Introduction
In a recent video created by Benny Johnson, he sheds light on a concerning decision made by the top election official in Maine – the Secretary of State. This decision, made without a court ruling or conviction, involves the removal of Donald Trump from the ballot. What makes this decision even more controversial is the personal bias displayed by the Secretary of State, who openly admits to disliking President Trump and his orange skin color. This review aims to delve into the fairness and constitutionality of this decision, ultimately questioning the Secretary of State’s authority and its implications for democracy.
Unfair and Unconstitutional Decision
The heart of the issue lies in the fact that the Secretary of State made a decision, not based on legal requirements or a thorough examination of evidence, but rather on her personal feelings towards President Trump. This leaves room for subjective judgment, which can easily infringe upon individual rights and undermine the principles of democracy. Article 2 of the Constitution clearly outlines the eligibility criteria for the president, none of which include being liked or disliked by anyone. According to the Constitution, the president must be 35 years old, a natural-born American citizen, and have lived in the country for 14 years. By excluding Trump based on personal opinions, the Secretary of State’s decision appears to be both unfair and unconstitutional.
The Role of the Secretary of State
It is crucial to acknowledge that the role of the Secretary of State is to oversee the election process, not to determine who can or cannot run for president based on personal biases. The Secretary of State’s duty is to ensure fair and impartial elections. By letting personal feelings intervene, she not only deviates from her responsibilities but also undermines the principles of democracy. It is the duty of the courts to determine a candidate’s eligibility, not the Secretary of State acting as a sole arbiter of who can be on the ballot.
The Irrationality of the Decision
When analyzing the Secretary of State’s decision, it becomes apparent that it lacks rationality. Removing a candidate from the ballot solely based on personal preferences disregards the concept of due process and objective evaluation. Democracy calls for an unbiased and rational approach, where rules and procedures are followed diligently, rather than subjective judgments made by a single individual. The Secretary of State’s decision, in this case, seems to lack the necessary rationale that should underpin electoral processes.
Undermining Democracy and Fairness
The decision made by the Secretary of State raises concerns about the principles of democracy and fairness in elections. By allowing personal biases to dictate who can run for president, we risk setting a dangerous precedent where individuals in positions of power can manipulate the electoral process to suit their agenda. Democracy is founded upon the idea that every eligible candidate has the right to run for office and have their case evaluated by the public. The Secretary of State’s decision not only bypasses this important principle but also undermines the trust that citizens have in their electoral system.
The Need for Review and Reversal
Given the questionable nature of the Secretary of State’s decision, it is vital that it undergoes a thorough review by the appropriate authorities. This review should evaluate the decision within the bounds of the Constitution and ensure that personal biases have not influenced the outcome. If it is determined that the decision was indeed influenced by personal opinions rather than legal requirements, it should be overturned promptly and measures should be taken to prevent such occurrences in the future. The integrity of our democracy relies on fair and impartial elections free from personal biases.
In conclusion, Benny Johnson’s video sheds light on a concerning decision made by the Secretary of State in Maine, who removed Donald Trump from the ballot based on personal biases. This decision not only appears to be unfair and unconstitutional but also undermines democracy and fairness in elections. It is crucial to ensure that decisions regarding eligibility for office are made based on legal requirements and objective evaluation, rather than personal opinions. The Secretary of State’s decision must be reviewed and, if necessary, overturned to uphold the principles of democracy and the integrity of our electoral system.
