departure from the platform came shortly after the general election, during which she sought to share insights into election results and processes. However, she claimed that some of the backlash, including alleged threats and harassment, originated from Block, who did not make such threats.
During a legislative committee meeting, Toulouse Oliver accused unnamed members of the committee of contributing to the toxic environment online. Later, her office singled out Rep. Block, labeling him and Piñon Post a “frequent purveyor of false and misleading information” about elections. Block has been vocal in his push for voter ID laws in New Mexico and has criticized Toulouse Oliver’s stance against such measures.
“I wouldn’t say that he was like, the ring leader, but he was certainly getting in on the pile-on and, I think, helping to foment the anger and some of the nasty comments,” she said to one outlet.
In response, Block told the Santa Fe New Mexican, “If she thinks that asking questions about why she doesn’t support voter ID is a threat, then she’s got the thinnest skin I’ve ever seen in my life,” emphasizing that political debate should not be conflated with harassment. He further argued that Toulouse Oliver’s characterization of criticism as harassment reflects an attempt to silence dissent and control the narrative around New Mexico’s elections.
Toulouse Oliver, who has historically opposed voter ID measures, reiterated her belief that such laws are unnecessary. “That is a solution in search of a problem,” she said during the committee meeting, dismissing Block’s proposals as lacking evidence of widespread voter fraud.
The tension escalated after Toulouse Oliver shared that she would file a report with law enforcement regarding the threats she faced, which she said were “egged on” by Block’s rhetoric. Block countered by highlighting the lack of evidence directly tying him to any threatening behavior and called her allegations politically motivated. “The secretary of state is probably the biggest purveyor of propaganda, fake news, lies, and clearly orchestrated headlines to get attention,” he charged, framing her accusations as a tactic to deflect from genuine questions about election security.
Block’s criticism of Toulouse Oliver’s opposition to voter ID laws has resonated with many New Mexicans, particularly given polling that shows broad support for such measures, with Gallup finding 84% of Americans support the commonsense measure that upholds election security.
While Toulouse Oliver maintains that her resistance stems from concerns about voter suppression, Block and his supporters see it as dismissing legitimate concerns about election integrity.
This clash highlights a broader debate on voter security in New Mexico. For Block, questioning election policies and advocating for voter ID is about protecting democracy.
For Toulouse Oliver, such benign questions represent a dangerous incitement that threatens election officials, and it appears she is not open to the will of the people of New Mexico.
House Republicans and several Democrats approved a bill on Wednesday to expand proof-of-citizenship requirements for federal elections and impose voter roll purges on states. The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act passed with a 221-198 vote, with five Democrats supporting it.
Despite this, New Mexico’s Democrat Reps. Gabe Vasquez, Melanie Stansbury, and Teresa Leger Fernandez opposed the bill, showing a clear divide even within the Democrat Party. The vote shows the trio’s support for allowing illegal aliens to vote in U.S. elections.
The legislation is unlikely to progress in the Senate due to strong Democratic resistance. President Biden has also promised to veto it. Critics argue that the bill’s core idea—making noncitizen voting illegal—is redundant and more likely to disenfranchise U.S. citizens than prevent illegal voting.
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) insisted on the House floor that the bill is necessary because noncitizens have participated in U.S. elections, despite existing laws against it. Johnson stated, “Even though it’s already illegal, this is happening.” He further emphasized the need for the legislation to prevent noncitizen voting and to make it unlawful within states.
The far-left “Brennan Center for Justice” cataloged 30 suspected cases of noncitizen voting out of 23.5 million. The notion that noncitizens are voting and that Democrats are importing undocumented immigrants for electoral gains is central to the bill’s purpose.
The Heritage Foundation found illegal alien voting in abundance, including 11,000 illegals previously registered on Virginia’s voter rolls.
Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who introduced the bill, argued that progressive Democrats use open border policies and attack election integrity laws to transform America. Roy’s stance is that Democrats aim to leverage undocumented immigrants to maintain one-party rule.
