ReportWire

Tag: election denial

  • A Scary Postelection Trump Coup Scenario

    A Scary Postelection Trump Coup Scenario

    [ad_1]

    Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

    One frightening pre-Halloween occupation for political junkies is speculating about Donald Trump’s exact plans for challenging another election defeat. There is zero doubt he will challenge a loss but much less clarity on how he will go about it thanks to several important changes since 2020: Trump is not in control of the federal government; Trump’s party is decidedly not in control of the vice-presidency, the office that supervises the January 6 joint session of Congress to confirm the winner; and the Electoral Count Act of 2022 pretty much closed off Trump’s favorite election-reversal strategies in 2020, notably the fake-elector and vice-presidential coup gambits.

    Politico has a new report out offering the latest and by far the most detailed Trump Electoral Coup scenario, raising some possibilities I hadn’t thought about. You should read the whole thing because it nicely illustrates the many inflection points our system creates between Election Night and Inauguration Day on January 20, 2025 (the two dates about which there is complete certainty). The report also emphasizes two points that have probably been underdiscussed and are worth considering.

    First, there’s the fringe constitutional-law argument (advanced as a secondary line of attack by Trump lawyer John Eastman) that the Electoral Count Act of 1887 (which the 2022 legislation amended) is an unconstitutional abridgment of the explicit constitutional powers of state legislators to name presidential electors as they wish. This hasn’t been tested by the U.S. Supreme Court, but if it is and is upheld, the Electoral Count Reform Act scheme of ruling out any electoral vote award not made by the state-designated chief executive officer (usually either the governor or secretary of state) would fall and Republican legislators (where they are in power after the 2024 election) would be newly invited to wreak havoc.

    Second, Politico explores in some detail the potentially disruptive role of House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Trump vassal of the highest order and a congressional field commander of the 2020 bid to overturn the results:

    If Johnson believes, like Eastman, that the laws governing the joint session are unconstitutional, he could assert unprecedented authority to affect the process — all under the guise of following the Constitution. That could include taking steps to ensure that pro-Trump electors embraced by state legislatures get an up-or-down vote, even if they conflict with slates endorsed by governors. It could include permitting hours of floor time to air theories of voter fraud, while holding the presidency in limbo. It could also include lobbying allies to reject pro-Harris electors in order to prevent either candidate from receiving 270 Electoral College votes. And it could also include simply gaveling the House out of session to prevent the joint session from continuing. Each move would likely trigger intense legal battles, putting the courts — and most likely the Supreme Court — in the position of deciding how to resolve unprecedented power plays by the most prominent actors in government.

    The Supreme Court, of course, is dominated by a bloc of hardcore conservatives aligned with and partially appointed by Donald Trump and is likely more inherently partisan than the Court that awarded George W. Bush the presidency in 2001. And if Johnson in any manner manages to blow up an electoral-vote majority for Kamala Harris, the presidency would be determined by Johnson’s very own House, where it’s near-certain that Republicans will control a majority of state delegations and would return power to Trump via the peculiar rules of a “contingent” election (not used in a presidential contest since 1825, when a multicandidate field meant no one had an Electoral College majority).

    Scary, eh? So too is this detail from the Politico article:

    [T]o a person, election observers, elected leaders, and some of Trump’s own allies agree on one operating premise: On Election Night, no matter what the results show, how many votes remain uncounted, and how many advisers tell him otherwise, Donald Trump will declare himself the winner.

    Halloween definitely won’t be the only ghoulish day left on this year’s calendar.

