Why are Democrats furious about a transparent ballot? - Must Read Alaska
Connect with:
Friday, May 14, 2021
HomePoliticsWhy are Democrats furious about a transparent ballot?

Why are Democrats furious about a transparent ballot?



The Alaska Division of Elections has chosen to return to an honest, transparent ballot, one in which those who ran in the Democratic Party Primary are clearly identified as Democratic nominees on the General Election ballot.

No more monkey business by Democrats pretending to be anything but Democrats. If you run on the Democrats’ ticket, you advance as their nominee. You don’t get to pretend to be an independent.

The Alaska Democratic Party is, of course, furious. The executive director says the revised ballot is “bullshit.”

That’s because Democrats got their way under the old Walker Administration Division of Elections, which made a critical decision that played right into the Democratic Party’s strategy to run fake independents instead of Democrats, and to fool the voters at the General Election.

It all started with Margaret Stock in 2016. The Alaska Democrats wanted to run her as an “independent” on their ticket for U.S. Senate in their Primary Election slot; they weren’t allowed to do that because their party rules didn’t permit it.

Democrats subsequently made a rule change in their party governing documents to accommodate that kind of shape-shifting candidate.

What had also gotten in their way with Stock was a State Statute that said only registered members of a party may run as candidates in that party’s primary.

The matter was taken to court by the Democrats in 2017, and the court ruling was a both a victory and a disappointment to the Democrats.

Judge Philip Pallenberg, in a 33-page ruling, agreed the Democrats could run candidates not aligned with a party in their primary. But those candidates, should they win, would have to be identified on the General Election ballot as Democratic nominee.

Under Democrat Lt. Gov. Byron Mallott, the Division of Elections came up with a sleight-of-hand method for how the winner of that primary would appear on the ballot: They would have either a (U) or an (N) by their name, but would be identified as the Democrats’ nominee.

This year, the Division of Elections is changing that. Whoever runs on the Democrats’ Primary ballot will be their nominee. After all, the Division of Elections can’t keep up with all the party-changing ways of the Democrat-Independent candidates. A candidate could, in fact, change his or her registration after the primary and really confuse the voters and the Division of Elections, which is charged with making things fair and clear.

Democrats in Alaska are running more fake independents all the time.

This year, for example, they’re running both Al Gross for U.S. Senate and Alyse Galvin for U.S. House as charade independents endorsed by their party.

The Democrats wanted them to appear on the General Election ballot with as little of the stink of the Democratic Party as possible, in hopes of attracting the big pool of undeclared voters.

The Democrats could sue, but they’d run up against the 2018 Supreme Court ruling, which did not accept a proposed ballot design of the Democrats.

Judge Pallenberg had noted that the Democrats’ suggested ballot would serve to trick voters via bait-and-switch tactics.

“If the law actually required this ballot design, I would find that such a ballot design created a significant potential to mislead or confuse voters. The State has a legitimate interest in preventing a party from engaging in such a bait and switch,” he wrote.

Pallenberg continued, “I thus conclude that, if the law permits the Democratic Party to nominate as its candidate a nonaffiliated candidate, AS 15.15.030 requires that the general election ballot must inform voters that such a candidate is the nominee of the Democratic Party.”

He also wrote about the burden on the director of the Division of Elections to “prepare all official ballots to facilitate fairness, simplicity, and clarity in the voting procedure, to reflect most accurately the intent of the voter.”

“Similarly, the court believes the law permits – and likely obligates – the director to make clear to primary election voters which nomination is being sought by a nonaffiliated voter who runs in a party primary. Sufficient care on the director’s behalf will ensure that voters in both the primary and general elections are fully informed about exactly who it is they are voting for.”

Donations Welcome


Written by

Suzanne Downing had careers in business and journalism before serving as the Director of Faith and Community-based Initiatives for Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and returning to Alaska to serve as speechwriter for Gov. Sean Parnell. Born on the Oregon coast, she moved to Alaska in 1969.

Latest comments

  • This is great news. Thank you

  • This is nothing more than trickery and slight of hand politics. Bryce Edgmon did the same thing when he changed to an independent. He didn’t run on that but ultimately pulled a bait and switch. Unknowing voters and those future voters who only look at name tags might think he is guy who swings both ways. Ultimately he is setting himself up for a run at the governorship and I hope everyone knows or at least educates themselves that a skunk even if you paint his stripe black is still nothing more or less than a skunk because the stink is still there.

  • Frankly, I don’t understand why an “independent” candidate actually pretends to be anything other than a dyed in the wool Democrat. Seriously, I know several “independents” and so far, not a single one of them can ever recall voting for a Republican for any office at any time.

  • Stinking lying Democrat’s are trying extra hard to put us into their vision of the future anyway they can. Anybody should be able to see what they stand for and how they are changing the rules to try to be in power. They know they will never win fairly with their social agenda. I do not like their future and what it will bring more money out of my pockets and more laws designed to heard us into submission. Get ready for the battle of our future and where we are headed.

  • …..that’s because Bill Walker is, and always has been, …..a Democrat, and his soul brother, who he chose to run with ….. was always a Democrat…….but now a deceased Democrat.

  • The brand is so tainted, you almost can’t blame them. Of COURSE they don’t want to run as who they are- only racist, self hating, communists would vote for them!

  • ….”with as little of the stink of the Democrat Party as possible…” LMFAO!
    That’s like walking past a well-used outhouse and pretending that the smell is coming from a floral shop.

  • LMAO!
    A do-called independent running as a D, is lipstick on a jackass. Appropriate icon for that party.
    Democrats need to be careful what they wish for!

  • The State has a legitimate interest in preventing a party from engaging in such a bait and switch,” .. I really enjoy the word problems the state puts on ballots for initiatives and voter approved laws.. By voting “no”, you’re really voting “yes”.

    Democrats have been doing this for years. In the 90’s, a “independent democrat” running for the school board, called. He was canvassing the area over the phone. I kept that dude on the phone for over 2 hours, debating. The logic to it- usually a simple canvas call last 5 minutes. I wasted 2 hours of this guy’s time. It was two hours he was not calling 20+ other people.

  • Real nice follow-ups on these underhanded tactics, Suzanne. Here’s another one about the same topic:


    Now we just need to keep our focus on the Ranked Choice Voting scam that is rapidly becoming yet another damaging tool in the Left’s war on transparency.

    • Exactly. One Person, One Vote, for One Candidate, One Time.

      And Primaries to remain closed, want to “influence” the Republican party’s pick? Join it.

      Given the GOP and DNC national platforms are essentially diametrically opposed, there is no reason for a non-Party member to have a “good faith” reason to try to influence the Party’s pick from outside the organization.

  • I changed my party affiliation to “undeclared” years ago when I realized everyone’s name, party affiliation, registration date, mailing address, etc. is publicly available for all to see. Go look yourself up:


    If you have to live and work among intolerant leftist Democrats you can’t afford to be found to be a Republican. You could lose your career. There are no laws protecting people from discrimination based on political affiliation. You may be at risk.

%d bloggers like this: