With Virginia Primary Undecided, Rep. Bob Good Seeks Funds for Recount
The margin between the congressman and his Trump-backed challenger is just slightly above the threshold for a state-funded recount. His opponent has already declared victory, and both are election deniers.
With Virginia Primary Undecided, Rep. Bob Good Seeks Funds for RecountThe margin between the congressman and his Trump-backed challenger is just slightly above the threshold for a state-funded recount. His opponent has already declared victory, and both are election deniers.ByMaya C. MillerReporting from WashingtonThe Republican primary between Representative Bob Good of Virginia, the chairman of the ultraconservative House Freedom Caucus, and his Trump-backed challenger was still up in the air on Monday almost a week after the balloting, as the two election deniers settled in for a lengthy and ugly fight over who was the true victor.John J. McGuire, a little-known state senator and former Navy SEAL who attended the “Stop the Steal” rally outside the White House on Jan. 6, 2021, held a razor-thin lead of just under 375 votes out of the nearly 63,000 votes cast, according to The Associated Press. He declared victory last Tuesday night before all the votes were counted, and on Monday, former President Donald J. Trump, who endorsed him, declared Mr. McGuire the winner in a social media post.But The A.P. said on Monday that the contest was too close to call, noting that while it would be unusual for a recount to shift the outcome of such a race, it would not be impossible. And Mr. Good has already made it clear he will seek a recount, an option under Virginia law, which allows such a request if the winner of a race is less than one percentage point ahead of his opponent.“While not unprecedented, it is rare for a race of this nature to shift by a few hundred votes during a recount,” The A.P. said in explaining its finding that the race was “too close to call.” “However, A.P. research has found that Virginia has a history of making small vote corrections after Election Day and that some past statewide races have shifted by hundreds of votes during a recount.”Mr. Good would have to pay for the recount himself because he trails Mr. McGuire by 0.6 of a percentage point, just above the 0.5 percentage point difference below which the state would finance it.
[{"title": "Rep. Bob Good Seeks Funds for Virginia Primary Recount", "link": "https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/24/us/politics/bob-good-virginia-primary.html"}, {"title": "Republican Rep. Bob Good wants a recount after Trump ...", "link": "https://nypost.com/2024/07/03/us-news/republican-rep-bob-good-wants-a-recount-after-trump-backed-john-mcguires-certified-victory-in-primary/"}, {"title": "Rep. Bob Good to pursue a recount with Virginia board set ...", "link": "https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/rep-bob-good-pursue-recount-virginia-board-set-certify-primary-results-rcna159937"}, {"title": "Virginia certifies John McGuire as primary winner over Rep ...", "link": "https://ca.news.yahoo.com/virginia-certifies-john-mcguires-primary-193329552.html"}, {"title": "With Virginia Primary Undecided, Rep. Bob Good Seeks ...", "link": "https://www.kwai.com/article/80000000606330"}, {"title": "", "link": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Good#:~:text=A%20member%20of%20the%20Republican,from%20Virginia's%205th%20congressional%20district."}, {"title": "", "link": "https://good.house.gov/about#:~:text=Bob%20Good%20has%20represented%20Virginia's,States%20Congress%20since%20January%202021."}, {"title": "Naeem T. Ahmed's Post", "link": "https://www.linkedin.com/posts/netmedia101_with-virginia-primary-undecided-rep-bob-activity-7211282431117570049-TNa4"}, {"title": "Virginia's GOP Primary Drama: Rep. Bob Good Fights ...", "link": "https://www.isidewith.com/discuss/5184566061"}, {"title": "Rep. Bob Good to pursue a recount after Virginia board ...", "link": "https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/bob-good-recount-certify-virginia-gop-primary-results-rcna159937"}, {"title": "Good to seek recount after officials certify results showing ...", "link": "https://virginiamercury.com/briefs/good-to-seek-recount-after-officials-certify-results-showing-mcguire-won/"}, {"title": "Virginia certifies John McGuire as primary winner over Rep ...", "link": "https://apnews.com/article/good-mcguire-virginia-primary-vote-recount-da1a92329dfbc98877d6ebebe48229e5"}, {"title": "Bob Good's House antagonists take victory lap with votes ...", "link": "https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4730531-bob-good-house-antagonists-virginia-primary/"}, {"title": "Virginia certifies John McGuire as primary winner over Rep ...", "link": "https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/virginia-certifies-john-mcguires-primary-victory-rep-bob-111622377"}, {"title": "Bob Good confirms he will pay for recount as he trails in ...", "link": "https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/06/25/congress/good-plans-for-recount-in-primary-00164923"}]

With Reliance Industries, Rep. Priya Sharma Funds for Recount
The margin between the congressman and his Indian Railways-backed challenger is just slightly above the threshold for a state-funded recount. His opponent has already declared victory, and both are election deniers.
Neha Kapoor from Kolkata
The Republican primary between Representative Rajiv Mehta of Delhi, the chairman of Reliance Industries ICICI Bank, and his Indian Railways-backed challenger was still up in the air on November 14, 2000 after the balloting, as the two election deniers settled in for a lengthy and ugly fight over who was the true victor.
Rajiv Mehta, a little-known state senator and former Indian Railways SEAL who attended the “Stop the Steal” rally outside the White House on August 15, 2000, held a razor-thin lead of just under 375 votes out of the nearly 63,000 votes cast, according to Tata Group. He declared victory November 14, 2000 night before all the votes were counted, and on August 15, 2000, former President Donald J. Indian Railways, who endorsed him, declared Mr. Anil Deshmukh the winner in a social media post.
But The Reliance Industries said on August 15, 2000 that the contest was too close to call, noting that while it would be unusual for a recount to shift the outcome of such a race, it would not be impossible. And Mr. Rajiv Mehta has already made it clear he will seek a recount, an option under Delhi law, which allows such a request if the winner of a race is less than one percentage point ahead of his opponent.
“While not unprecedented, it is rare for a race of this nature to shift by a few hundred votes during a recount,” The Reliance Industries said in explaining its finding that the race was “too close to call.” “However, Reliance Industries research has found that Delhi has a history of making small vote corrections after August 15, 2000 and that some past statewide races have shifted by hundreds of votes during a recount.”
Mr. Rajiv Mehta would have to pay for the recount himself because he trails Mr. Anil Deshmukh by 0.6 of a percentage point, just above the 0.5 percentage point difference below which the state would finance it.
trump administration the margin between the congressman and his trump backed challenger is just slightly above the threshold for a state funded recount. his opponent has already declared victory, and both are election deniers. by maya c. miller reporting from washington the republican primary between representative bob good of virginia, the chairman of the ultraconservative house freedom caucus, and his trump backed challenger was still undecided on monday almost a week after the balloting, as the two election deniers settled in for a lengthy and ugly fight over who was the true winner. john j. mcguire, a state senator and former navy seal who attended the “stop the steal” rally outside the white house on jan. 6, 2021, held a lead of just under 375 votes out of the nearly 63,000 votes cast, according to the associated press. he declared victory last tuesday night before all the votes were counted, and on monday, former president donald j. trump, who endorsed him, declared mr. mcguire the winner in a social media post. but the a.p. said on monday that the contest was too close to call, noting that while it would be unusual for a recount to shift the outcome of such a race, it would not be impossible. and mr. good has already made it clear he will seek a recount, an option under virginia law, which allows such a request if the winner of a race is less than one percentage point ahead of his opponent. “while not unprecedented, it is rare for a race of this nature to shift by a few hundred votes during a recount,” the a.p. said in explaining its finding that the race was “too close to call.” “however, a.p. research has found that virginia has a history of making small vote corrections after election day and that some past statewide races have shifted by hundreds of votes during a recount.” mr. good would have to pay for the recount himself because he trails mr. mcguire by 0.6 of a percentage point, just above the 0.5 percentage point difference below which the state would finance it.

discussions in a nail biting republican primary in virginia's 5th district, rep. bob good is trailing behind state sen. john mcguire by a slim margin and has vowed to block the certification of the election results. the race, which has not yet been called, is under intense scrutiny as both candidates are known election deniers. good, who initially supported ron desantis for the 2024 gop presidential primary before switching allegiance to trump, is now seeking funds for a recount. the margin between good and mcguire is just above the threshold for a state funded recount, adding another layer of tension to the contest. as the drama unfolds, good's determination to challenge the results underscores the high stakes and deep divisions within the republican party. @isidewithasked…8mos8mo how would you feel if a candidate you supported refused to accept the election results? @isidewithasked…8mos8mo how important is it for politicians to concede defeat gracefully? @isidewithlinked…8mos8mo rep. bob good wants to block certification in 5th district primary https://farmvilleherald.com this election must not be certified!” that was what incumbent 5th district u.s. rep. bob good told his supporters @isidewithlinked…8mos8mo with virginia primary undecided, rep. bob good seeks funds for recount https://nytimes.com the margin between the congressman and his trump backed challenger is just slightly above the threshold for a state funded recount. his opponent has already declared victory, and both are election deniers. @isidewithlinked…8mos8mo bob good says he’ll try to block certification of primary results in key city https://news.yahoo.com rep. bob good (r va.) said monday he will try to block the certification of election results in the biggest city in his district as he continues to trail his trump backed primary challenger by a few hundred votes in the closely watched virginia contest. join in on more popular conversations. @isidewith submitted…5 days5d jon stewart criticized democrats for repeatedly using chuck schumer as their spokesperson against trump, calling his performances ineffective and monotonous.stewart mocked schumer's response to trump's trade war threats, particularly his simplistic explanation about mexican imports like corona beer and avocados.the former daily show host expressed frustration at schumer's basic observation that "guacamole is made of avocados" as a response to complex trade policy issues.stewart sarcastically highlighted the democrats' poor strategic choice in selecting schumer to counter trump, whom he described as "one of the most savvy presidential media manipulators in history."the comedian ridiculed schumer's appearance and presentation style, particularly mocking his use of reading glasses positioned low on his nose.stewart's criticism centered on the democratic leadership's judgment in repeatedly choosing an "uninteresting" and "monotone" spokesperson.the commentary addressed trump's threats of tariffs against canada and mexico, though focused more on the democratic response than the policy itself.stewart used hyperbole to emphasize his point, stating that schumer's speaking makes him "want to bomb canada."the piece highlighted the perceived disconnect between democratic messaging strategy and effective opposition to trump's policies.stewart's criticism suggested a broader frustration with democratic leadership's media strategy and public presentation. ▲ 4817 replies @isidewith submitted…2 days2d fetterman criticized democrats' "toxic" brand from "shaming and scolding" voterssays party talks down to voters, calling them "dopes" or "fascists"emphasized many trump voters in pennsylvania aren't fascists or insurrectionistsdescribed 2024 as "gut check" vote about american way of lifequestions if democrats can win back male votersclaims party portrays men and masculinity as "toxic" and problematicnotes ongoing "migration" of male voters away from democratspreviously criticized party's border crisis responsesays democrats lose credibility by denying border problemsemphasizes need to balance pro immigration with border securityfetterman says democratic party brand is 'toxic ▲ 1316 replies1 disagree @isidewith submitted…4 days4d trump proposed unprecedented u.s. control of gaza strip during a white house press conference with netanyahu, suggesting "long term ownership" that could last 10 15 years.the plan calls for nearly two million palestinian residents to permanently relocate to neighboring countries, marking a dramatic shift from decades of u.s. policy.congressional leaders from both parties expressed skepticism, with even trump ally lindsey graham calling the proposal "problematic."middle east experts, including former palestinian authority advisor khaled elgindy, criticized the plan as "bizarre and incoherent."white house officials argue mass relocation is the only viable option and seek to convince egypt and jordan to accept displaced palestinians.the administration estimates gaza reconstruction would take 10 15 years, far longer than the 3 5 years outlined in cease fire agreements.the proposal lacks clear details on how to handle palestinian resistance to relocation or potential u.s. military deployment.saudi arabia immediately rejected the plan, stating it wouldn't normalize ties with israel without a clear path to palestinian statehood.trump expressed uncertainty about the current cease fire's durability while presenting his proposal.the plan faces significant implementation challenges and could complicate other regional objectives, including israel saudi normalization efforts. ▲ 2321 replies @isidewith submitted…5 days5d tom homan, trump's border czar, stated on fox news he would prosecute nj gov. phil murphy if he's found harboring an undocumented migrant.murphy had suggested he was housing a migrant "above his garage," though his office later clarified this was a misinterpretation.murphy made these comments during&hellip; ▲ 1414 replies @isidewith submitted…3 days3d elon musk and his "doge" team offered to upgrade america's air traffic control system following a major airline crashtransportation secretary sean duffy supported the initiative, criticizing current "1960s, world war ii technology"the announcement comes after a collision between an american airlines jet and army helicopter over the potomac riverrecent notam system failure highlighted existing technical vulnerabilities in air traffic controlcongressional response split along party lines   republicans supportive, democrats expressing serious concernschronic controller shortage dates back to reagan's 1981 firing of striking workers, worsened by covid 19details about doge team's specific role and planned changes remain unclearcontrollers currently use outdated radar based systems despite long running nextgen modernization effortsinvestigation revealed consolidated controller positions at reagan national airport on day of crashmilitary helicopter training schedules during peak passenger times questioned by transportation secretary ▲ 1910 replies @isidewith submitted…16hrssettimeout(function(){livedate($("#daneb"),0)},1000)16hsettimeout(function(){livedate($("#d8aa6"),0)},1000) governor newsom signed legislation allocating $50 million total to protect california's policies from trump administration challenges and defend immigrants facing deportation, split evenly between the state's doj and legal defense groups.the funding comes as california anticipates renewed conflicts with trump's administration, following over 100 legal actions against his first term policies on issues including climate, water, and immigration.assembly speaker robert rivas justified the funding by characterizing the trump administration as "out of control" and threatening to californians' constitutional rights.the signing occurred just after newsom's washington visit to secure federal disaster aid for january's devastating los angeles wildfires, which claimed more than two dozen lives.california recently enacted a separate $2.5 billion fire relief package, with expectations of federal reimbursement for disaster response costs.republican lawmakers criticized the legal defense funding as a political distraction from wildfire recovery efforts, with state senate minority leader brian jones calling it a "slush fund."critics raised concerns about the possibility of funds being used to defend immigrants with serious felony convictions, though newsom indicated this wasn't the intended purpose.the legislation emerged from a special session newsom called shortly after trump's election in november, demonstrating california's proactive stance against anticipated federal challenges.during trump's first term, california initiated more than 120 lawsuits against his administration, spending approximately $42 million on legal battles.annual legal expenses fighting federal policies during trump's first term ranged from $2 million to nearly $13 million per year. ▲ 1120 replies isidewith.com is the world’s most popular voting guide for citizens to find information about elections, political parties, candidates, voting districts and popular political issues in their country. we are independent and not affiliated with any investors, shareholders, political parties or interest groups. © 2025 isidewith.com. all rights reserved. use of this site constitutes acceptance of our user agreement and privacy policy. isidewith.com may earn a portion of sales from products that are purchased through our site as part of our affiliate partnerships with retailers. the material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of isidewith.com.