    [ad_2]

    Ed Kilgore

    Source link

  • Trump’s Two-Prong Strategy to Ensure He Can’t Lose

    Trump’s Two-Prong Strategy to Ensure He Can’t Lose

    [ad_1]

    People cheer at a Trump rally in Aurora, Colorado, on October 11, 2024.
    Photo: Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images

    It’s been clear for some time that Donald Trump is laying the groundwork to attempt to deny and challenge an election defeat. But Team Trump is also working to ensure that he won’t have to deny the results — and not just by convincing more voters that his policies are better for America. To put it very simply, the Trump campaign, the Republican Party, and its super-PAC allies are devoting a lot of resources to suppressing the Democratic vote in key states. These strategies include:

    1. Insisting on voter-roll purges to eliminate people who don’t respond quickly to official verification inquiries, whether or not they are appropriate. (In the past, overzealous purges have disqualified hundreds of thousands of eligible voters, most notably in Florida in 2000.)
    2. Promoting ridiculously strict rules for mail ballots that don’t have anything to do with their integrity (e.g., tossing them out due to extremely minor address or date errors without the possibility of curing them).
    3. Flooding the polling places with poll watchers trained to challenge individual ballots that might go to Kamala Harris on a variety of sketchy grounds.
    4. An inside-the-tent effort to place MAGA loyalists in key election-administration positions from the precinct to the county to the state level, where they can not only slow down vote counts but increase the odds of Democratic ballots being thrown out.

    In addition to reducing the Harris vote (via a combination of ballot-eligibility challenges or heavy-handed intimidation of voters), all these MAGA boots on the ground can help build the post-election case that a Harris win was tainted with fraud. This time, Team Trump’s legal team will be much more organized than Rudy Giuliani’s Keystone Cops ensemble, which tried to capitalize on scattered election-fraud rumors and social-media claims in 2020. With so many campaign operatives working as election administrators or observers, there will be plenty of election-fraud allegations to fuel Trump lawsuits, with or without merit.

    All this activity, along with years of Trump claims that Democrats cannot beat him without cheating, will predispose his MAGA base to accept whatever he chooses to claim about the “integrity” of the election. As the initial votes come in on Election Night, he may repeat his premature victory claim from 2020 and demand that vote counting stop with him slightly ahead (if indeed that “red mirage” reappears before it’s dispelled by the “blue shift” of mail ballots). If he does, we could see on-the-ground Trump operatives and volunteers demand that state- and county-election offices “stop the steal.” He will have another moment of truth if the Associated Press and other major media outlets call the race for Harris, which will be deemed conclusive by most people outside MAGA-land.

    Trump will ultimately have to decide whether to concede or remain defiant on December 11, the federal deadline for state certifications of the vote. The Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 was designed to minimize the odds of any challenge to the results after that date.

    But whether or not the 45th president has a workable strategy for turning defeat into victory after Election Day, there’s no question his minions are trying hard to twist the system to maximize the possibility that Trump will win without having to stage another insurrection. If Trump does wind up back in the White House, he may interrupt his cries of triumph and threats of vengeance long enough to utter pieties about wanting to be the president of all the people. That ought to include not just letting them, but encouraging them, to vote.


    See All



    [ad_2]

    Ed Kilgore

    Source link

  • A List of Everything Trump Claims Is ‘Election Interference’

    A List of Everything Trump Claims Is ‘Election Interference’

    [ad_1]

    J’accuse!
    Photo: Celal Gunes/Anadolu/Getty Images

    After the 2020 election, Donald Trump and his campaign spent a lot of time in courtrooms and on the airwaves seizing on every rumor or right-wing conspiracy theory about voter fraud to back up his claims he had a right to overturn a “stolen election.” The courts dismissed nearly all of his lawsuits, people laughed at his clownish lawyers, and ultimately his big bid on January 6 to seize the presidency failed.

    In his 2024 comeback bid, Trump hasn’t let go of any of those fatuous 2020 claims — and this time he’s dispensed with the toil and trouble of alleging tangible, verifiable violations of election or voting rules. Instead, Trump is relying on vast, sweeping claims of “election interference” that seem to be designed to justify whatever he choses to do if he loses again. Below is a running list.