“This is a matter of national security and election integrity, and Gabe Vasquez is willing to compromise both just to avoid contradicting Biden’s open border. NM-02 deserves better than someone who would sell out their votes like that,” wrote National Republican Congresional Committee Spokeswoman Delanie Bomar following the vote.
“The only reason New Mexico’s Democratic representatives would oppose states requiring proof of citizenship to vote is because they want illegal immigrants to vote in our elections,” said Republican Party of New Mexico Spokeswoman Ash Soular. “They stood by while Joe Biden let 10 million illegal immigrants into our country and now, they’re going to stand by while our national security, election integrity and democracy are threatened. Only American citizens should be allowed to vote in U.S. elections. The SAVE Act is a common-sense and crucial step to restoring confidence in our voting system.”
Early voting for the June 4th primary election in New Mexico starts tomorrow, May 7th, 2024. Registered voters can cast their ballots at the County Clerk’s office beginning on May 7th, with additional early voting locations opening up on May 18th.
All early voting locations will close on June 1st, and Election Day polling stations will be open on June 4th from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
If you’re unsure of your registration status or need to register for the first time, you can check or update your voter registration online via New Mexico’s voter portal.
Same-day registration will also be available at every polling location statewide on Election Day.
For those who won’t be able to make it to the polls to vote, requesting an absentee ballot as early as possible and returning it promptly to avoid postal delays is advisable. You should hand-deliver your ballot to the County Clerk’s Office to ensure it gets in the proper hands. If there is no other option, it can also be mailed.
In-person voting locations for early and Election Day voting can be found through the New Mexico Secretary of State’s voter portal linked here, along with specific information on districts and sample ballots.
Remember that New Mexico conducts closed partisan primaries, so voters registered with a political party can only vote in that party’s primary.
Further details on primary election protocols, including mail-in ballots and FAQs, can be found on the New Mexico Secretary of State’s website and your county clerk’s office simply by putting “X County Clerk” in the search engine of your choice.
Voting in the primary is vital to ensure the strongest and most qualified candidates get elected to office across the board, and voting early is helpful, especially if you are unsure if you’ll be in-town or available on Election Day.
In a major legal development, a federal court has ruled that New Mexico must allow a conservative group to publish voter registration data online in a move toward transparency and election integrity.
U.S. District Judge James Browning in Albuquerque decreed that the conservative-leaning Voter Reference Foundation LLC is legally entitled to access information from the state’s voter rolls. This marks a setback for the Secretary of State’s office, which had sought to prevent the release based on a federal election transparency law.
The Secretary of State’s office, led by far-left Democrat Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, disagreeing with Judge Browning’s decision, plans to challenge the ruling at the 10th Circuit Court and will seek to suspend the ruling’s effect during the appeal process.
The dispute centers on the foundation’s intention to post detailed voter data on its website, including names, addresses, and birth years. The foundation, led by Gina Swoboda, a former Trump campaign official and current chairwoman of the Arizona Republican Party, asserts its mission is to bolster voter engagement across all states.
“The Voter Reference Foundation is dedicated to ensuring transparent, accurate and fair elections in the United States of America. The purpose of this website is to provide educational information about how our elections process works and how elections data is compiled and maintained nationwide,” the group’s website states.
Judge Browning’s ruling aligns with similar federal court decisions, reinforcing the precedence set by the National Voter Registration Act over state-level restrictions on voter data dissemination. This ruling comes amidst ongoing legal battles in other states like Pennsylvania and Maine, where attempts to safeguard voter information from online exposure have faced legal challenges.
In response to the ruling, Alex Curtas, a spokesperson for the Secretary of State’s office, claims the court’s acknowledgment that the state’s restrictions on voter data usage do not infringe on First Amendment rights and were not applied in a retaliatory manner against the Voter Reference Foundation.