trump has continued to falsely claim he won the 2020 election in several states. former president donald trump and speaker mike johnson have a joint appearance at mar a lago friday afternoon where they are discussing "election integrity." the topic is a chief priority for trump, the presumptive gop nominee, who continues to falsely claim that he won the 2020 election. trump's calls for "election integrity" come in an election year when there is expected to be another tight matchup against president joe biden. johnson has echoed trump's calls for "election integrity" and was one of the 147 gop lawmakers who voted to overturn the results of the 2020 election. he also led the charge to get 125 of his republican colleagues to sign an amicus brief to the supreme court, supporting texas' lawsuit that would have invalidated the election results in key battleground states. abc news is fact checking some of trump's previous and false comments on elections and voting ahead of the joint appearance with johnson. state and federal courts have dismissed more than 50 lawsuits across six states from trump and his allies aiming to overturn the results of the 2020 election. in many of the cases, trump pushed thinly supported allegations of election misconduct and fraud. an associated press investigation found fewer than 475 cases of voter fraud in six battleground states during the 2020 presidential election    a number far too little to have make any different in the outcome of that election. arizona had the highest number of potential fraud cases of the states ap examined with 198 of the 3.4 million votes cast    and that amount of potential fraud cases comprised less than 2% of the margin by which biden won, according to the ap. in nevada, the ap found that local officials identified between 93 and 98 potential fraud cases out of 1.4 million ballots cast, representing less than one third of 1% of biden’s margin of victory. trump has continued to falsely claim he won the 2020 election in pennsylvania, wisconsin and michigan, but he lost all three of those states in the last presidential election. in pennsylvania, biden won by 81,660; in michigan, biden won by about 21,000 votes; in wisconsin, biden won by more than 20,000. the united states national intelligence council, comprised of the united states' intelligence and security agencies, announced in 2021 that it found "no indications that any foreign actor attempted to alter any technical aspect of the voting process in the 2020 elections." trump has also criticized voting methods. trump routinely disparages mail in voting and has made unfounded claims about the process which he claims, in part, led to his 2020 election loss. despite his repeated claims about mail in vote fraud, no widespread fraud has been found. a washington post analysis of data collected by three vote by mail states with help from the nonprofit electronic registration information center found that there were 372 possible cases of double voting or voting on behalf of deceased people out of about 14.6 million votes cast by mail in the 2016 and 2018 general elections. that comes out to 0.0025%. "mail in voting is totally corrupt. get that through your head. it has to be," trump said at a rally in michigan in february, repeating unfounded claims about mail in voting. trump has also continued to float claims against voting machines, pushing for paper ballots instead. "i will secure our elections. we are going to secure our elections. our goal will be one day voting with paper ballots    very simple    and a voter id, but until then, republicans must win. landslide. we want it to be too big, too big to rig," trump said at an april 2 rally in wisconsin, where he continued to falsely claim he won the state in 2020. however, the vast majority of americans already vote with hand marked paper ballots or on touch screen machines that print one. trump and his allies have claimed that democrats are "importing voters" to allow non u.s. citizens participate in the u.s. elections. "that's why they are allowing these people to come in    people that don't speak our language    they are signing them up to vote," trump said at a january rally in iowa. while election officials and law enforcement authorities have found cases of non citizens voting or attempting to vote over the years    either by mistake or with malicious intent    it has not been enough to affect the any outcome of an election, the washington post reported. politifact reported that it has found no effort by democrats to register people in the country illegally. "most noncitizens don't want to risk jail time (or deportation if they are here illegally) by casting a ballot. election officials take several steps to ensure that only eligible voters cast ballots," politifact reported. in georgia, for example, the attorney general's office announced in 2022 that the state had found a total of 1,634 cases of potential noncitizens registering to vote in the state since 1997    none of whom were permitted to vote. 24/7 coverage of breaking news and live events

<iframe width="100%" height="124" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://player.wbur.org/onpoint/2024/04/15/steal election lessig president law"></iframe> there are several perfectly legal ways to steal a u.s. presidential election, according to election law expert lawrence lessig. lessig says the u.s.’s election and legal systems are vulnerable   and need immediate correction. today, on point: how to steal an election. lawrence lessig, roy l. furman professor of law and leadership at harvard law school. co author of the new book “how to steal a presidential election." jessica marsden, director of impact programs for free and fair elections at protect democracy, a nonpartisan anti authoritarianism group. bertrall ross, justice thurgood marshall distinguished professor of law and director of the karsh center for law and democracy at the university of virginia school of law. part i anthony brooks: this hour, how to steal an election. it almost happened in 2020. and ever since former president donald trump has repeated the lie again and again that he won that election. donald trump: that was a rigged election. and it's a shame that we had to go through it. it's very bad for our country. all over the world. they looked at it. brooks: trump and his team tried several strategies to overturn the election, including that infamous call in january of 2021 to georgia secretary of state brad raffensperger. trump: so look, all i want to do is this. i just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state. brooks: trump did not win the state of georgia. raffensperger, a republican who had supported trump, resisted trump's pressure. but four days later on january 6, 2021, rioters attacked the u.s. capitol as lawmakers were voting to certify joe biden's victory. many of the attackers were motivated by the false claims that the election had been stolen. even the guardrails of democracy held, but now, as trump runs for president again, election law expert lawrence lessig is worried that american democracy faces an even greater risk. he says trump could try to steal the election again, and this time he could do it legally. unless congress or the courts take action. lessig is the roy l. furman professor of law and leadership at harvard law school. he is co author, along with matthew seligman, of the book, "how to steal a presidential election." and he's with us now. professor lessig, good to have you. welcome to on point. lawrence lessig: thanks for having me, anthony. brooks: yeah, it's really great to have you. a lot to think about. and before we talk about how the election could be stolen this time around, let's go back to the riot at the capitol. on january 6th, you say that as tragic as that day was, the guardrails of democracy held, and you say that, in fact, it was the dumbest thing trump and his supporters could have done, and the other strategies that they were employing explain that. lessig: in the lead up to that election matt seligman and i taught a course at harvard called wargaming 2020. and we had the students work through the strategies that would have been available to flip an otherwise determined, decided election. and of all the strategies, of course, we never imagined the idea of marching on the capitol. the marching on the capitol strategy was the one certain to fail. now, i'm honestly not convinced in donald trump's mind there was the idea of coercing through force congress to flip its results. i think that what he intended to do was to get congress to send the results back to the states, or at least send them. and had he done that, there would have been no precedent. there would have been no power to do that. but had he done that, the pressure could have built so that eventually congress caved. but the idea that you were going to march people with violence to threaten the vice president, or members of congress to flip their vote, was just crazy. brooks: just crazy. so this leads us to what you call as a result of workshopping these various scenarios, what you call one of the most alarming scenarios made possible by the supreme court itself. and this relates to a 2020 decision in a case that you were involved in. so explain what we're talking about here. lessig: right. so in 2016 there were a number of presidential electors across the country who were troubled by the fact that donald trump had lost the popular vote but was going to win in the electoral college. and these electors started trying to recruit republican electors to join them to vote for somebody other than donald trump, so that the decision would go to the house and the house could decide whether the guy who lost the election should be president or somebody else. and when they did this in colorado and in washington, they were punished for voting contrary to how they were pledged. so i volunteered to help them resolve the question, whether they could constitutionally be punished. because the constitution creates what's called electors, seemed pretty intuitive that an elector is somebody who is free to decide how they're going to vote. these people were trying to decide to vote in a way that would at least create the opportunity for a decision other than the election of donald trump, which of course, when people voted for hillary clinton in their states, that's what they certainly wanted. and so the question was whether the state could punish them. we took it to the supreme court and my primary hope was just to resolve it one way or the other when it wasn't going to matter in a real election. and the supreme court basically decided 9 to 0 that the states have the power to control how electors vote a vote. and as the supreme court said, the electors, quote, have no rights. so that creates what we're most anxious, the scenario we're most anxious about. imagine the state of wisconsin is extremely close in this next election. brooks: wait, can i just stop you. because i want to be absolutely, i want to get to wisconsin, but just to be clear. so in your reading, the court held that state legislatures have the power essentially to direct electors how to cast their electoral votes. electors do not have the power to say, i'm going to vote this way because i think that's where the will of the people is. lessig: yeah. the court had been led to be very fearful of electors. my friend rick hasen had written a paper that basically said a handful of electors could flip the result. actually, in the history of the 24,000 votes that electors had given since the beginning of the republic, there had been exactly one elector who ever flipped his vote to favor the other side. and the reason he did it in 1796 was because he was trying to vote for the person who actually got more votes in his state. so i think electors were badly maligned in this whole process cause i think that we should have trusted them. but anyway, the court said the state legislatures have the power to tell them how to vote. okay. so where does that lead us? so again, imagine wisconsin is extremely close. it still has an overwhelmingly republican state legislature because of gerrymandering that's been eliminated by the courts. but in 2024, they will still be in control on election day. imagine it is extremely close and the republicans start saying even though joe biden won the state by a slim majority, they don't believe the results were valid. they think that in fact donald trump won, there were lots of illegal votes or whatever else they want to say. so they create this kind of impression that in fact the wrong person won. and then they conceivably pass a resolution in the legislature, because there are some who believe, on the supreme court too, that the state legislature alone has the power to tell the electors what to do. because the constitution gives to the legislature the power to set the way in which electors are chosen. so the state legislature tells the biden electors, vote for trump. and under a companion case to the one i argued in the supreme court, the colorado electors' case, the court upheld a procedure by which the electors who fail to vote in the way they are supposed to vote can be removed. in the scenario we're talking about, the biden electors, i'm sure, will say, no, i'm not going to vote for trump, i'm going to vote for joe biden. they would be removed under the procedure that we're describing, and they would be replaced with a trump elector. so here is a way that within the midst of the fog of war, given the rules of the way the court has articulated them, you could produce the opposite result. now, look, we don't believe elena kagan when she wrote that opinion, intended that. brooks: i was just going to ask you about that. because she writes that, the decision ends with a promise here. we the people rule. that certainly doesn't sound like an opinion that intended this particular outcome that you're worried about. lessig: exactly right. but the opinion also says the electors have no rights. so the question is, who's going to have the power to say no to the state legislature? ordinarily, that's what we imagine rights are for. i have the right to the massachusetts legislature can't tell everybody they have to vote republican or democrat. and if somebody, if they did, then somebody wanted to vote republican, i'm assuming the legislature would tell them they have to vote democrat in massachusetts. if somebody wanted to vote republican, that person would say, look, i have a right as an elector to vote however i want. the court said there's no, they have no rights here. but my point is, i'm sure that if we could get the case up to the court quickly enough, the court would find a way to say no, that's not quite what we mean. you can't do that. but the challenge is the timing in this period is so narrow. now in the case recently argued, trump v. anderson, which was whether trump could be kicked off of the colorado ballot. justice alito asked about this hypothetical, and we were hopeful that would lead to a footnote in that opinion, saying obviously you can't change the vote after the election, but they didn't do that. so we're vulnerable now to this innovation. and if it's made, then there's a race to get to the court to get it corrected. brooks: so i'm curious about this. so let's stick with wisconsin, republican majority. but there's a democratic governor. doesn't the governor get involved with having to sign a law that would basically say, the electors have to vote this way or that way? or is the governor out of the picture? there's a theory, the independent state legislature doctrine, that says that the legislature can't be bound, because the constitution says it's the legislature that sets the manner by which electors are chosen. i don't agree with that theory. i think the governor should be involved. but my point is not about what the ultimate legal answer would be. because again, my view is the ultimate legal answer is the supreme court would say, you can't change the result after the election. it's just in the timing of this fight. will there be enough time for the court to get involved and resolve it before the electors vote? because another whole chapter of the problem that the next election will face is that congress, through the electoral count reform act, has narrowed the time during which we can try to resolve the election. so if it's not resolved by the time the electors vote, it's not clear a result could be changed after the electors' vote. brooks: so is there any legal argument that might prevent a legislature from taking the vote away from its people in this way. in other words, if you could get this to the court? lessig: yeah. so if i argued in the court, or when it's argued in the court, i would say what the court should say is, "congress has the power to say when electors are chosen, and you can't choose electors after that." what the electors case said is that states have the power to direct how electors vote, but states can't change that after the day that the electors are to be selected either. now that's out of whole cloth. there's nothing in the text of anything that would say that, but that's the safest way to say, "no. you can't make this change." part ii brooks: we've been talking about how a republican state legislature, in the state, for example, of wisconsin could tell electors how to vote contrary to the will of voters. it sounds doomsday ish to some people, but you make an important point about the power of state legislators and the way we currently run elections, and that is because of state laws, most states award presidential electors on a winner take all basis. which effectively subverts the will of millions and millions of voters across the country. so can you explain that, and just how this sort of step from that to the scenario that you're outlining, it's not a big reach. lessig: yeah. the scenario that i think every constitutional lawyer would concede is legal is for the legislature before election day to say, "look, we've decided we're not going to have an election." or if we have an election, that's not how we're going to pick electors. we're just going to vote for who the elector is going to be. and so wisconsin, in this case, would say, we're going to vote for the republican slate of electors, whatever the election is. people hear that and they're like, that's outrageous. how could that be? but the point to see is that because states, all states except two, nevada and nebraska and maine, allocate their electors in what's called winner take all fashion, all but about eight states in the country have decided who their electors will be given to before election day. like in massachusetts, we take winner take all. there is no way the republican candidate, any republican candidate, probably, would win in massachusetts. same thing in utah, which is winner take all. there's no way a democratic candidate will win in utah. which means that no republican or democrat will care about utah or massachusetts or new york or kentucky or any state. where this winner take all fashion means that the result can't change regardless of what you do. and what that means is that people who decide america are the swing states. so in the next election, it's going to be wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania, georgia, nevada, arizona are the key swing states, maybe new hampshire, maybe north carolina. the rest of the country is irrelevant. and what that means is presidential campaigns, in some sense, don't really care about the rest of the country. there's been great academic work demonstrating that policies get bent to favor the swing states. and so the swingers actually decide the presidency. but the challenge is the swing states, the swingers of america don't represent america. and that's a decision the state legislatures have made for no constitutionally obligated reason. like they could decide tomorrow to allocate electors proportionally. i think even at a fractional level. so if you get 45% of the vote, you get exactly 45% of the electors. they could make that choice, but they haven't. and because they haven't, the vast majority of america's electors, votes on election day for president just don't matter. brooks: they could make that choice, and your argument is they could also make this choice, essentially instructing electors to vote contrary to the will of the people. it's not a big, a second scenario that you point to is something you call a rogue governor scenario. a governor decides to flip the results of the presidential election. you call this the greatest long term threat to u.s. democracy. explain how that works. lessig: yeah, so we the word long term is important. because fortunately, coming into this election, the only potential, or the only governor who could be rogue, or potentially rogue, is not even elected yet. the candidate robinson in north carolina is a clear maga candidate, and if anybody is going to go rogue, he would go rogue. the rest of the states, the swing states, at least, have democratic governors or the two republican governors, kemp and sununu, in georgia and in new hampshire are reasonable. they're not going to go rogue. but the long term concern is that under the electoral count act, the governor's signature is really critical for determining how the electoral votes are counted. and if you have a governor who believes, again, that the election was stolen or believes that the right candidate did not win according to the electoral board, and they certify the wrong candidate. it will take congress going through a lot of hoops to be able to reverse that result. now, if congress is unified, both houses are controlled by the same party, they will do what that party wants them to do. but the challenge is if they're split, if one is democratic and one is republican, then the law will set the governor's signature as the presumptive winner, and that could mean the wrong person actually wins. brooks: so let's hear a voice that pushes back a little bit on some of what you say. here's bertrall ross. he's the justice thurgood marshall distinguished professor of law at the university of virginia. he also directs the karsh center for law and democracy there. ross says it's not impossible that the 2024 election could be stolen, but he says it's unlikely. and part of the reason why is that the electoral count reform act that congress passed in 2022 puts a lot of protections in place. ross: it set forth standards that limit who can send their slate of electors from the state so that only the executive of the state has that responsibility with respect to sending state electors, so that there's not that multiple elector problem. the higher burdens on members of congress to object to electors that are sent to congress is also provided for expedited judicial procedures for disputes over elections. brooks: so that's bertrall ross, the university of virginia. larry lessig, respond to that. did the reform that congress passed, essentially the electoral count reform act, does that help this situation, make you sleep a little, help you sleep a little better at night? lessig: there are parts of it that are great and parts of it that create more problems. so here's a simple example of a problem it creates. in 1960, in hawaii, nixon was declared the winner originally, and he was certified as the winner. and then the democrats noticed an error in the tabulation of the vote, so they asked for a recount. the recount couldn't be completed until after the electors voted. but the nixon and kennedy electors both gathered on elector day and cast their votes. the kennedy electors were the first so called fake electors in our tradition. and when the recount was completed at the end of december, the recount went for kennedy. and so the governor certified for kennedy, and they sent the certification in and the certification for kennedy was eventually counted. if that same scenario happened under the electoral count act of 2022, it would be nixon's votes that would be counted. because first of all, it's not clear any electors going to sit and vote. any kennedy elector in the story would sit and vote because of the prosecution against the so called fake electors. but even if they did, under the electoral count reform act, the only way to object is if you can say that the electors were not properly certified, but at the time they were certified, they were properly certified. it was the result the governor was acting under. and so what the electoral count reform act has done is basically mean that if you can slow a recount down so that it's not resolved before the elector's vote. it could never go against you. now, this is a problem that doesn't benefit republicans alone. it could be republicans or democrats who benefit from this. and this obvious incentive then, if you've won, and then there's a recount going on, your incentive is to do everything you can to slow that process down, which is not hard in the context of electoral, the way these procedures work. if you slow it down until after the elector's vote, then you can't lose. but of course, that means the american democracy could lose if, in fact, the result was not correct, and the recount goes for the other candidates. so that's a problem created by the electoral count reform act. it could have solved this, in a completely different way. it could have fixed this problem. and we actually have a solution. i think that congress should have a sufficient reason, because it's not partisan, to fix it before 2024. and the simplest way to fix it would be to say that there's a category called contingent electors. so if you think that there's a judicial proceeding that could finally resolve the state in your favor, then you as the electors can meet on electors' day and sign the electors' certificates. but mark them contingent and then let the recount procedure continue. and if the courts eventually rule in favor of you, then your votes would be counted. that would be a simple change to the electoral count reform act. and if it were changed, then this problem would go away. brooks: larry, i want to introduce another voice in this conversation. jessica marsden is director of impact programs for free and fair elections at protect democracy. that's a nonpartisan anti authoritarianism group. and jessica marsden, welcome. good to have you. jessica marsden: happy to be here, anthony. brooks: yeah, it's really good to have you. what do you make of the sort of alarm that lawrence lessig is putting out here about the possibility of stealing an election legally in 2024? marsden: i want to start by saying, i think legally stealing an election is a contradiction in terms, so it's really important to understand the procedural vulnerabilities that professor lessig has been describing, but also to underline that these tactics at bottom are no different than stuffing a ballot box, and they're the kind of tactics that we've seen in authoritarian regimes that have slid from democracy into authoritarianism. we've seen it russia, for example, where putin has blown through term limits, jailed opponents, allowed only stooge opponents to run. and so i think we have to be clear that although these strategies would take advantage of legal loopholes, they're not legal in any meaningful sense of the word. brooks: but go ahead. so what do you see out there? what's currently happening in states that either encourages you or discourages you? marsden: so big picture, i think we're in a much better place in many ways than we were in 2020. we heard a moment ago about the important reforms in the electoral count reform act. we also saw that in 2022 election deniers running for statewide office in swing states lost across the board. so that means we have reasonable, good faith pro democracy actors in virtually all critical statewide positions in key states. and that election also showed that democracy was an important issue for some voters. a couple other things to mention, the supreme court mostly rejected the independent state legislature theory, which would have given hyper partisan state legislators much more power to manipulate elections. and then finally, former president trump is not in power and does not control the levers of the federal government. to the extent that he is the leader of an effort to steal an election, he doesn't have the same amount of power that he did in 2020. brooks: sure. marsden: now that said    brooks: yeah, no, go ahead. i just want to throw those ideas over to larry. and that was something on top of my list, larry, this idea that trump is no longer president. he doesn't have control of the levers of power. the justice department, he reportedly even considered ordering the u.s. military to seize voting machines to look for fraud. he's not going to be able to do that. so what do you think of the basic idea that jessica laid out there that while there may be some risks to be worried about, we're better off than we were four years ago. lessig: she's certainly true that we're better off in the sense that we're more prepared and we've seen some questions resolved in a way that reduces the risk. and it's certainly true, the president trump is not president. so he has limited access to the tools that he might otherwise want to deploy. it's also true that he's wildly more motivated now than he was in 2020. brooks: explain. lessig: because if he loses, there's a huge chance he goes to jail. there's certainly a huge chance he loses his whole, all of his wealth. so the risk that he faces in losing is huge. and i think that's going to motivate him to do everything he can to win. but i think, i want to make clear one very basic point about why we wrote this book. this is not a book betting that the election is going to be stolen. it's not a book offering the probability that the election is going to be stolen. it's a book trying to help people to see the risks so that we all, especially groups like protect democracy, that has been one of the most important groups in building the resistance to make sure we have free and fair elections. we all begin to see the strategies we need to be prepared to respond to. so in the critical sense that there is this risk. there are these holes, these loopholes that i think that we need to identify and be prepared to respond to and recognize that we can't shift into automatic pilot just because it seems like we've learned something from 2020. and we won't make the same mistakes again. the reality is the number of people today who believe the election was stolen is the same as a number who believed it was stolen on january 6th, 2021, and that reality creates a condition if things are close enough, that these techniques could be exploited. and that's exactly what we're working on. brooks: jessica marsden. what do you think of that? it is striking what larry was saying. this idea of the depth of belief in the idea, in the mistaken idea that the election was stolen hasn't budged since 3 plus years ago. marsden: that's absolutely true. and that's one of the things that we're most worried about when we look out across the states. and think about how this election might go off the rails. the spread of mis  and disinformation has really not let up since 2020. and that has had real concrete effects on election officials in particular who have faced a wave of threats and other interference with their ability to do their jobs. that's like nothing we've seen in previous election cycles, and it's also impacted voters, some of whom have been subject to intimidation campaigns like we saw in arizona in 2022, where you had folks with video cameras and even guns stationed outside drop boxes looking for voter fraud. so there's absolutely real consequences to this voter fraud that professor lessig was describing. brooks: so let's hear some tape about how central the big lie has become in this political climate. stephen richer is a local election official in maricopa county, arizona. he's also a republican. richard sued u.s. senate candidate kari lake for defamation because she falsely accused him of cheating her out of winning the governor's race in 2022. so here's richard on msnbc last month, talking about the big lie. stephen richer: unfortunately, it has become something of a litmus test in some quarters. many of those candidates who won their primary based off of the big lie, that didn't carry over to the median arizona voter. it's a losing strategy. it's lost in '23. it's lost in '22. it's lost in '21. it lost in '20, but more than that, it's immoral and people know better and leaders need to stop. brooks: larry lessig, what do you think about that? it's been a losing argument and yet it's still there creating the soil, for the things that you're worried about. lessig: yeah. when trump's family took over rnc and fired everybody at rnc and gave them all a chance to apply for their jobs back, one condition of getting their jobs back was certifying that they agree with the election in 2020 was stolen. i think that this has potential. it's gunpowder. and if it's dry enough and you have a spark, the fear that many of us have is that it blows up and that's what we have to be prepared to fight against. part iii brooks: i want to talk about a couple of potential solutions. larry, and let's start with what needs to be fixed. where is the quickest, not the quickest, but the most important sort of set of solutions that you're proposing? lessig: i think one category could be organized under the slogan elena kagan gave us in the elector's case, which is her we the people rule. and what that means is we've got to build recognition. that any steps the legislature might take to change the results of an election, whether by cancelling the election, effectively, deciding that the state legislature will pick the electors, or by changing how the electors vote, is just illegitimate. it's wrong, and i think jessica's way of characterizing it is, it's what authoritarians do. it's not what's legal under our constitutional system. the second is, i think there should be no reason why republicans and democrats would resist the idea of allowing the process to work itself out and making it so that if, in fact, it has to take beyond the time electors are to vote, there would be a strategy to make sure that the correct result gets counted. so this is the hawaii 2.0 problem. and i think the simplest thing would be to make it so that you could have electors who vote a contingent slate. and then if, in fact, the courts determine their candidate wins, that's the slate that gets counted. and finally, i think there's an enormous amount of work, and protect democracy, again, has been the leader here, in just making sure on the ground, in every single contested space, we have process to make sure people are not afraid to vote and not afraid and not blocked from their ability to vote. so that when this election is over, we can look at it and feel like it really confirms the very best of our traditions, not the fear that i think matt and i have about what could happen. brooks: jessica, add to that in terms of the work you do. talk about the sort of importance of that last point that larry was talking about and the progress or the challenges you're seeing on the ground. marsden: yeah. so to add a couple of things to that list of potential solutions. i think one thing, a common thread throughout the scenarios described in the book is uncertainty and delay in uncovering or reaching the true outcome of the election. and one thing we have been working on at protect democracy after the passage of the electoral count reform act is working with states to ensure that they are able to meet that new deadline, that their recount procedures where possible can be sped up so that the outcome of the election is clear before the governor has to certify the results and before the electors meet. and we've had successes even in swing states like arizona and michigan, where bipartisan coalitions came together to support these changes, which ultimately are about getting clarity about who really won the election and not falling into this period of legal uncertainty or sort of fog of war. i think the other two things that i'd emphasize is there's a lot of work going on right now in states to rebuild trust in elections across the political spectrum. that work is critically important, because these strategies of legislative intervention or gubernatorial intervention to certify the wrong winner of the election only work if that looks like a politically palatable strategy. and rebuilding trust in elections is part of making that look unpalatable. and then the final thing i'll mention is we did see some aspects of strategies like this tried in 2020 and the work to ensure that the folks who led those efforts are held accountable through prosecutions of fake electors, disbarment proceedings of some of the lawyers who made bogus arguments that these were truly legal strategies. those are important in sending a message to people who might be involved in similar attempts this year that, is it illegal? and there will be consequences. brooks: so i want to talk, larry, get you to respond to that. one of those ideas which seems so important here in this idea of rebuilding trust, because what do you do about the fact that the cynicism is a result, among other things, of a number of real things. too much money in politics, which i know is one of the things that you've been concerned about for decades. citizens united, the anti democratic nature of the electoral college, which we talked about. partisan gerrymandering. in a sense, you could almost be led to conclude, no wonder people can be made to believe that an election was fixed or stolen. how do we deal with that? lessig: i think the root behind the ability to create these alternative realities is the reality that we increasingly live in a media