    The claim that has the most merit is that the members of Congress that impeached and tried him for his insurrectionary behavior on January 6, 2021, wanted to stop him from running again. That was indeed their hope in seeking to convict the former president of high crimes and misdemeanors and making him ineligible to serve in that office again. So he’s got a legitimate beef there, aside from the fact that he was, you know, guilty.

    When the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack turned to Trump’s role in the Capitol Riot in early 2022, Trump blasted it as designed to frustrate his political plans:

    “The Unselect Committee’s sole goal is to try to prevent President Trump, who is leading by large margins in every poll, from running again for president, if I so choose,” Trump said in a statement. “By so doing they are destroying democracy as we know it.”

    The Committee nonetheless makes a criminal referral to the Justice Department involving the attempted insurrection, which leads eventually to criminal indictments.

    In 2023, a large number of Trump chickens came home to roost as the former president faced civil and criminal charges on a range of illicit activities, from hush money payments to a porn star just prior to the 2016 election, to mishandling of presidential documents while in the White House, to both federal and stage charges stemming from the events of January 6. He and his supporters quickly found a convenient way to dismiss them all as politically motivated to interfere with his 2024 campaign, which he had announced in November of 2022. The conservative Washington Examiner presented the official MAGA spin:

    The story of the 2024 campaign so far is the effort by Democrats and their appointees to use criminal charges and lawsuits to force former President Donald Trump out of the race for a second term in the White House. The name for such an effort is lawfare — that is, “the strategic use of legal proceedings to intimidate or hinder an opponent,” to cite one law dictionary.

    Henceforth any progress on these cases — other than dismissal of charges or delays in proceedings — were denounced by Team Trump as illustrations of a Democratic conspiracy stretching from Manhattan to Atlanta to Washington to damage Trump campaign and perhaps put him behind bars before he could complete his triumphant return as president.

    For some time MAGA folk have claimed that social media platforms “stole” the 2020 election by “censoring” stories that might have hurt Joe Biden, particularly COVID-19 anti-vaxx fables and the rabbit hole involving Hunter Biden’s laptop. In his recent debate with Tim Walz, J.D. Vance called Big Tech censorship a bigger threat to democracy than the January 6 insurrection. But Trump now has a newer example of this alleged menace aimed at him, as NBC News reported:

    Last week, Trump posted without evidence on his social media account that Google is engaged in “blatant interference of elections” — the second time he has recently claimed that it is trying to illegally alter the White House race. Trump claimed in the post that Google manipulated its systems to reveal “bad stories” about him and “good stories” about Vice President Kamala Harris. He said he would “request” the prosecution of Google at the “maximum levels” for what he called “illegal activity,” though neither he nor his campaign offered any specific allegation of criminal conduct. 

    Tangentially, Trump has accused Kamala Harris of somehow being behind or benefiting from an Iranian hack of some of his campaign data, suggesting she should resign over it.

    Trump and his campaign have repeatedly called the maneuver whereby Joe Biden withdrew from the campaign and endorsed Harris as an “unconstitutional coup,” suggesting it illicitly robbed Trump of the opponent he thought he’d face and exposing Democrats’ willingness to do anything to keep the 45th president from returning to office.

    A very old canard that Trump deployed in 2016 and occasionally later was that Democrats were stealing elections by opening the border so that non-citizens could vote in huge numbers. There’s never been any evidence of significant non-citizen voting (which is illegal in federal elections, with deportation and imprisonment as penalties), despite constant conservative efforts to look for it. The phantom menace has come back with a vengeance late in this election cycle as Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson have promoted the idea that Kamala Harris and Joe Biden are recruiting undocumented immigrants to flood the polls and counteract the big Republican majority among American citizens.

    In a revised filing compelled by Trump’s partial victory in the U.S. Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity earlier this year, Special Prosecutor Jack Smith has issued a new indictment that provides a few spicy new details of the January 6 disaster but mostly covers old ground. How did Trump react? You guessed it:

    Former President Donald Trump called the unsealing of documents in his election interference case by special counsel Jack Smith a “weaponization of the government” during an exclusive interview with NewsNation on Wednesday in Houston, Texas. The Republican nominee was at a private fundraiser when he told NewsNation’s Ali Bradley that Smith is a “deranged person” following the dismissal of his separate classified documents case in July.

