The above posts presented no evidence that the candidate or his campaign spent any money on the election. Obviously someone spent money, but why should that di

The above posts presented no evidence that the candidate or his campaign spent any money on the election. Obviously someone spent money, but why should that disqualify the candidate. Should news media companies that report positively about one candidate or negatively about another be required to file in-kind donation reports? Can we disqualify their favored candidate if they don’t? If we statistically see that there are a lot of social media posts for or against a candidate, should we require all social media posters to file in-kind donation reports? If poor university students with nothing more than time and access to a photocopier be required to report in-kind donations for posting flyers? I’m sure in any election we could and would find plenty of “unreported” donations, and if the penalty was removing the offending candidate, it would be weaponized to remove candidates from competition. There is no “fair” distribution of information. Allowing courts to interfere in elections with the assumptions that they can remedy that fairness is a recipe for tyranny and manipulation. The only reason courts should step in is when legally established processes related to registration and casting of ballots (objective, observable processes) are not followed correctly.