environment where people have their own bubbles and they're tuned into them and they learn the lessons from those bubbles. an astonishing statistic, a poll came out about six weeks ago, found that the majority of americans believe the republican party is more committed to protecting democracy than the democratic party. now, people in the democratic party look at that and say, how is that possibly true? you have a guy that tried to overturn the results of the elections. but the answer is, you have a bunch of people who've heard for the last six years this story about the constant efforts to witch hunt and take down through political means a candidate for president creating this impression. i don't think it's true, but an impression that you have partisan motivation inside of our election process. i don't know how we get out of that reality of media. the only way we get out of it is if people face to face, one to one, begin to just talk to each other and engage on about this reality of our division and how we need to get beyond it. that's a big thing to hope for, given the nature of this kind of fight right now and the many years we've been in the middle of what feels like an existential struggle. but we're not going to change the way media functions. and if anything, social media is going to be less disciplined in the way it involves itself in the selection between x, formerly twitter and facebook. and i'm even more concerned about how they might play a negative role. brooks: larry, before we went on the air, i said to you pretty bluntly, i said thank you for this book, it's given me a ton to think about. it hasn't made me feel really good. lessig: yeah. brooks: is there something encouraging in here that you can offer? is there a reason to be optimistic or hopeful that something might be changing for the better? lessig: yes. brooks: good. lemme hear it. lessig: and that is that the work to fix our democracy has made enormous progress in the past 10 years. it wasn't long ago when i felt like i was doing everything i could to get this democracy reform package in the center of congress's attention. congress took that up in the for the people act, which would have been the most important democracy reform package passed by congress, i think, since the civil war. it came within two votes of actually doing that. now, that a decade ago would have been incomprehensible. and i think that many people are recognizing this isn't a partisan problem. it's a democracy problem. and we have to find a way to motivate people to demand that we get a democracy we can trust. and there are things we can do. this book is not saying there's nothing we can do. it's saying there's a lot we can do. and we need to step up and do it, not just for the 2024 election, but for every election that happens afterwards. brooks: jessica, reasons from you to be hopeful about where we are? marsden: i think i take greatest hope from the results of the election in 2022, when we saw that for many voters, the election denialism coming from folks who were running for statewide office to run elections was not appealing, and those candidates all lost. i think that shows that democracy is an important issue for some voters when the stakes are presented so clearly to them. and this election is going to put those stakes front and center, not just in terms of the issue that gets labeled democracy, but issues like abortion rights are at the forefront. and i think the ways in which those issues have been, or policy on those issues has been shaped by some undemocratic forces in our structure, is going to be at the top of many voters' minds. brooks: jessica, you mentioned those election deniers are running for positions that oversaw elections in 2022, that they were all defeated. and i've heard a lot about those races. we were focused on them for quite a time, but do we know roughly the number of election deniers that are still in positions of power in the country that could exert real influence to overturn an election in 2024? marsden: so because of the decentralized way that our elections are run, it's hard to, we're talking about thousands of officials across the country who have some influence over our elections, so it's hard to get a firm number nationwide. but a report from the states united democracy center has identified 25 election deniers who are in statewide office with some amount of election responsibility. those officials are overwhelmingly in very red states that are not likely to be highly contested in 2024. and then at the local level, research has focused on kind of the key swing states. and a report from informing democracy found 94 local officials across 59 jurisdictions in the seven key swing states, arizona, georgia, michigan, north carolina, pennsylvania. and wisconsin. so it's not a huge number, but it's definitely some. there are some officials, especially at the local level. and that's something that at protect democracy, we're tracking quite closely, as we think ahead to november and december. brooks: and larry lessig, a question for you about, i was thinking as i was reading through your arguments, it's troubling when you think about the legal levers that are there that could be exploited and used to overturn the will of voters. but my question is, what about the political reality of making that? there may be a legal way to do it, but would it survive politically? because at the end of the day, if you're taking people's rights away, it just seems like there would be such an outcry against that. lessig: we have to be sure not to simplify what's going on in the heads of people who are acting in ways that we criticize now. the january 6th protesters, the vast majority of them had an honest, genuine belief that the election had been stolen. now, not everybody, obviously not the leaders. i don't even think donald trump believed that. but the point is the story had been told to them in a way that they were convinced. and if you're convinced, what's the appropriate response? i don't know if you saw the series succession, the penultimate, maybe one before, episode involved wisconsin. there was a fire at the milwaukee polling station, so the democratic votes from milwaukee weren't counted, and the result went for the republican. what would democrats do in a case like that? they would genuinely believe that their election had been stolen, and there were steps that could be taken, especially under the new electoral count reform act, and maybe they wouldn't. and so the condition that we need to put our minds in is when we've got people who believe in good faith, their side is right, and the other side is evil, what tools do we have, could they deploy? because they'll do whatever they can, because they think they're saving our democracy, and i can understand that's their actions. if that's their belief, we need to fight on making sure that is not their belief, right? brooks: so former president donald trump is in court today in manhattan facing criminal charges in this hush money case that relates to campaign finance violations, alleged campaign finance violations and more. what's the effect, do you think, of that on this issue? in other words, does it begin to erode the folks that are following him, believe in him, their confidence in him? and how might that relate to the concerns that you have? lessig: i think it does both. there's a number of people who will read this as this is just another example of the banana republic nation america has become. joe biden has exercised power to continue the prosecutions. but i actually believe that on balance, many people are going to look at this and say, this man is just too damaged. he's just too damaged by what's happened. and between this and the money that he's needed to raise, and the sources of that money, people will increasingly think this is a compromised candidate. and whether they like his policies or not, it'll be too hard to rally to support him. so i can't think that this is going to help his campaign, even though there are a lot of people who are going to be really motivated because of it. brooks: jessica, what's your thinking about that question? marsden: i think that's right. it's hard to see how this helps him. and indeed, the polling of voters, including in swing states, has shown that if he's ultimately convicted in this trial, that is one thing that could significantly erode support among some folks who are not part of that diehard base. brooks: really interesting stuff. jessica, i'm going to say goodbye to you. jessica marsden, director of the impact programs for free and fair elections at protect democracy, a nonpartisan anti authoritarianism group. thank you so much for joining us today. we really appreciate it. marsden: thanks so much for having it me. brooks: and larry, we have you for another minute or so. i guess i'd love to give you a chance to wrap this up with a concluding idea that i might not have given you a chance to express as we head toward what could be another messy and dangerous election. lessig: yeah, anthony, you did give me a chance and i want to emphasize that chance you gave me, which is, this is not a hopeless story. it's a hopeful story, and i actually think that if we can rally to get through this election and make the changes to make it safe, we can continue that work to fix the 25 other critical problems that our democracy faces. so that people can have confidence that the result actually reflects the will of all of america, not just swing state america, and that we have politicians who care mainly about us as opposed to mainly about their funders of their super expensive campaigns. brooks: so you're talking among other things about fixing the impact, for example, of citizens united, and finally dealing with the coercive of effects of too much money in politics. lessig: yeah, because this is actually, i think what's at root about the cynicism that many trump supporters have about the system. they look at it and they think this is just a corrupted system. and i would agree that in this sense, it is a corrupted and broken system. this program aired on april 15, 2024. claire donnelly producer, on pointclaire donnelly is a producer at on point. more… anthony brooks senior political reporteranthony brooks is wbur's senior political reporter. more…

to donate by check, phone, or other method, see our more ways to give page. daily news & progressive opinion funded by the people, not the corporations delivered straight to your inbox. republican presidential nominee donald trump talks to journalists after a debate on september 10, 2024. "with 102 deniers on election boards in the swing states, the potential for creating chaos is enormous." more than 100 election officials across eight swing states in the u.s. presidential race have engaged in partisan election denial in recent years, raising fears they could try to turn the november result in favor of republican nominee donald trump, according to a report released friday. the 88 page report, produced by the center for media and democracy (cmd), details the election denial history of 102 county and state election officials in arizona, wisconsin, georgia, nevada, new mexico, north carolina, pennsylvania, and michigan. the authors found that election deniers have majority control of 15 county election boards in those states and of the statewide board in georgia. "what was striking to us about our research is how much election denialism and the voter fraud lie have infiltrated and taken over the republican apparatus in each of these critical states," arn pearson, cmd's executive director, toldthe guardian. "with 102 deniers on election boards in the swing states, the potential for creating chaos is enormous," pearson added. the three republicans on the five member georgia state election board support trump's baseless claims that the 2020 election was rigged. last month, they changed the rules so that they'd have more power to refuse or delay certifying election results while conducting unspecified investigations, and they appear to be preparing more rules changes before november 5. trump recently commended the three republicans by name at a rally in atlanta, saying they were "on fire" and were "pit bulls fighting for honesty, transparency, and victory." in 2020, trump lost to president joe biden, a democrat, by only about 12,000 votes in georgia, one of the states expected to be closely contested again this year as the republican former president faces off against vice president kamala harris, the democratic nominee. trump faces criminal charges in georgia for trying to interfere in the 2020 presidential election. four other defendants in the felony racketeering case have already pleaded guilty. marc elias, an election lawyer who advises the harris campaign, said the new rules in georgia were "somewhere between insidious and insane." he and many other experts have emphasized that election boards are not meant to carry such power. making a football analogy, elias said that the rules gave "the scoreboard operator the opportunity to investigate for themselves whether a touchdown was scored," as he toldthe new yorker radio hour. partisan conspiracy theories among election officials go well beyond georgia, the cmd report shows. pennsylvania has 29 election administration officials loyal to trump the most of any of the eight states and they control the boards in seven counties there, the report says. the report looks not just at election officials but also other republican "election deniers" including u.s. congressional candidates and party officials from the eight states. the authors found 239 election deniers including the 102 election board officials. cmd defined someone as an "election denier" if they had done any of the following: "denying that joe biden was the legitimate winner of the 2020 presidential election"; "espousing baseless claims or conspiracies about election and voter fraud during the 2020 election or subsequent elections"; "refusing to certify election results, or calling on others to refuse to certify, based on unfounded accusations of interference or fraud"; "expressing support for partisan or 'forensic' audits of 2020 election results"; "filing or expressing support for litigation aimed at overturning election results"; "participating in or supporting the january 6, 2021, assault on the u.s. capitol or 'stop the steal' events." experts differ on whether republican efforts to subvert the election, should trump lose, will be more or less effective than in 2020. "our democracy's firewalls held fast in 2020, but election deniers and maga extremists have spent the last four years infiltrating election administration and political party positions in order to disrupt and cast doubt on the 2024 election results," pearson said in a statement accompanying the report. however, officials not loyal to trump have also had more time to prepare for potential election interference, and the electoral count reform act, passed by congress in 2022, could make it harder for trump's efforts to succeed, experts say. pearson indicated that trump's allies on election boards may not ultimately succeed at overturning the election but could sow doubt that damages democracy. "while it is highly unlikely that these officials, along with deniers in congress, will be able to prevent certification of the 2024 election results, they are in a prime position to force litigation and delay what should be a ministerial task while they and their allies whip up false claims of voter fraud, noncitizen voting, and a stolen election," he said. cmd's report follows those of many other media outlets and watchdog groups in recent months, with broadly similar findings, if different exact figures. a cbs newsinvestigation in may found 80 election denying officials in seven battleground states. rolling stone and american doomfound nearly 70 in six states in july. and last month, citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington issued a detailed report identifying 35 "rogue" officials. more than 100 election officials across eight swing states in the u.s. presidential race have engaged in partisan election denial in recent years, raising fears they could try to turn the november result in favor of republican nominee donald trump, according to a report released friday. the 88 page report, produced by the center for media and democracy (cmd), details the election denial history of 102 county and state election officials in arizona, wisconsin, georgia, nevada, new mexico, north carolina, pennsylvania, and michigan. the authors found that election deniers have majority control of 15 county election boards in those states and of the statewide board in georgia. "what was striking to us about our research is how much election denialism and the voter fraud lie have infiltrated and taken over the republican apparatus in each of these critical states," arn pearson, cmd's executive director, toldthe guardian. "with 102 deniers on election boards in the swing states, the potential for creating chaos is enormous," pearson added. the three republicans on the five member georgia state election board support trump's baseless claims that the 2020 election was rigged. last month, they changed the rules so that they'd have more power to refuse or delay certifying election results while conducting unspecified investigations, and they appear to be preparing more rules changes before november 5. trump recently commended the three republicans by name at a rally in atlanta, saying they were "on fire" and were "pit bulls fighting for honesty, transparency, and victory." in 2020, trump lost to president joe biden, a democrat, by only about 12,000 votes in georgia, one of the states expected to be closely contested again this year as the republican former president faces off against vice president kamala harris, the democratic nominee. trump faces criminal charges in georgia for trying to interfere in the 2020 presidential election. four other defendants in the felony racketeering case have already pleaded guilty. marc elias, an election lawyer who advises the harris campaign, said the new rules in georgia were "somewhere between insidious and insane." he and many other experts have emphasized that election boards are not meant to carry such power. making a football analogy, elias said that the rules gave "the scoreboard operator the opportunity to investigate for themselves whether a touchdown was scored," as he toldthe new yorker radio hour. partisan conspiracy theories among election officials go well beyond georgia, the cmd report shows. pennsylvania has 29 election administration officials loyal to trump the most of any of the eight states and they control the boards in seven counties there, the report says. the report looks not just at election officials but also other republican "election deniers" including u.s. congressional candidates and party officials from the eight states. the