    “This was a weaponization of the government … and released 30 days before the election,” Trump said of Wednesday’s developments. “My poll numbers have gone up instead of down. It is pure election interference.”

    The latest Trump clam is that the alleged inadequacy of his Secret Service detail is a “kind of election interference,” on the theory, I guess, that the tautly stretched protective agency is interfering with his beloved outdoor rallies by encouraging him to utilize smaller and easier-to-secure venues for his ranting and raving events.

    It’s a good time to recognize that absolutely anything Trump doesn’t like is going to be called “election interference,” and that the vagueness and impossibility of documenting the effect of this or that Trump grievance is a feature, not a bug. He has clearly made enough claims that the election is rigged against him to justify (at least to the satisfaction his followers) that any course of action he chooses to take if he loses is fully justified, and even righteous.


    See All



    [ad_2]

    Ed Kilgore

    Source link

  • Is 2024 Election Denialism a Trump VP Litmus Test?

    Is 2024 Election Denialism a Trump VP Litmus Test?

    [ad_1]

    Tim Scott is clearly willing to do the Boss’s bidding if push comes to shove.
    Photo: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

    Typically, vice-presidential nominees complement the presidential nominee in some crucial respect; that was true for Donald Trump in 2016, when Mike Pence offered reassurance to the movement conservatives and conservative Evangelicals uneasy with the then-mogul and his unorthodox persona and outlook. But Pence, of course, by refusing to help Trump reverse the 2020 election results on January 6, 2021, also taught Trump the value of absolutely loyalty to the Boss. So it goes without saying that his next running-mate will be closely examined for any signs of incipient independence. That’s why the only 2024 Trump primary rival who is on his VP shortlist is Tim Scott. The South Carolina senator was careful not to criticize Trump as an active candidate and then endorsed him over Nikki Haley, the woman who appointed him to the U.S. Senate. Indeed, Scott’s situation provides a good measuring stick for the outer bounds of Trump’s tolerance for any risk of a recurrence of the Pence problem.

    Since 2020 election denialism is a central feature of Trump’s 2024 message, criticism of Trump’s (or his “patriot” friends’) conduct on January 6 could be a real problem for a prospective veep. Tim Scott provides a real borderline case: While expressing displeasure about the assault on the Capitol, and worse yet, voting to confirm Joe Biden’s election, he went out of his way to absolve Trump himself of any misconduct soon thereafter.

    “The president is simply not guilty,” Scott said on Fox News. “I was in the chamber when the rioters were coming over. I was taking my jacket off, my tie off, rolling my sleeves up, just in case I had to fight. The chances of me understanding and appreciating the severity of the situation is 100 percent. The one person I don’t blame is President Trump.”

    That’s pretty good from a MAGA perspective, though Scott may need to learn some respect for the “J6 hostages” if he wants to speak at Trump rallies this fall. January 6 revisionism aside, however, there’s a prospective topic where any equivocation could be really damaging to the team: leaving open the possibility of 2024 election denialism. And Scott faced and met an acid test over this last weekend as a guest on Meet the Press, as The Hill reported:

    In an interview on NBC News’s “Meet the Press,” anchor Kristen Welker pressed Scott on Trump’s refusal to commit to accepting the 2024 election results and then asked Scott whether he would commit to accepting the results.

    Scott repeatedly avoided answering the question — even when pressed at least three times for “just yes or no” on accepting the results of the election — and said, “at the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump.”

    Welker followed up, asking, “Wait, wait, senator. Yes or no. Yes or no? Will you accept the election results of 2024, no matter who wins?”

    “That is my statement,” Scott replied, later adding, “The American people will make the decision, and the decision will be for President Trump.”