The case, dating back to 2022, saw the foundation initially post New Mexico voter data online, which was subsequently removed following objections from state election regulators. The foundation’s legal action against the state argued that the pushback constituted unconstitutional retaliation and infringed on First Amendment rights.
The publicly accessible voter information in New Mexico does not include sensitive personal details such as Social Security numbers or precise birthdates, nor does it cover participants in the state’s Safe At Home Program for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking.
However, the foundation’s use of voter data from April 2021 means that any changes to voter registration status after that date will not affect the information available on their website.
Although Toulouse Oliver previously touted a leftist MIT study, claiming New Mexico had some of the best election administration in the country, the Voter Reference Foundation ranks New Mexico’s elections at the bottom of the nation, with a “D” rating. See New Mexico’s ranking on the group’s website here.
According to the far-left Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s “MIT Election Lab,” New Mexico is ranked first on its “Elections Performance Index.” MIT is a predominantly leftist institution, according to a survey by the school.
The state got an 88 percent, with multiple factors determining the score. Interestingly, the state’s participation in the far-left George Soros-funded Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC).
According to Influence Watch, “ERIC was established by Pew Charitable Trusts, a left-of-center nonprofit advocacy and grantmaking organization, in 2012. 990 tax data shows that one year prior in 2011, grantmaking organization Foundation to Promote Open Society (FPOS), funded by philanthropist George Soros, provided two grants to Pew Charitable Trusts totaling $725,000, ‘to support the Pew Center on the States’ voter registration modernization initiative’ and ‘expand [its] scope and scale.’”
Because New Mexico joined ERIC, its score on the MIT index went up. New Mexico is ranked 40th in its voter registration rate, with 80.35 percent registered.
Other factors include data completeness, information lookup tool availability, absentee ballot problems, and the number of registrations rejected.
In terms of absentee ballot problems, which the Election Lab notes, “[m]easures the degree to which citizens are deterred from voting because of problems with registration or absentee ballots,” New Mexico ranked 14th, with 1.46 percent.
For registrations rejected, New Mexico ranked 15th at 0.9 percent.
As for absentee voting, the state ranked 28th for absentee ballots not returned at 10.96 percent, while a mere 0.1 percent of absentee ballots were rejected, ranking 11th in the nation. Only 0.2 percent of provisional ballots were rejected in New Mexico of the 0.8 percent cast.
The state’s average voting wait time was 3.8 minutes, which is 21st among states. And at 46.65 percent, New Mexico scores worse than the national average for voter turnout.
Following the news, far-left Democrat Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver said in a news release, “I’m proud to have helped modernize New Mexico’s elections by finding a critical balance between voter access and election security.”
“I’m so proud of this important distinction for our state. In New Mexico, we are committed to free and fair elections and protecting democracy. I urge all eligible New Mexicans to exercise their right to #vote this election year,” chimed in far-left Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham.
I’m so proud of this important distinction for our state. In New Mexico, we are committed to free and fair elections and protecting democracy. I urge all eligible New Mexicans to exercise their right to #vote this election year! 🗳️ https://t.co/4eRsJMoh7Z
— Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (@GovMLG) March 26, 2024
A recently released study by Judicial Watch has exposed voter registration disparities in 353 U.S. counties, revealing 1.8 million more registered voters than eligible voting-age citizens, including two counties in New Mexico.
This discrepancy implies that the registration rates in these counties surpass 100% of eligible voters. The study, conducted in September 2020, drew attention to eight states with statewide registration rates exceeding 100%: Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
New Mexico’s Los Alamos County had a 110% voter registration rate, while Harding County had a 177% rate.
The methodology involved comparing the most recent registration data, obtained from states’ online records, with the Census Bureau’s five-year population estimates collected by the American Community Survey (ACS) from 2014 to 2018. ACS surveys, sent to 3.5 million addresses monthly, are considered highly reliable for estimating population figures outside the decennial census.