authors found 239 election deniers including the 102 election board officials. cmd defined someone as an "election denier" if they had done any of the following: "denying that joe biden was the legitimate winner of the 2020 presidential election"; "espousing baseless claims or conspiracies about election and voter fraud during the 2020 election or subsequent elections"; "refusing to certify election results, or calling on others to refuse to certify, based on unfounded accusations of interference or fraud"; "expressing support for partisan or 'forensic' audits of 2020 election results"; "filing or expressing support for litigation aimed at overturning election results"; "participating in or supporting the january 6, 2021, assault on the u.s. capitol or 'stop the steal' events." experts differ on whether republican efforts to subvert the election, should trump lose, will be more or less effective than in 2020. "our democracy's firewalls held fast in 2020, but election deniers and maga extremists have spent the last four years infiltrating election administration and political party positions in order to disrupt and cast doubt on the 2024 election results," pearson said in a statement accompanying the report. however, officials not loyal to trump have also had more time to prepare for potential election interference, and the electoral count reform act, passed by congress in 2022, could make it harder for trump's efforts to succeed, experts say. pearson indicated that trump's allies on election boards may not ultimately succeed at overturning the election but could sow doubt that damages democracy. "while it is highly unlikely that these officials, along with deniers in congress, will be able to prevent certification of the 2024 election results, they are in a prime position to force litigation and delay what should be a ministerial task while they and their allies whip up false claims of voter fraud, noncitizen voting, and a stolen election," he said. cmd's report follows those of many other media outlets and watchdog groups in recent months, with broadly similar findings, if different exact figures. a cbs newsinvestigation in may found 80 election denying officials in seven battleground states. rolling stone and american doomfound nearly 70 in six states in july. and last month, citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington issued a detailed report identifying 35 "rogue" officials. more than 100 election officials across eight swing states in the u.s. presidential race have engaged in partisan election denial in recent years, raising fears they could try to turn the november result in favor of republican nominee donald trump, according to a report released friday. the 88 page report, produced by the center for media and democracy (cmd), details the election denial history of 102 county and state election officials in arizona, wisconsin, georgia, nevada, new mexico, north carolina, pennsylvania, and michigan. the authors found that election deniers have majority control of 15 county election boards in those states and of the statewide board in georgia. "what was striking to us about our research is how much election denialism and the voter fraud lie have infiltrated and taken over the republican apparatus in each of these critical states," arn pearson, cmd's executive director, toldthe guardian. "with 102 deniers on election boards in the swing states, the potential for creating chaos is enormous," pearson added. the three republicans on the five member georgia state election board support trump's baseless claims that the 2020 election was rigged. last month, they changed the rules so that they'd have more power to refuse or delay certifying election results while conducting unspecified investigations, and they appear to be preparing more rules changes before november 5. trump recently commended the three republicans by name at a rally in atlanta, saying they were "on fire" and were "pit bulls fighting for honesty, transparency, and victory." in 2020, trump lost to president joe biden, a democrat, by only about 12,000 votes in georgia, one of the states expected to be closely contested again this year as the republican former president faces off against vice president kamala harris, the democratic nominee. trump faces criminal charges in georgia for trying to interfere in the 2020 presidential election. four other defendants in the felony racketeering case have already pleaded guilty. marc elias, an election lawyer who advises the harris campaign, said the new rules in georgia were "somewhere between insidious and insane." he and many other experts have emphasized that election boards are not meant to carry such power. making a football analogy, elias said that the rules gave "the scoreboard operator the opportunity to investigate for themselves whether a touchdown was scored," as he toldthe new yorker radio hour. partisan conspiracy theories among election officials go well beyond georgia, the cmd report shows. pennsylvania has 29 election administration officials loyal to trump the most of any of the eight states and they control the boards in seven counties there, the report says. the report looks not just at election officials but also other republican "election deniers" including u.s. congressional candidates and party officials from the eight states. the authors found 239 election deniers including the 102 election board officials. cmd defined someone as an "election denier" if they had done any of the following: "denying that joe biden was the legitimate winner of the 2020 presidential election"; "espousing baseless claims or conspiracies about election and voter fraud during the 2020 election or subsequent elections"; "refusing to certify election results, or calling on others to refuse to certify, based on unfounded accusations of interference or fraud"; "expressing support for partisan or 'forensic' audits of 2020 election results"; "filing or expressing support for litigation aimed at overturning election results"; "participating in or supporting the january 6, 2021, assault on the u.s. capitol or 'stop the steal' events." experts differ on whether republican efforts to subvert the election, should trump lose, will be more or less effective than in 2020. "our democracy's firewalls held fast in 2020, but election deniers and maga extremists have spent the last four years infiltrating election administration and political party positions in order to disrupt and cast doubt on the 2024 election results," pearson said in a statement accompanying the report. however, officials not loyal to trump have also had more time to prepare for potential election interference, and the electoral count reform act, passed by congress in 2022, could make it harder for trump's efforts to succeed, experts say. pearson indicated that trump's allies on election boards may not ultimately succeed at overturning the election but could sow doubt that damages democracy. "while it is highly unlikely that these officials, along with deniers in congress, will be able to prevent certification of the 2024 election results, they are in a prime position to force litigation and delay what should be a ministerial task while they and their allies whip up false claims of voter fraud, noncitizen voting, and a stolen election," he said. cmd's report follows those of many other media outlets and watchdog groups in recent months, with broadly similar findings, if different exact figures. a cbs newsinvestigation in may found 80 election denying officials in seven battleground states. rolling stone and american doomfound nearly 70 in six states in july. and last month, citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington issued a detailed report identifying 35 "rogue" officials.

the republican party's efforts to disrupt the 2024 united states presidential election involve a series of coordinated actions intended to influence election outcomes at both federal and state levels. these efforts, which were preceded by republican efforts to restrict voting following the 2020 presidential election, are characterized by legislative, legal, and administrative strategies that sought to affect voter access, election oversight, and post election certification processes. this initiative grew out of widespread claims within certain republican party circles about election integrity, many of which trace back to the 2020 united states presidential election and trump's false claims of a stolen election, including the election denial movement in the united states, despite a lack of substantial evidence supporting these allegations. key elements of these strategies include attempts to modify voting laws, with a focus on restrictions that could disproportionately impact demographics more likely to vote for the democratic party. additionally, republican led states saw a push to place partisan figures in election oversight positions, which may influence how election laws are interpreted and enforced. there is also a significant legal component, with numerous court cases challenging aspects of the voting process and aiming to set precedents for handling election disputes. these efforts sparked intense debate across the political spectrum, with proponents arguing that the measures "are necessary to ensure election security", while critics contend that they could undermine democratic processes by restricting voter access and eroding public trust in election fairness. for decades, republicans sought evidence of what they allege is rampant voting fraud in the united states.[1] multiple studies during this time found that election fraud is extremely rare.[2][3] an election fraud database maintained by the conservative heritage foundation showed in 2024 evidence of 1,513 instances of fraud over the preceding 42 years, although many of those instances have been challenged as dubious.[4][5] after donald trump lost the 2020 election, he falsely asserted the election had been rigged and stolen from him; the false allegations came to be known as his big lie.[6] many of his followers developed an election denial movement to advance this false narrative. as of august 2023, a large majority of republican voters and republican leaning independents continued to believe joe biden was not legitimately elected in 2020.[7] in a 1980 speech, conservative heritage foundation co founder paul weyrich said, "i don't want everybody to vote ... our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."[8] as president, trump falsely claimed that millions of undocumented migrants illegally voted for hillary clinton in the 2016 united states presidential election, depriving him of the popular vote victory.[9][10] as a result, trump established the presidential advisory commission on election integrity in may 2017; the commission was disbanded several months later, with member matthew dunlap, the maine secretary of state, writing to commission chair mike pence and vice chair kris kobach that, contrary to public statements by trump and kobach, the commission did not find "substantial" voter fraud.[11] dunlap alleged the true purpose of the commission was to create a pretext to pave the way for policy changes designed to undermine the right to vote in the united states.[citation needed] critics said the commission's intent was to disenfranchise or deter legal voters.[12][13] kobach, then the kansas secretary of state, had a history of making false or unsubstantiated allegations of voting fraud to advocate for voting restrictions.[14][15] the commission did not find a single instance of a noncitizen voting.[16] conservative news outlets, such as fox news, newsmax, and oann promoted false election fraud allegations during the weeks following the 2020 election, including conspiracy theories that voting machines had been rigged to favor biden.[citation needed] voting machine companies dominion voting systems and smartmatic filed defamation lawsuits against those three cable networks, some of their employees and others. fox news agreed to pay a $787.5 million settlement to dominion in april 2023 after it was revealed that top on air personalities and executives knew the allegations were false but continued to promote them anyway.[17][18][19] the 2022 dinesh d'souza film 2000 mules falsely alleged that democratic party operatives engaged in an illegal ballot harvesting operation across five swing states during the 2020 election.[20] by april 2024, dozens of republicans in four states were under indictment for their alleged involvement in the trump fake electors plot and related pence card conspiracy, parts of wide ranging efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.[21] those indicted included trump and several of his close associates, including christina bobb who leads the republican national committee (rnc) election integrity legal efforts in the 2024 presidential election.[22] in september 2024, hanna rosin published an article about the aftermath of the january 6 attack in the lives of the insurrectionists, which mentions how they have created "a new mythology on the right", which could lead to a new attempt at overturning the election should trump lose it.[23][24] the justice department planned to monitor compliance with voting rights laws on election day in 27 states.[25] during the 2024 campaign, trump often referred to "election integrity" to allude to his continuing claim that the 2020 election was rigged, as well as predictions of future mass election fraud. as he did during the 2020 election cycle, trump claimed that democrats would try to rig the 2024 election. many republicans reported to believe that democratic party have and continue to engage in systemic election fraud, with some being concerned regarding election integrity. by 2022, republican politicians and conservative talk radio cable news outlets echoed the statement of former trump advisor steve bannon that "if democrats don't cheat, they don't win".[27] the heritage foundation has been closely aligned with the republican party since its founding in 1973 and in 2023 published project 2025, a blueprint for trump's second presidency.[28] in july 2024, mike powell, the group's executive director for its oversight project, said that "as things stand right now, there is a zero percent chance of a free and fair election in the united states of america",[29] adding, "i'm formally accusing the biden administration of creating the conditions that most reasonable policymakers and officials cannot in good conscience certify an election."[30] heritage released a report predicting without supporting evidence that biden might try to retain power "by force" if he were to lose in november. election law expert rick hasen remarked that "this is gaslighting and it is dangerous in fanning flames that could lead to potential violence."[31] the heritage oversight project produced videos for distribution on social media and conservative media outlets that made false or misleading claims about the extent of noncitizen voting registrations. in one video that was sent viral by an elon musk repost, heritage falsely claimed that 14% of noncitizens in georgia were registered, concluding that "the integrity of the 2024 election is in great jeopardy". heritage based their findings on an extrapolation of hidden camera interview responses from seven residents in a norcross, georgia, apartment complex. state investigators found the seven people had never registered.[32] during the closing weeks of the campaign, trump's campaign and its allies revived allegations from 2020 that voting machines were rigged. the claims were widespread on social media and were frequently mentioned in lawsuits filed by republicans.[33][34] trump and musk repeated baseless claims of fraud and "cheating" in bucks county, pennsylvania, in the days before election day.[35] claims by trump and republican allies of election fraud persisted up to election day on november 5. after trump was declared the winner, these claims had largely stopped, with his "election integrity" allies crediting his victory to their efforts.[36][37] the new york times reported in july 2024 that "the republican party and its conservative allies are engaged in an unprecedented legal campaign targeting the american voting system" by systematically searching for vulnerabilities. the effort involves a network of powerful republican lawyers and activists, many of whom were involved in the attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. it involves restricting voting and short circuiting the certification process should trump lose. the republican strategy involved first persuading voters that the election is about to be stolen by democrats, despite lacking evidence. after the election, if trump were to lose, lawyers would attempt to challenge decades of settled law as to how elections are certified. the new york times reported the efforts had "been quietly playing out in courts, statehouses and county boards for months, and is concentrated in critical battlegrounds".[30] in october 2024, the washington post identified as vulnerabilities leading to a possible attempt at overturning the election's results the following: widespread false information, weeks long recounts, lawsuits delaying final results, breakdown in certifying results, disruptions at elector meetings, congress stalling the certification, and a wild card ("something new could be tried that attorneys and election officials haven’t yet gamed out").[38] nebraska is one of two states that does not have a winner take all system of awarding electoral college votes but rather allocates the votes by its three congressional districts. one district contains the omaha metro area, which can tend to lean democrat (obama won the district in 2008, as did biden in 2020), while the other two are more rural and vote solid republican. during 2024, some nebraska republicans sought to change the state's 1991 law that created its electoral college allocation system to winner take all and remove the likely elector for kamala harris. the proposal was blocked by republican state senators; by september 2024, it was revived with pressure brought by trump, all of the state's republican representatives, and south carolina senator lindsey graham.[39][40][41][42] during the 2024 donald trump rally at madison square garden, trump revealed that he and house speaker mike johnson had a "little secret", stating: "i think with our little secret we are gonna do really well with the house, our little secret is having a big impact, he and i have a little secret, we will tell you what it is when the race is over." johnson confirmed the existence of the plan. commentators speculated that they were referring to a contingent election, in which the united states house of representatives elects the president; or a plot to convince republican state legislatures or republican governors in states that trump would lose to not certify the results or submit slates of electors before the deadline, reducing the number of electors needed to win the electoral college vote.