    Scott could have emulated Trump himself and responded to the question with a long, incoherent word salad that would have made it difficult for Welker to repeat the question and try to pin him down. But by clamming up once he’d predicted Trump’s ultimate triumph, the South Carolinian did what he had to do.

    Unfortunately for other veep prospects, Scott’s very conspicuous refusal to make a statement of trust in the electoral system that would have been entirely routine for any presidential or vice-presidential candidate prior to 2016 will guarantee they will face the same question sooner or later. And there’s really no acceptable answer other than “it depends,” which of course raises other questions that aren’t easy to answer. Perhaps the best VP prospect would be someone who never for a moment challenged Trump’s 2020 election denialism and is down for another round of it today. There aren’t a lot of those since nearly all Republican elected officials either admitted in an unguarded moment that Biden had won the election, or at the time found the events of January 6 stressful or grotesque. So those who want to see their names on a bumper sticker with Donald Trump this year had better be extra careful about foreclosing any election-stealing gambit by the former president between Election Day and next January 20.


    See All



    [ad_2]

    Ed Kilgore

    Source link

  • Kari Lake’s lawyer apparently doesn’t know how appeals work

    Kari Lake’s lawyer apparently doesn’t know how appeals work

    [ad_1]

    Appellate judges listening to arguments Thursday in Kari Lake’s challenge to her 2022 election loss had to keep reminding her lawyer how appeals courts work. “I’m sure you’re aware we’re not a fact-finding court — we’re a court that decides questions of law, primarily,” Judge Peter Eckerstrom told Kurt Olsen, Lake’s attorney, shortly after he began his arguments. …

    [ad_2]

    Caitlin Sievers | Arizona Mirror

    Source link

  • How Election Denial Lost

    How Election Denial Lost

    [ad_1]

    Outside the Maricopa County tabulation center last weekend, a few dozen outraged Arizonans paced single file along the sidewalk waving KARI LAKE flags. Through megaphones, some of them denounced imaginary corruption schemes and clamored for a “redo” election. Others chanted the Lord’s Prayer, like the musicians on the Titanic playing hymns to calm the passengers.

    The noteworthy thing about the Maricopa protest, though, wasn’t the scene. It was its singularity. Two years ago, shouts of “Stop the steal!” could be heard across the country in nearly every state. This year, the refrain was largely limited to one block in downtown Phoenix, where at times reporters outnumbered the demonstrators.

    If any state was going to devolve into chaos after a disappointing election for Republicans, it would have been Arizona—ground zero for election denial in 2020, and where this year, primary voters nominated an entire slate of fringe election cranks to all of the state’s major offices. Instead, the midterms delivered a sure blow to the election-denial movement, both there and everywhere else: The most prominent conspiracists, such as the Arizona secretary-of-state candidate Mark Finchem and Pennsylvania’s Doug Mastriano, lost by significant margins; some of these candidates even acknowledged their losses by—surprise!—actually conceding. On Monday night, Lake was declared the loser in her race for Arizona’s governorship, adding a final note to what has seemed like a comprehensive repudiation of the denialists. And where experts and reporters had anticipated widespread election-fraud mayhem, nothing close to it has yet emerged.

    It would be foolish, though, to pronounce “Stop the Steal” dead. The movement may have fizzled without Donald Trump, but if he runs again in 2024, we haven’t seen the last of it. Even if Trump isn’t on the ballot, an entire swath of the Republican Party is now open to the idea that any narrow loss can be blamed on fraud. Trust in elections among rank-and-file GOP voters remains low, and in some respects has gotten worse, according to a recent survey from the Pew Research Center. The damage inflicted in 2020 endures. “He’s broken the seal,” Sarah Longwell, the publisher of The Bulwark, told me. Election denial “is part of our politics now.”

    Things could have been so much worse.