However, the study’s scope is limited to the 37 states providing regular updates to their registration data. Some state voter registration lists may potentially be larger than reported, as they may exclude “inactive voters,” who remain registered and can still participate in elections.
Judicial Watch uses such voter registration studies to caution states about potential non-compliance with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. This federal law mandates states to make reasonable efforts to clean their voter rolls, and Judicial Watch has a track record of suing to enforce compliance.
In a recent lawsuit against Colorado for non-compliance with the National Voter Registration Act, Judicial Watch revealed that 42 counties, or two-thirds of the state’s counties, had registration rates exceeding 100%. Similar lawsuits were filed earlier this year against Pennsylvania and North Carolina for their failure to remove ineligible voters from their rolls. Another lawsuit was initiated against Illinois for refusing to disclose voter roll data, violating federal law.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton emphasized the study’s revelation of 1.8 million excess or “ghost” voters across 29 states. Fitton expressed concern about the implications of blindly mailing ballots to such voter registration lists, highlighting the importance of clean voting rolls for ensuring fair elections.
This study builds on a similar analysis conducted by Judicial Watch in August 2019, emphasizing the organization’s commitment to promoting cleaner elections and holding states accountable for maintaining accurate voter rolls.
Learn more about all the states and counties affected here.
On Tuesday, New Mexicans headed to the polls for the 2023 local elections, where they voted on municipal and school board races, as well as ballot questions.
In some areas of the state, conservatives saw gains for school board seats, with Republicans Shannan Wright, Brandy Murphy, and Craig Danekas defeating three leftist incumbents on the Alamogordo Public School Board — shifting the board from a 4-1 leftist majority to a 4-1 conservative majority, with leftist Amber Ross being the only one left on the board. She is not up for reelection until 2025. The far-left American Federation of Teachers (AFT) Alamogordo union chapter endorsed all three victorious candidates’ incumbent opponents.
However, in Albuquerque, Republican school board member Peggy Muller-Aragón lost a close race by two percentage points behind Ronalda Tome-Warito. With 10,400 votes counted at that point, Muller-Aragón secured 4,149 votes, while Tome-Warito received 4,404. The Albuquerque school board election featured eight candidates competing for three school board seats, although it is traditionally a seven-member panel.
However, despite their success in the race against Muller-Aragón, the teachers union did not appear to retain current board President Yolanda Montoya-Cordova’s seat, leaving the teachers unions without a majority on the board.
On the Albuquerque City Council, Councilor Brook Bassan, a Republican, appeared to defeat a Democrat challenger narrowly. In an open seat, Republican Dan Champine defeated Democrat Idalia Lechuga-Tena.
In another election race, the mayoral contest in Las Cruces required six rounds of ranked-choice voting to determine the winner. Eric Enriquez, a former fire chief and moderate Democrat, emerged victorious in the sixth round, securing 52.32% of the vote and defeating current District 1 City Counselor Kasandra Gandara, who received 47.68% of the vote.
The mayoral race in Las Cruces featured seven candidates vying to replace the long-time Mayor Ken Miyagishima, who did not seek reelection.
In Santa Fe’s city council races, the results indicated no major upsets in the political balance on the City Council. The election took place in a year when far-left Democrat Mayor Alan Webber was not on the ballot, but his performance remained a significant topic of discussion. Candidates were asked to grade the mayor during forums and were scrutinized for their level of support for him. Many candidates distanced themselves from the mayor, whose popularity had waned due to various factors, including issues with city audits and the removal of the Plaza obelisk, known as the Soldiers’ Monument.
Notably, the results revealed that the City Council would maintain its current political balance. While some candidates received support from Mayor Webber, others positioned themselves as critical of his administration, emphasizing the need for more accountability. Some vowed to provide oversight of the mayor’s administration if
The office of New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver has resolved a legal dispute concerning voter records through a settlement of $22,000 with a libertarian think tank. This agreement comes after the initial denial of access to voting information.