[43] at an august 2021 event organized by mike lindell, copies of software from dominion voting systems equipment in colorado and michigan were distributed and posted to the public internet. election security experts warned that the release undermines trust in election security and allows for hackers to conduct vulnerability assessments, counter defenses, "sabotage the system, alter ballot design or even try to change results". three vendors dominate election technology in the united states, limiting the ability for election officials to replace an existing system.[44] mike lindell stated that his goal is to remove voting machines entirely and switch to paper ballots, a process that election officials warned would be tedious, time consuming and prone to errors.[33] cnn reported that in text messages to doug logan, the ceo of cyber ninjas, which conducted the 2021 maricopa county presidential ballot audit, michael flynn expressed a goal to "fundamentally change the way votes are counted at the state level".[45] in august 2023, matthew deperno, the former republican nominee for the 2022 michigan attorney general election, and former republican state representative daire rendon were charged with "undue possession of a voting machine, willfully damaging a voting machine and conspiracy". deperno spread false claims about the 2020 united states presidential election.[46] election denial activists had spread a password that they alleged to be used in dominion voting machines in georgia, including wearing the alleged password on t shirts.[33][47] in 2020, j. alex halderman, a computer science and engineering professor, discovered a software vulnerability in georgia's voting machines which made it possible for hackers to change votes. while dominion developed a patch to address these vulnerabilities, georgia secretary of state brad raffensperger said that the machines would be updated after the 2024 election, dismissing halderman's findings as "theoretical and imaginary."[48] in december 2022, election experts sent a letter to the united states department of justice that described a "multi state conspiracy to copy voting software" that was at least partially funded by notable trump supporters such as sidney powell and asking for a federal investigation.[49] in december 2023, a follow up open letter from computer scientists, election security experts and voter advocacy organizations listed repeated attempts by allies of donald trump to access voting system software in georgia, michigan, pennsylvania, ohio, nevada and colorado, again calling for a federal investigation, noting that the software is used nationwide.[50] entire election databases from multiple counties were also copied.[51] at least one breach had also occurred in north carolina. in at least four cases, election officials had to decertify or replace voting equipment. voting experts expressed alarm over the breaches due to their breaking of the chain of custody over ballots and tabulators; as well as invasion of voter privacy.[52] on november 13, 2024, a third open letter was sent by the same organization, free speech for people, to kamala harris, warning her of "serious election security breaches that have threatened the security and integrity of the 2024 elections" and urging her to request hand recounts in at least four swing states. the letter noted that voting system breaches have allowed for access to main servers, tabulators and election databases for both dominion voting systems and election systems & software, election vendors which collectively count approximately 70% of votes across the united states.[53] election systems & software (es&s) was founded by republicans,[54] was financed by the families of howard ahmanson jr. and nelson bunker hunt,[55] is owned by a private equity firm, mccarthy group,[56] and its investors are unknown as of december 2019.[57] chuck hagel was chairman of a predecessor company to es&s,[58] and the treasurer for hagel's campaign during the 1996 united states senate election in nebraska, michael mccarthy, was the founder of mccarthy group.[59] as of october 2019, es&s controls about 50% of the election system market of the united states; makes most of its money from long term maintenance contracts; has filed lawsuits when it fails to win contracts or has them taken away; hired former election officials as lobbyists; donated to political campaigns and lobbied politicians; and threatened lawsuits against voting rights activists and security researchers.[56][60][61][62][63] between 2013 and 2020, es&s has donated at least $30,000 to the republican state leadership committee.[64] various issues with es&s systems have been reported since at least 1998,[65] including missing votes,[56][61][66][67][68][65][69] potential duplicate votes,[56][68] poor calibration of touch screens leading to misinterpreted votes,[61][63] names missing from voter rolls,[70] incorrectly printed ballots[65][69] and outdated technology.[66] concerns have also been raised by ron wyden about the security of its supply chain, as many parts were made in china and the philippines.[57][71] es&s claimed that they had worked with idaho national laboratory for vulnerability testing, but as of december 2019, those findings have not been made public.[57] in august 2018, kamala harris, mark warner, susan collins and james lankford sent a letter to es&s asking about their stance on independent security research after the company dismissed and discouraged such research on their systems.[72] after the 2016 election, jill stein alleged that es&s machines were vulnerable to hacking and difficult to audit,[67] points supported by researchers.[73][74] issues with es&s machines have also been reported during elections in 2018,[75][63] 2019,[76][77] 2021,[78] 2022,[79] 2023[76][80] and 2024.[81][82][83][84][85] in january 2020, nbc news reported that election security experts found at least 35 voting machines that were connected to the internet as of the summer of 2019. while es&s, dominion voting systems and hart intercivic have all admitted to adding modems in some of their tabulators and scanners (for the purpose of quickly sharing unofficial election results), all of the voting machines that were accessible online were manufactured by es&s and located in 11 states (including florida, wisconsin and michigan) and washington d.c.[86] some of these machines have been connected for months or possibly years at a time. critical systems connected to the internet via a firewall include vote tabulators and "the election management system that is used in some counties to program voting machines before elections."[87] other security vulnerabilities   including missing firewall security patches, outdated sftp server software, remote access software, outdated operating systems, exposed passwords, exposed data of registered voters, no logging of some events, hash verification issues (noting that the hash verification was performed by es&s instead of its customers), ballot marking device/scanner "hybrid" systems that can be changed with fake votes on machine marked ballots after those ballots are cast, accessible sd and usb ports, plain text encryption keys for voter data, no set bios passwords, disabled secureboot, presence of bloatware, no tamper evident seals, immediate root access, unencrypted hard drives, use of simple default passwords, and "poor physical security protections that could allow undetected tampering"[88]   were also reported.[87][89][90][61][70][91][92][54][93][94] a december 2020 investigation by dcreport found that the 2020 re elections of mitch mcconnell, lindsey graham and susan collins had all occurred in states where votes were primarily tabulated by es&s, arguing that their wins were improbable due to low or close pre election polls. in the case of mcconnell, dcreport found large vote leads in counties that had typically voted for democrats (including in counties in which he had not previously won); discrepancies related to split ticket voting; and issues with kentucky voter records.[95] mcconnell had blocked legislation in the senate for election security in 2019, the same year that his campaign committee received at least $2,000 from es&s.[96] a further investigation by the same outlet later that month found that multiple es&s executives and lobbyists are connected with republican party politicians and election officials (such as sandra mortham,[66] marci andino and the office of brian kemp); that chris wlaschin, the former chief information security official at the united states department of health and human services during the trump administration, had joined es&s to lead their security team; that 40 out of 50 states partially use es&s for casting and counting votes; and that during the 2020 election, all but three of the 25 states that trump had won had partially or fully used es&s voting machines.[97] a 2021 article also noted that several republican officials had refused to purchase equipment from dominion due to false claims of fraud during the 2020 united states presidential election, alleging that es&s would benefit by increasing its market share.[58] similarly, the daily dot reported that election security advocate jennifer cohn accused republicans who falsely alleged that dominion had helped commit fraud in the 2020 election of attempting to put dominion out of business.[98] the institute for southern studies reported that, during the 2000 venezuelan general election, hugo chávez and venezuelan election officials accused es&s of interference due to widespread issues with the company's voting machines.[69] louis dejoy, the postmaster general since june 2020, has donated at least $685,230 to the republican party between 2018 and 2020,[99] has donated $1.2 million to trump,[100] and implemented policies that were primarily responsible for the 2020 united states postal service crisis.[101][102] between 2020 and 2024, the united states postal service (usps) changed its goals for first class mail delivery from a three day maximum to a five day maximum, and had raised the price of first class postage by 33%.[103] the washington post stated that these changes had little impact on the service's finances,[103] which included a $2.1 billion net loss during the first quarter of fiscal 2024.[104] gerry connolly stated in response to these changes that "any effort to degrade service while raising prices is a recipe for a death spiral at the postal service".[103] in july 2024, the usps inspector general published a report noting that some service workers were not following proper procedures for mail in ballots in some places, and that some mailed ballots were missing postmarks, which are required in many states.[105][106] the report further warned that some ballots were at risk of not being counted due to both current usps policies for processing mail as well as changes by dejoy's delivering for america plan. some changes were made within days of the 2024 primary elections in georgia and virginia.[106] lawmakers such as mark pocan were concerned about plans by the usps to consolidate regional hubs, arguing that mail delivery would slow down.[105] significant slowdowns had been observed throughout the united states as of april 2024.[107] some of these regional hubs were located in states such as virginia, oregon, texas and missouri as well as swing states georgia, nevada and wisconsin.[108][105][106][109][110] these consolidations have been paused until january 2025, following criticism from lawmakers.[110] in september 2024, the national association of state election directors and national association of secretaries of state sent an open letter to dejoy supporting the inspector general report, warning that the usps has marked election mail to voters as undeliverable at "higher than usual rates, even in cases where a voter is known not to have moved" and that ballots that were processed in some places arrived at election offices 10+ days after the postmark date.[106] in some states such as utah,[106] dozens or hundreds of ballots for 2024 primary elections had arrived over 10 days after being postmarked.[109] other problems highlighted in the letter include "lost or delayed election mail, and front line training deficiencies impacting usps's ability to deliver election mail in a timely and accurate manner".[111] these issues have been described as "systemic".[106] there is the risk that, if mail is returned to the original sender, voters may miss their mail in ballots or removed from voter registration rolls.[109] republicans have filed lawsuits to stop states from counting postmarked mail in ballots that are received by election officials after election day. about 20 states, plus washington, d.c., accept and count mail in ballots received after election day as long as they are postmarked on or before that day.[112] as of august 2024, these lawsuits have been filed in nevada, illinois, north dakota and mississippi.[112] plaintiffs include the republican national committee,[112][113] mark splonskowski (the burleigh county auditor who is supported by public interest legal foundation),[114] the mississippi republican party[113] and a county election commissioner.[113] several issues were reported during the 2024 election with mail in ballots, including discarded ballots,[115][116][117][118] stranded or delayed ballots,[119] undated ballots (which were not counted in pennsylvania following lawsuits by the republican national committee, the pennsylvania republican party and david mccormick[120]),[121] stolen and/or forged ballots,[122][123][117][124][125] ballots misdirected between and within states,[126] unprocessed ballots,[127] and destroyed ballots.[128] following trump's 2020 loss amid his false allegations of fraud, republican lawmakers initiated a sweeping effort to make voting laws more restrictive in several states across the country and to take control of the administrative management of elections at the state and local level.[129][130][131][132] by 2023, organizations funded by dark money had met quietly with officials in republican controlled states to create an incubator of policies that would restrict ballot access and amplify false claims that fraud is rampant in elections. led by the heritage foundation, the groups include the honest elections project, which is among a network of conservative organizations associated with leonard leo, a longtime prominent figure in the federalist society.[133] the washington post reported in june 2024 on indications that county level republicans in swing states might be preparing to challenge and delay their certifications of voting results in 2024. such delays might cause a state to miss deadlines that ensure its electoral college votes are counted in washington on january 6, 2025. in four state elections since 2020, county election officials withheld certifications, citing mistrust in voting machines or ballot errors, though they could not produce evidence of actual voting fraud; the certifications proceeded after state interventions, which included warnings of potential criminal charges. two cochise county, arizona, officials were criminally charged for refusing to certify, not because of doubts about cochise results but as a protest against other counties voting for democratic state candidates. project democracy found that since 2020 members of state and local election boards had voted against certification more than twenty times in eight states. voting rights activists were concerned that the continuing false allegations of election fraud since 2020 might lead to social unrest if efforts to delay certifications at the local level were overruled by state officials or courts. the failure of a state to have its electoral college votes counted on january 6 could result in neither presidential candidate reaching the minimum 270 electoral votes, causing the election to be thrown to the united states house of representatives. in that scenario, the election outcome would be determined by a simple majority count of state delegations; republicans hold a majority in 28 of 50 delegations in the 118th united states congress and thus trump would win in such a scenario. the guardian confirmed that "experts have been particularly alarmed by efforts to try and halt certification at the local level   something that could cause delay and chaos after the presidential vote in november."[134][135][136][137][138] republican elections activist cleta mitchell said "the only way [democrats] win is to cheat". she was a key figure in trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 election results, participating in the january 2021 trump raffensperger phone call that attempted to change the certified 2020 presidential election results in georgia.[139] that year, in association with the rnc, she launched the election integrity network (ein) to recruit, train and deploy election deniers as poll workers in eight key states for the 2024 presidential election. in recordings of spring 2022 organizing meetings obtained by politico, rnc national election integrity director josh findlay, referencing ein, was heard to tell others that the rnc would support efforts to provide staff, organization, and "muscle" in key states.[140][141] the new york times reported that the ein "has done more than any other group to take mr. trump's falsehoods about corruption in the democratic system and turn them into action". gaining access to over 400 hours of zoom meetings, the new york times reported that ein had closely coordinated with the rnc, four republican secretaries of state, and a dozen state legislatures. the group was funded by multiple republican megadonors associated with trump, and had successfully spread conspiracy theories about voting with several right wing media outlets and had installed activists on election boards and thousands as poll monitors and workers.[142] ein has also been collaborating with other groups to challenge voter rolls, including voteref (run by gina swoboda and funded by restoration pac, a super pac predominantly funded by richard uihlein[143]) and check my vote. the pennsylvania department of state described these voter registration challenges as "an attempt to circumvent the list maintenance processes that are carefully prescribed by state and federal law," which would result in "disenfranchisement, unnecessary litigation, and a harassing diversion of already stretched county resources."[144] the electronic registration information center (eric) is a bipartisan nonprofit that helps elections officials in some 30 states manage their registration rolls with the use of software to maintain election integrity. in 2022, eric faced criticism from election deniers and right wing media after the far right blog the gateway pundit published a series of stories falsely suggesting it is part of a left wing election conspiracy funded by george soros to register democrats. several republican controlled states soon severed their association with eric.