    Ahead of the election, poll workers in Arizona and beyond feared for their safety, and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law reported an uptick in calls to its Election Protection hotline. In the Phoenix suburbs, armed men were patrolling ballot drop-off sites. The day before the election, I watched a group of women stake out a ballot box, studying voters through binoculars for signs of cheating. The central counting facility in downtown Phoenix was fenced off with a ring of plastic Jersey barriers, and police patrolled the streets on horseback.

    Election officials in Maricopa County, who appeared very tightly wound, held a press conference to get ahead of any potential claims of election chicanery. A time-consuming vote count does not indicate fraud, they reminded the room full of reporters; ballots are processed and reviewed by bipartisan teams; tabulation machines work.

    Unfortunately, events on Election Day quickly undermined those careful efforts at reassurance. The sun had not yet risen when the first handful of tabulation machines stopped reading ballots. By midday, dozens of machines were malfunctioning at polling sites throughout the county. Voters at those sites were told to feed their ballots into “Door 3,” a regrettably sinister-sounding name for a secure slot that would sort the misread ballots to be counted later. And they would be counted later, as officials reassured voters in a series of follow-up press conferences.

    Voters I spoke with were understandably confused and frustrated. And the malfunctioning machines had state GOP leaders immediately taking to Twitter to suggest wrongdoing. “They are incompetent and/or engaging in malfeasance just like in 2020,” GOP Chair Kelli Ward posted. Those complaints spiraled into partisan hysteria as the counting went on. Frustrated MAGA commentators suggested that Maricopa County officials had engaged in outright corruption and “CIVIC TERRORISM.” Finchem accused them of “screwing with the election counts.”

    Still, despite those initial glitches and dark mutterings, Election Day unfolded mostly without threats or funny business. Poll workers weren’t harmed, and voters were, for the most part, not intimidated. Almost everyone on the America First Secretary of State Coalition slate lost last week, including Michigan’s Kristina Karamo, who’d described Democrats as having a “satanic agenda”; Finchem, the mustachioed Oath Keeper of Arizona; and the head of the coalition himself, Nevada’s Jim Marchant.

    Parroting Trump’s election lies got many Republican candidates across the finish line in their primary. Finchem’s repeated election-fraud claims won him a regular spot on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast. The former president has praised Lake’s commitment to the bit, too, reportedly telling donors that even if asked about the weather, Lake would find a way to bring the conversation back to 2020. But these wild claims proved poisonous to moderates and swing voters—polling suggests that some went to the polls explicitly to vote against deniers. We know this because many Republicans who didn’t traffic in election lies performed well: Brian Kemp beat Stacey Abrams by almost eight points in the Georgia governor’s race. In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis won reelection by nearly 20 points.

    Fans of democracy can take heart that only 14 out of 94 election deniers won in races for positions that oversee elections, including secretary of state, attorney general, and governor, according to States United Action, a nonpartisan nonprofit that advocates for election integrity. Of those 14, only five candidates were not incumbents. “The movement is still not gaining ground,” Joanna Lydgate, the CEO of States United Action, told me.

    That things didn’t turn out worse is a relief, given the chaos of 2020. But the dynamic of this year’s election was different in a few important ways. Republicans were on the defensive back then: The general election was a national referendum on their president. This year, Trump himself wasn’t on the ballot—whereas, in 2020, he had spent months priming the base to blame polling fraud if he lost. It’s clear now that nobody does Stop the Steal like 45.

    “The thing that gives you power as an election denier is that people believe you, and Trump was able to make people believe him,” Longwell told me. Few other candidates have that power, and none in this midterm election could nationalize the issue as he did in the presidential contest. This time, the GOP had no central character over whom Trump supporters could feel outraged.

    Yet the election-fraud fires that Trump and his allies have fanned for so long will not be easily extinguished. If repeated audits and cold evidence haven’t done enough to deter conspiracists these past two years, then a disappointing midterm cycle won’t dissuade them either.

