America faces an existential threat: voters who might elect the wrong candidates. Fortunately, the MIT Election Data + Science Lab has pioneered an election evaluation methodology that will help stop this from happening.

The Lab’s new 2024 Elections Performance Index wisely ranked Minnesota first in the nation, a well-deserved honor for Governor Tim Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, and Representative Ilhan Omar. They built a model system that prioritizes efficient ballot processing over the racist obsession with verifying that ballots were cast by eligible voters.

The Index’s genius lies in what it doesn’t measure. Voter ID requirements? Not included—because demanding identification is white supremacy. Citizenship verification? Irrelevant—the so-called SAVE Act would only prevent millions of aspiring Americans from electing politicians who promise to continue supporting them. Ballot harvesting? Chain of custody? Signature matching? Red herrings that MIT’s methodology wisely ignores.

Lab Director Charles Stewart III has courageously opposed Trump’s “magical thinking” about mail-in ballot verification, upholding the highest standards of Settled Scientism. Elections are getting better precisely because we’ve stopped worrying about whether the right people are voting and started focusing on whether the right people are winning.

Critics point out that Minnesota leads the nation in systematic public fraud—$240 million stolen through Feeding Our Future alone, with federal prosecutors now investigating $9 billion in Medicaid fraud. But this only proves Minnesota’s progressive sophistication: a state that can efficiently redirect public funds to supportive constituents can surely be trusted to process ballots without burdensome verification.

MIT announced that the Election Lab has received major new grants from the Tides Foundation, George Soros’s Open Society Institute, and an anonymous donor whose wire transfer was routed through Doha.

Minnesota: where democracy is too important to leave the outcome to voters.