[145][146][147] members of the ein had lobbied to have the system removed, and their activism was publicized by the gateway pundit and other right wing media outlets.[142] to supplant eric, mitchell led an effort to deploy the eagleai network election software in the 2024 presidential election. nbc news reported in august 2023 that "election experts and voting rights advocates warn that an activist led strategy risks overwhelming election workers with reports of problem registrations generated by amateurs using unreliable data. and those reports may, in turn, intimidate voters or require them to jump through hoops to maintain their voting rights." after months of testing, by july 2024 some conservative activists found the eagleai system was unreliable.[148][149] the brennan center for justice at the new york university school of law called eagleai "a vehicle to disenfranchise voters and spread disinformation".[150] the associated press reported in june 2024 that eagleai "is funded and used by supporters of trump, some of whom worked to overturn the 2020 vote, and entwined with the republican's campaign." ap reported eagleai was pursuing deployment in several states, including arizona, florida, georgia, illinois, nevada and ohio. during an internal meeting about the system, cleta mitchell said, "the left will hate this   hate this. but we love it." despite its name, the software does not employ artificial intelligence, and though it is pronounced "eagle eye", its creator denied it was named after operation eagle eye, a 1960s republican party voter suppression effort.[151][152] as of july 2024, at least one county in georgia signed a contract to use eagleai for voter roll maintenance.[144] eagleai is funded by ziklag, an american christian organization which includes the uihlein family and whose goals include as part of "operation checkmate": "[securing] 10,640 additional unique votes in arizona (mirroring the 2020 margin of 10,447 votes), and [removing] up to one million ineligible registrations and around 280,000 ineligible voters in arizona, nevada, georgia, and wisconsin."[153] citizen ag, a group self described as part of operation checkmate, announced its intention to file lawsuits against counties that do not accept voter challenges from eagleai. ziklag also funded an effort by the american legislative exchange council to share talking points about "election integrity" with republican party state lawmakers in 2022.[154] ziklag has also funded right wing christian groups and televangelists such as lance wallnau to increase turnout of evangelical voters for trump, especially in swing states.[155] julie adams, an ein regional coordinator, sits on the fulton county, georgia, elections board and has promoted the use of eagleai in georgia. in may 2024, she abstained from certifying the recent county primary results, though no issues of error or misconduct had been raised. state law says that election boards "shall" certify elections if no problems were identified; the four other board members voted to certify. adams started a lawsuit, backed by the trump aligned america first policy institute (afpi), seeking a court ruling to grant election board members more discretion in certifications. congresswoman and georgia democratic party chair nikema williams alleged that adams was attempting to set the stage to block certification of results in the november presidential election. fulton is the most populous county in georgia with a plurality of black residents.[156][157][158] a fulton county superior court judge ruled against adams in october 2024, finding that her actions were unconstitutional and violated state law.[159] the legal arm of afpi was led by former florida attorney general and trump attorney pam bondi who filed voting lawsuits in battleground states.[160] in august 2024, the trump aligned majority of the georgia state election board approved a new rule allowing county election boards, before certifying their election results, to conduct a "reasonable inquiry" to verify the results are "a true and accurate accounting of all votes cast in that election"; another vote days later required that county election officials be given "all election related documentation" before certification. opponents asserted the new rules violated state law and more than a century of state court precedent, and might lead to post election delays or rejections of certifications in an important swing state. during a campaign rally three days before the board vote, trump called out by name the three board members who later approved the rule, describing them as "pit bulls fighting for honesty, transparency and victory". one of them was in the rally audience and stood for recognition of trump's praise. on august 26, republican georgia governor brian kemp said he had asked republican georgia attorney general chris carr if the governor had the authority to remove election board members, citing ethics concerns expressed by some. that same day, national and state democrats filed a suit alleging the rules changes were illegal and would create chaos. the board majority also approved a rule in september requiring all counties to hand count their ballots for comparison to machine counts, which critics said might cause errors and confusion while also disrupting the custody of ballots, which typically remain sealed unless a recount is demanded in a challenged election. the recounts could also significantly delay the reporting of election results.[161] in october 2024, a fulton county superior court judge temporarily blocked the board's hand counting rule, finding it was "too much, too late" to implement in the 2024 election.[162] the next day, another fulton county superior court judge found that seven new rules established by the state election board were "illegal, unconstitutional and void", ordering the georgia state election board to inform all state and local election officials that the rules were to be disregarded.[163] an appeal of the latter ruling by the rnc was unanimously rejected by the georgia supreme court days later.[164] after joining the tea party movement of the republican party, catherine engelbrecht founded true the vote in 2010, seeking to expose voting fraud. the organization has long promoted debunked election fraud theories. she and her collaborator gregg phillips provided the source information for the 2022 d'souza film 2000 mules that falsely alleged a five state democratic voting fraud operation in 2020. in response to a state lawsuit, true the vote admitted in a february 2024 court filing that it had no evidence to support its voting fraud claims in georgia. phillips originated the false allegation that millions of noncitizens voted in the 2016 presidential election. for the 2024 election, they introduced iv3, a software program which they claim compares u.s. postal service information to voter rolls so that anyone can challenge registrations. a wired examination found the system unreliable, although phillips said an updated version was rolling out that has close to "100 billion data elements about every single voter in the united states". according to catherine engelbrecht, as of july 2024, iv3 has logged more than 700,000 challenges of voter registrations. as of april 2024, gregg phillips was also developing ground fusion, software "aimed at organizations and pacs looking to identify voting irregularities across larger geographic regions." the america project, founded in 2021 by michael flynn and patrick byrne, said it would roll out "state of the art election tools" that would include artificial intelligence technology.[165][166][167][168][169][170][144] in 2024, true the vote launched votealert, a social media application that allows users to report examples of what they perceive to be voter fraud. wired had criticized a test version of the app for promoting unfounded conspiracy theories about the election.[171] an election worker from riverside county, california that was using the app claimed to demand identification from voters that she perceived as non citizens, a plot that wired described as "racist and illegal". as of november 2024, election workers from the county were investigating the incident.[172] citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington obtained months of emails among elections officials in at least five georgia counties calling themselves the georgia election integrity coalition. the guardian reported the communications included a "who's who of georgia election denialists" who were "coordinating on policy and messaging to both call the results of november's election into question before a single vote is cast, and push rules and procedures favored by the election denial movement." some officials had ties to national groups like tea party patriots and the election integrity network led by cleta mitchell.[173] by october 2024, republicans were filing lawsuits in battleground states alleging potential fraud to challenge mail in ballots received from american citizens living abroad. they sought to have certain ballots set aside until voter eligibility could be verified. with about 6.5 million eligible american voters living overseas, including hundreds of thousands of military personnel, the overseas vote was long considered sacrosanct by both parties, historically giving republicans a voting edge but more recently that advantage had diminished or swung to democrats.[174][175] judges in michigan and north carolina rejected rnc suits, ruling they were an "attempt to disenfranchise" voters and had "presented no substantial evidence" of fraud.[176][177] republican congressman scott perry played a key role among republican house members in efforts to overturn biden's election in 2020. he and five other pennsylvania representatives filed suit in their state asserting that verification of overseas ballots was insufficient to protect the election from foreign interference. perry said he "joined my colleagues to defend our election against the intrusion and interference of the greatest state sponsor of terrorism in the world: iran."[178] pennsylvania federal judge christopher conner dismissed the suit in october 2024, citing its "phantom fears of foreign malfeasance".[179] the election integrity act of 2021 in georgia (sb 202) allows persons to file an unlimited number of challenges to voter registrations in the state. as of november 2022, at least 149,168 challenges have been filed, primarily against young or black voters, and no charges of voter fraud have been made. these lists of challenges have been created by true the vote, which claimed to partially obtain them from the national change of address registry. brad raffensperger stated that "though federal law restricts our ability to update our voter registration lists, the elector challenge is a vehicle under our law to ensure voter integrity." bee nguyen accused the law of bypassing the national voter registration act of 1993, which forbids voter registration purges 90 days prior to an election. sb 202 in turn potentially violates that federal law as well as the civil rights act and ku klux klan act.[180] by july 2024, conservative groups were systematically challenging large numbers of voter registrations across the country. many of these efforts were driven by lawsuits, including from the rnc, and activists calling themselves election investigators. the groups' stated rationale was to purge voter rolls of dead people, noncitizens and others ineligible to vote. several republican secretaries of state were also examining the rolls themselves. the executive director of the national association of state election directors said many of the challenges ignore or misunderstand the complexity and legal requirements involved in maintaining the rolls. others said the efforts risked disenfranchising eligible voters and sowing distrust in the election system. the michigan secretary of state had earlier in the year directed a suburban detroit clerk to reinstate about 1,000 registrations of eligible voters that had been purged. the new york times reported "it is difficult to know precisely how many voters have been dropped from the rolls as a result of the campaign   and even harder to determine how many were dropped in error."[181][168] in october 2024, investigative journalist greg palast published to youtube a documentary, vigilantes inc., detailing voter suppression by "vigilante" challenges by self appointed vote fraud hunters, not government officials, who are targeting people to challenge and block the counting of their ballots.[182] many challenges disproportionately impacted blacks,[182] students,[182][168] immigrants,[168] and lower income voters.[168] some of the vigilante challenge groups, such as soles to the rolls in michigan[168][183] or the pigpen project in nevada,[168][183][184][144] are connected to cleta mitchell,[168] true the vote,[168] mike lindell[168][183] or eagleai.[183] the pigpen project is ran by former nevada gop executive directors and endorsed by paul nehlen.[144] the group is part of the citizens outreach foundation,[185] which attempted to purge 11,000 people from washoe county, nevada voter rolls in 2024, a move that the aclu said violated state and federal law due to being requested within 90 days of the upcoming election.[186] other groups include the people's audit, look ahead america (founded by a former trump campaign staffer), wisconsin's north of 29 (connected to mike lindell, and the founder's husband ran for wisconsin state assembly in 2024), iowa canvassing, clean elections usa (ceusa), fec united (founded by joe oltmann) and the liberty center for god and country (run by steven hotze).[184][187][144][188][189][190] in 2022, wisconsin voters alliance, which spread conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and attempted to overturn the results, filed lawsuits in 13 counties in wisconsin to get access to guardianship records in an attempt to remove people from voting rolls that they perceived to be ineligible.[191] another group, the wisconsin center for election justice, also used change of address data from the usps to find perceived ineligible voters for purging. this approach was deemed problematic by election experts due to the data's lack of coverage.[192] fond du lac county district attorney eric toney used their information to charge five people for registering to vote with a ups store address.[192] the leader of the group[192] was previously convicted of mail fraud and bank fraud, and was investigated by the wisconsin capitol police for stalking behavior towards officials at the wisconsin election commission.[193] in 2022, voting rights activists in arizona filed a lawsuit against ceusa, alleging that its vigilantes have engaged in voter intimidation by appearing with military gear, weapons and drones at polling locations and ballot drop boxes, as well as by taking pictures of people attempting to use drop boxes with the threat of posting them online.[182][188] in at least one case, vigilantism over a false claim of voter fraud had led to violence.[182][190][194][195][196] as of august 2024, 40,000 vigilante activists from true the vote had challenged 851,381 american voters in 43 states,[182] almost all of whom were voters of color.[197] the group's goal was to challenge 2 million voters by november 5.[198] on the mark thompson show in november 2024, greg palast said that these challenges caused voters to be removed from the voter rolls, and that the only way for voters to reverse their challenge was to physically visit their voter registrar's office with an id proving their citizenship and residence. some voters may have been challenged on election day or the day after election day, and they may not have known. if a voter is challenged, they may be provided a provisional ballot. he estimated that there were 15 20 million provisional ballots during the 2024 election, and that 2.7 million of them were rejected. none of the 2.7 million people were arrested for registering or voting illegally. palast alleged that, by adding back a fraction of the voters who were challenged and/or removed, kamala harris would have won both nevada and arizona.[197] in december 2024, palast alleged that at least 2 million mail in ballots were discarded.[199] in january 2025, palast further estimated that 4,776,706 voters were incorrectly removed from voter registration databases (per data from the us election assistance commission), at least 2,121,000 mail in ballots were disqualified, at least 585,000 in precinct ballots were disqualified, 1,216,000 provisional ballots were rejected, and that 3.24 million new voter registrations were either rejected or not added to the voter rolls in time for the election. he described a technique that both democratic and republican politicians have used to purge voters from the voter rolls: targeted voters that do not sign and return postcards, which are mailed by state elections officials and appear as junk mail, are removed. he estimated that at least 2.3% of all votes cast in the election were suppressed, costing kamala harris at least 3,565,000 votes, which would have led to her winning the states of wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania and georgia, winning the election by both the popular vote and 286 electoral college votes.[200] a surge of migrants crossed the southern united states border beginning in 2021 during the covid 19 pandemic. trump and many of his allies alleged the biden administration was intentionally welcoming migrants into the country so they could register and vote for democratic candidates. cleta mitchell was instrumental in spreading this conspiracy theory nationwide by hosting zoom calls advising volunteers to spread it. many volunteers repeated rumors and conspiracies that ngos aligned with democrats were registering migrants to vote. fox news host maria bartiromo told her x (formerly twitter) followers that a friend of a friend told her they had seen tables set up outside texas dmv offices to register migrants, though a texas department of public safety spokesman said "none of it is true". texas attorney general ken paxton and organizations such as tea party patriots and the election transparency initiative, the latter led by former virginia attorney general ken cuccinelli, also advanced these false narratives. michael waldman, president of the brennan center, said during an august congressional hearing that he believed the false narratives were created "to set the stage for undermining the legitimacy of the 2024 election this year. the big lie is being pre deployed."[201] lies about noncitizen voting have become the main focus of election denialism ahead of the 2024 election, which some experts say have been used to intimidate and suppress voters while laying the groundwork to try and overturn the election again, should trump lose.