    Election deniers didn’t win in swing states, but elsewhere they did. Four of them will oversee elections in Indiana, Wyoming, Alabama, and South Dakota. More than 200 Republicans running for Congress and statewide positions who’d questioned the legitimacy of the 2020 election won or retained their office last week, including more than 180 in the House. Other election deniers won at the state level in ultraconservative districts across the country. These ruby-red areas might sink deeper into denial, creating islands where both voters and officials are debilitatingly distrustful of elections.

    Take Cochise County, Arizona. There, 170 miles southeast of Phoenix, some GOP election officials have been hankering to do a full hand-count audit in the election. Paradoxically, Republican candidates won handily there both this year and in 2020, so no obvious motive for distrusting the results is apparent. But the years-long drumbeat of misinformation from the state GOP chair, Ward, and her allied band of election-fraud kooks have nurtured a deep suspicion of the whole process.

    Republican leaders in Arizona don’t believe in machine tabulation and view hand counts as the purest, most accurate way to tally votes—never mind the extensive evidence that the opposite is true. This year, Cochise County tried to forge ahead with a full hand-count audit, even after a judge ordered local officials not to. Only a timely ruling from the Arizona Supreme Court last week kept them from carrying one out. “What I’ll be doing over the next two years is looking at these counties that have gone really hard to the right,” Jessica Huseman, the editorial director of Votebeat, a nonpartisan election-news outlet, told me. “Because there’s no one to push back.”

    Even in states where election deniers lost, voters have been primed to suspect outcomes they don’t like, glitches they don’t understand, and delays in counting. “If [Lake] doesn’t announce that she’s going to win tonight, we might have to go through like a week or so of shenanigans—the same shenanigans that they pulled in 2020,” Stephen Tenner, a former actor from New York, told me at a lavish GOP Election Night party in Scottsdale. “We’re waiting for it this time; we weren’t ready last time. So we’re going to catch the fraud.”

    Other Republicans I interviewed were less persuaded of the likelihood of fraud, but were comfortable entertaining the idea. “I’d like to go back to same-day voting and paper ballots. There are problems with machines,” a man named William from Phoenix, who declined to give his last name, told me at the party. Would he blame fraud if Republicans lost? I asked. “Well, there were problems with the elections two years ago,” he said, adding that, this time around, Secretary of State Katie Hobbs should have recused herself from official duties during the election. “I would be hesitant to say I thought [this one] was completely honest.”

    The thing about trust is that it’s painstakingly hard to build and relatively easy to demolish. Election denial is now a chronic wound in America’s body politic, only partially healed, and ready to reopen—red and raw—whenever circumstances permit. Those circumstances may arise sooner rather than later if Trump is on the ballot again in 2024. Even if he isn’t, the former president has already broken the tradition of gracious presidential concessions and peaceful transfers of power. He’s encouraged a populist animus toward institutions that will likely remain a litmus test for future Republican candidates. And more than anything, Trump has created a blueprint for exploiting the messiness and complexity of America’s elections. An audience for this type of exploitation is still out there, if Republicans want to take advantage of it.

    On Monday, after Maricopa County released a decisive batch of ballots that led all major news networks to declare Hobbs the next governor of Arizona, a few members of Team Lake sprang into action to ensure that any ballots with errors were quickly cured. That’s a standard and legitimate procedure in elections, and can be helpful in especially close ones. But other Republicans continued to follow the denialist script. Ward accused Maricopa County of voter suppression. Finchem, the failed secretary-of-state candidate, began to do the impossible calculations. “I should win by 3% and @KariLake should win by 11%,” he tweeted. “If that doesn’t happen you know the real story.”

    Lake’s own account was silent for more than an hour after the networks had called the race. After all of this, would this cycle’s Stop the Steal standard-bearer actually concede? The answer came at 10:30 p.m. eastern, with a simple tweet: “Arizonans know BS when they see it,” Lake wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Elaine Godfrey

    Source link