The Southwest Public Policy Institute (SPPI) first informed The Daily Signal about resolving their lawsuit regarding a denied request under the state’s Inspection of Public Records Act (IPRA). This act is analogous to the federal Freedom of Information Act.
SPPI president Patrick M. Brenner emphasized the significance of the settlement in conveying a message to all governing bodies. He remarked, “You are being watched, and we do not take ignoring public records requests lightly.” He emphasized that government agencies often employ tactics like stonewalling, delays, or reclassifications to dismiss requests, but the secretary of state’s office took the unusual step of attempting to disregard their request completely.
Maggie Toulouse Oliver, a far-left Democrat first elected in 2016, has a prior background as the county clerk of Bernalillo County, where she had oversight over public records.
Linda Bachman, the director of legislative and executive affairs for the secretary of state’s office, confirmed that a verbal settlement had been reached and that efforts were underway to document the agreement in writing. Bachman stated, “The SOS maintains that it did not violate the requirements of the Inspection of Public Records Act, but deemed it in the best interest of the Office and the public to settle this disputed claim without incurring further litigation costs.”
Patrick M. Brenner articulated the purpose behind their request, saying, “We were looking for voter records, all of which are subject to public inspection. We wanted to educate the public if we know which members of the public to educate.”
The lawsuit reached the settlement stage after a state court dismissed the motion by the New Mexico secretary of state’s office to have the case dismissed. Brenner underscored this outcome as a necessary step in holding public records custodians accountable for their actions and ensuring public access to government records.
Brenner stressed the importance of transparency in upholding a robust democracy and affirmed their commitment to fight for it within the boundaries of the law.
Recently, Democrat New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham tweeted out a link to a story from NPR titled, “How the Far Right is Making Voter Fraud Easier,” with an at-a-girl message for New Mexico’s corrupt SOS, Maggie Toulouse Oliver:
The Tweet garnered 80 retweets – 60 of which were hidden by Twitter – all of which are skeptical of the linked article and the governor’s assertion that the Secretary of State supports a strong voting system and accurate election in New Mexico.
“You’re joking, right?” asked one Twitter user. Another simply stated, “crook.”
One particularly informed Twitter user asked the Governor, “Without ERIC, Dominion couldn’t do what you all need it to do, no?”
The linked audio story from state-sponsored NPR decries a recent exodus of nine states (Texas, Iowa, Missouri, Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, Ohio, West Virginia, and Virginia) from the program called ERIC (Electronic Registration Information Center), and naturally, they blame the “far right” and their “conspiracy theories” as the reason ERIC is crashing and burning.
Not to be carried away by the radical left’s emotional name-calling, let’s take just a moment to examine the facts surrounding ERIC:
Since 2012, ERIC collects member states’ registration data to supposedly collaborate with other states to clean voter rolls and reduce fraud by cross-checking data across states and alerting states of duplicate registrations. At its height, ERIC had 31 members. ERIC charges each of its members a hefty annual fee. New Mexico had its first year’s fee of $75,000 paid for by the leftist Pew Charitable Trust as an enticement to join.
A less-advertised feature of ERIC is that they cross-check data with other sources, such as each state’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) database, to look for people who may be eligible voters but are not registered. Then they send lists of eligible but unregistered voters to the election jurisdictions, who then send out mailers at taxpayers’ expense to those people inviting them to register to vote.
An obvious problem with using DMV data to try to find new voters is that non-citizens are often in these databases. ERIC has a strange rule that states, “Under no circumstances shall the members transmit any record indicating an individual is a non-citizen of the U.S.” So, ERIC wants DMV data, but they don’t want the data to indicate which people are citizens and which are not as they compile their lists of potentially eligible voters.
Can we trust our election officials to filter the lists they get from ERIC so that they only solicit people to register to vote who are citizens? Apparently not. The SOS of Colorado was caught sending invitations to register to vote to 30,000 non-citizens. She claimed the mistake occurred because of a “database glitch,” but that “database glitch” may very well have occurred because of ERIC and its process of identifying adults over the age of 18 in each state.
What has become clear in the last few years as citizens across the country have investigated the accuracy of their voter rolls by door-to-door canvassing is that ERIC has not “cleaned” the voter rolls in any state where it is present. The voter rolls in every ERIC state have only grown since they joined ERIC, and the data is a mess.
The Otero County Audit conducted last year in New Mexico included a random survey of over 2,000 residences and found that 30 percent of those residences had people registered who were not actually living at those addresses – and 40 percent of those cast ballots in the 2020 election. The canvass found a German man who was surprised he was being surveyed as he had never registered to vote, knowing he was not eligible as a non-citizen. How did he end up on the rolls? Did it have anything to do with ERIC? Our SOS has expressed no interest in finding out.
If ERIC isn’t really cleaning voter rolls or keeping them accurate, what are they doing? To answer that question – it’s necessary to investigate the origins of this shady program:
ERIC was founded by a Democrat election attorney named David Becker. The initial grant to create ERIC was provided by none other than George Soros’ ultra-radical Open Society Foundation. After Becker had gotten ERIC on its feet, he established another leftist non-profit called the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR) in 2016.
A researcher named Peter Bernegger discovered in April 2023 that ERIC was passing voter information directly to its sister non-profit, CEIR. CEIR works with another company called Catalist, which claims it “compiles, enhances, stores, and dynamically updates data on over 256 million unique voting-age individuals across 50 states and the District of Columbia.” Essentially, they have the goods on every human in the U.S. over 18. They also say, “Our data and models are continually improved with the data returned to Catalist by our partners and clients. This virtuous circle ensures the national file is more accurate and more powerful for our clients.”
And who are Catalist’s clients? According to their website, “Catalist works exclusively with Democratic and progressive organizations that share [their] values.” These include political campaigns, Planned Parenthood, the American Federation of Labor, America Votes, and others.
So, states pay ERIC tens of thousands of dollars per year for the privilege of having data on virtually all their citizens and non-citizens harvested by a Soros-funded organization. This organization then passes along this data to CEIR, which has an intimate relationship with Catalist, which compiles data on essentially every voting-age adult in the country. Catalist, in turn, provides high-quality data exclusively to Democrat politicians and organizations.
Since we know no state has ended up with cleaner voter rolls after becoming an ERIC member, we can safely assume that the purpose of ERIC and all its incestuous relationships with the radical left is to inflate voter rolls across the country and provide Democrat candidates and organizations an unfair advantage with the data it harvests at the taxpayer’s expense. Citizens of all ERIC states should be outraged that their election officials are participating in this obviously biased scheme to provide an unfair advantage to one party.
So why would Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse-Oliver join NPR to defend the indefensible? Maybe because, like ERIC, they are both sponsored by George Soros and are staunch advocates of everything the radical left wants to do to unfairly tip the political landscape in their favor to enact its radical policies.
The data cataloging the political donations made directly by George Soros include only about 165 officeholders or candidates in the last 13 years. Maggie Toulouse Oliver and Michelle Lujan Grisham were both recipients on this exclusive list.
Contrary to the Governor’s Tweet and attempt to shield the Secretary of State from justified criticism – ERIC does not exist to keep elections free and fair. It doesn’t even do what it advertises. Rather, as all 80 people who responded to the Tweet have figured out – the real reason for the existence of ERIC is to keep the voter rolls as large as possible. That way, Democrats like Grisham and Oliver have plenty of available votes to work with throughout the Election Season to ensure they maintain control over the serfs.
Opinions expressed by Piñon Post contributors do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of the publication or its editorial staff. Submit an op-ed to the Piñon Post at news@pinonpost.com.