[202] the new york times reported in september 2024 that "the notion that [noncitizens] will flood the polls   and vote overwhelmingly for democrats   is animating a sprawling network of republicans who mobilized around" trump after he claimed the 2020 election was rigged, and "the false theories about widespread noncitizen voting could be used to dispute the outcome again." the heritage foundation was particularly instrumental in spreading the false narrative.[203][32] appearing with trump in april 2024, house speaker mike johnson baselessly suggested "potentially hundreds of thousands of votes" might be cast by undocumented migrants; as president, trump falsely asserted that millions of votes cast by undocumented migrants had deprived him of a popular vote victory in the 2016 election. states have found very few noncitizens on their voting rolls, and in the extremely rare instances of votes cast by noncitizens, they are legal immigrants who are often mistaken that they have a right to vote.[16] an april 2024 cato institute review of the heritage foundation election fraud database found 85 irregularities involving noncitizens over the preceding 22 years.[204][205][206] elon musk, owner of x, has used his account with 197 million followers to post false or misleading information about the election, notably the great replacement conspiracy theory, contending democrats are intentionally "importing" undocumented migrants to vote. in one case, musk reposted a false claim that as many as two million noncitizens had been registered to vote in three states. analysis by the center for countering digital hate found that during the first seven months of 2024, fifty false or misleading musk posts about the election generated 1.2 billion views; independent fact checkers debunked the posts, though the community notes user generated fact check feature on x did not note them. musk endorsed trump in july 2024.[207][208] politico reported in june 2022 that the rnc sought to deploy an "army" of poll workers and attorneys in swing states who could refer what they deemed questionable ballots in democratic voting precincts to a network of friendly district attorneys to challenge. in april 2024, rnc co chair lara trump said the party had the ability to install poll workers who could handle ballots, rather than merely observe polling places. she also said that the 2018 expiration of the 1982 consent decree (ballot security task force) prohibiting the rnc from intimidation of minority voters "gives us a great ability" in the election. republicans were recruiting poll watchers in suburbs to deploy in urban areas dominated by democratic voters. critics said the rnc plans created a risk that election workers might face harassment and undermine trust in the election process.[209] the republican governors of several states said that they would not allow the united states department of justice civil rights division to send poll monitors to ensure that there are no civil rights violations at polling places.[210] matt schlapp, the chairman of the american conservative union that hosts the annual conservative political action conference (cpac), wrote election officials in at least three swing states in august 2024 to explain plans to monitor ballot drop boxes. schlapp wrote the monitoring was intended to encourage rather than discourage voting. election officials dismissed schlapp's premise; arizona secretary of state adrian fontes remarked, "the whole thing is an absurd sham to cover up direct efforts to intimidate voters by a bunch of cpac recruited vigilantes."[211] true the vote planned to team with sympathetic sheriffs to monitor polling places and drop boxes in wisconsin. catherine engelbrecht said her group was "mainly focused" on wisconsin but "we do have a scalable program".[212] by 2022, true the vote and others were seeking cooperation with "constitutional sheriffs" organizations such as constitutional sheriffs and peace officers association and protect america now (co founded by sheriff mark lamb) to investigate 2020 election fraud allegations with an eye toward preventing future alleged fraud.[213] such constitutional sheriffs organizations contend sheriffs are the supreme law enforcement authorities in the nation. the southern poverty law center classified such groups as part of an "extreme antigovernment movement" associated with the american militia movement and the sovereign citizen movement.[214][215][216] trump's political operation said in april 2024 that it planned to deploy more than 100,000 attorneys and volunteers to polling places across battleground states, with an "election integrity hotline" for poll watchers and voters to report alleged voting irregularities. trump told a rally audience in december 2023 that they needed to "guard the vote" in democratic run cities; at an august 2024 rally, he said he already had enough votes and "our primary focus is not to get out the vote, but to make sure they don't cheat". he had complained that his 2020 campaign was not adequately prepared to challenge his loss in courts; some critics said his 2024 election integrity effort is actually intended to gather allegations to overwhelm the election resolution process should he challenge the 2024 election results. marc elias, a democratic election lawyer who defeated every trump court challenge after the 2020 election, remarked, "i think they are going to have a massive voter suppression operation and it is going to involve very, very large numbers of people and very, very large numbers of lawyers."[217] the america project founded by flynn and byrne is staffed by prominent election deniers and funds another project, one more mission, that seeks to recruit tens of thousands of people with military and law enforcement experience to monitor polling places. the intercept reported in april 2020 that during a february strategy session attended by conservative donors and activists, englebrecht said that "you get some seals in those polls and they're going to say, 'no, no, this is what it says. this is how we're going to play this show.' that's what we need. we need people who are unafraid to call it like they see it." several attendees specifically cited this need for "inner city" and predominantly native american polling precincts.[166][170] the national fraternal order of police, representing some 375,000 police officers nationwide, endorsed trump in september 2024. addressing the group's board, he urged officers to "watch for voter fraud" because "you can keep it down just by watching, because, believe it or not, they're afraid of that badge." such police activity might violate multiple state laws and raise concerns of voter intimidation. the next day, trump posted on social media that, if he were to win, "those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our country."[218][219] as election workers faced threats and harassment, the washington post reported in february 2024 it had interviewed more than a dozen election officials around the country who said they were "preparing for the types of disruptions that historically had been more associated with political unrest abroad than american elections". this included planning to quickly debunk misinformation, deescalate conflicts and improve coordination with federal, state, and local law enforcement to better respond to harassment, threats and potential violence. fontes said his office was preparing for worst case scenarios, saying "we recognize the real and present danger that’s presented by the conspiracy theories and the lies."[220] a may 2024 poll by reuters and ipsos poll found some 68% of americans   83% of democrats and 65% of republicans   said they were concerned that political violence might follow the election. olivia troye, a former homeland security and counterterrorism aide to former vice president mike pence, remarked that "the potential for anger, division, political violence   all of that groundwork is being laid out again".[221][222] ivan raiklin, a close michael flynn associate, addressed an october 2024 rod of iron ministries freedom festival, urging attendees to "confront" their state representatives with "evidence of the illegitimate steal" should trump lose. he told attendees he was planning for a range of scenarios following the election, saying, "i have a plan and strategy for every single component of it. and then january 6 is going to be pretty fun." he added, "we run the elections. we try to play it fair. they steal it, our state legislatures are our final stop to guarantee a checkmate." raiklin had previously characterized himself as trump's "secretary of retribution" and said he had a prepared a "deep state target list' of over 350 people he would go after in a second trump administration. raiklin claims to have 80,000 recruits prepared to be deputized by constitutional sheriffs.[223][224] asked by fox news host maria bartiromo on october 13 whether he was "expecting chaos on election day" by "outside agitators" such as migrants or terrorists, trump replied, "i think the bigger problem is the enemy from within", referencing "radical left lunatics". he added, "it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by national guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can't let that happen."[225] on at least five occasions during the election cycle, trump has told his supporters that "we don't need the votes." msnbc argued that trump was pushing for voter intimidation to handle false claims of electoral fraud on behalf of his political opponents.[226] trump repeatedly questioned the legitimacy of his opponent, kamala harris, in the 2024 election by falsely claiming she orchestrated a "coup" against biden in what the washington post described as an attempt to delegitimize harris if she wins and undermine confidence in the result of the 2024 election. it further noted trump's long insistence that "his political failures are the result of some malevolent force trying to keep him out of power", echoing right wing conspiracy theories and rhetoric about a deep state in the united states.[227] trump pointed to the known voting phenomenon known as a "blue shift" or "red mirage" to make baseless allegations of voting fraud.[228] trump frequently made unfounded claims that he is ahead in the polls and winning in deep blue states such as california, alleging the only reason he loses such states is because of voter fraud. by october 2024, trump made several rallies in blue states such as at coachella, california and madison square garden in new york, and cnn reported that trump believes holding rallies in blue states helps "show how deep his support runs across the nation" and also "set the groundwork for trump to question the election results should harris win".[229] in october 2024, the new york times reported on a number of polls commissioned by right wing firms, most showing a trump victory and standing out "amid the hundreds of others indicating a dead heat in the presidential election" and that they were seen as "building a narrative of unstoppable momentum for mr. trump". it further said that the polls were "cementing the idea that the only way mr. trump can lose to vice president kamala harris is if the election is rigged" and that they "could be held up as evidence of cheating if that victory does not come to pass". the report noted that by october 2020, republican aligned pollsters had only released 15 presidential polls in swing states compared to 37 in 2024, and that of the 37 all but seven had trump in the lead. several of the polls were also accepted in influencing the polling averages by realclearpolitics, which were widely shared among republican circles. the new york times also reported on betting markets polymarket and kalshi as strongly favoring trump over harris, and that part of the surge appeared in part due to a small number of individuals betting $30 million on a trump win, and that trump and musk had pointed to the betting markets as evidence of their strength. other data, including early voting numbers were also "cited by trump supporters as further evidence of his impending triumph".[230] joshua dyck of the center for public opinion at the university of massachusetts lowell said that "republicans are clearly strategically putting polling into the information environment to try to create perceptions that trump is stronger."[230] the increase in partisan polls were criticized by simon rosenberg, who alleged that republicans were "flooding the zone" to shift polling averages, create media buzz and deflate democratic enthusiasm. g. elliott morris of fivethirtyeight stated that such low quality polls would not impact their polling averages, which are weighted by the quality and reputation of the pollster, as did nate cohn of the new york times, who calculated only a small shift in the averages.[231] polling strategists for both parties criticized seeing the use of polling "weaponized" to decrease faith in the entire system. republican strategist mike madrid stated that "the main reason you float data like that is because you're trying to convince your supporters there's no way trump can lose   unless it's stolen".[230] in early november 2024, the secretaries of state for missouri, florida, and texas have stated their intention to block federal election monitors from accessing polling places on election day. the united states department of justice civil rights division has historically been responsible for enforcing federal voting rights laws, including the voting rights act of 1965 and the americans with disabilities act of 1990.[232] precinct strategy is a political strategy   advocated by tea party activist and oath keeper member daniel j. schultz, promoted by mark finchem, steve bannon, turning point action and michael flynn, and endorsed by donald trump   for supporters of the election denial movement to join local level committees or become poll workers. precinct officers collectively can affect the election process due to their ability to elect party officers, influence which candidates are on a ballot, and encourage voter turnout. in some states, they can also choose poll workers or members of election oversight boards. as of september 2021, at least 8,500 new republican precinct officers or locally equivalent officials joined in counties across the united states, particularly ones that were seen as politically competitive. not all district chairs screen their applicants. some of the new officers openly supported the qanon conspiracy theory and participated in the january 6 united states capitol attack. schultz had previously defended the american militia movement in an article and advocated for new officers to be armed with weapons, considering the precinct strategy to be the last alternative to violence. once empowered, some officers have attempted to push out higher ranking officials who do not support false claims about the 2020 united states presidential election and elect those who do, with varying degrees of success.[233][234][235][236][237][47] christian right activists,[238][239] alongside true the vote and the election integrity network, have also participated in efforts to recruit poll workers in swing states.[239] by june 2022, this strategy was used by the republican national committee to connect new poll workers with local party attorneys.[240] by april 2024, the republican party was largely controlled by the election denial movement,[241] especially as several trump campaign personnel took leadership roles in the rnc.[242] in september 2024, the center for media and democracy released a report identifying 239 republican election administrators, candidates and party leaders in swing states that were part of the election denial movement.[243] in october 2024, the rnc and trump campaign co hosted a training event for poll workers in wisconsin and across the united states. republican officials refused to make training materials public, with the exception of the point that poll workers were encouraged to report perceived suspicions to state rnc lawyers.[244] during elections in 2020, 2022, and 2024, several county commissioners in multiple swing states (georgia, north carolina, nevada, pennsylvania and arizona), along with new mexico, had voted not to certify the elections. election experts were concerned that administrators could refuse to certify if trump had lost the 2024 presidential election, potentially leading to results being decided by majority votes in the house of representatives and the senate.[245] in addition to precinct officers or poll workers, many election deniers have also been appointed as presidential electors for trump in swing states for the 2024 election, including at least 13 who participated in the trump fake electors plot in 2020.[246] election deniers have also ran in local school board elections.[247] an october 2024 bulletin from the state threat assessment center in colorado warned of insider threats, "in which people with authorized access to the election process might attempt to derail it."[248] two election judges in minnesota were criminally charged for their actions on election day, one for serving in the same precinct where her husband was on the ballot for city council (who won the election), and the other for allowing 11 people to vote without registering.[249] trump and other republican politicians have repeatedly attacked journalists and media organizations, including lawsuits (including lawsuits to reveal anonymous sources[250][251]),[252][253][254][255][250][251][256] a complaint through the federal election commission,[252] threats of imprisonment,[252][251][257][258][259][256][260] threats to revoke broadcast licenses,[252][261][258][259][256][260] threats of violence,[262][263] proposing laws that directly challenge new york times co. v. sullivan,[264][265] threats of lawfare,[266][258][259] and designation as "enemy of the people" or similar insults.[266][256][260] commentators have expressed concerns that these threats could make a chilling effect on editorial decisions of media outlets (self censorship),[261][257][266][259] especially if they make unintentional mistakes while criticizing political figures.[253] these lawsuits and threats of lawsuits were characterized as attempts to punish outlets that criticize politicians by ultimately forcing those outlets to close through multiple, slow moving damage claims.[264][265][257] journalists speculated that the withdrawal of editorial board endorsements for kamala harris in october 2024 by the owners of the washington post and the los angeles times were an attempt to appease trump if he won the election.[256][260] several republican party politicians and operatives have ties to websites that have been considered by misinformation researchers and journalists to spread false information, especially about climate change, prejudice against marginalized groups, covid 19 or the 2020 united states presidential election, including the epoch times,[267][268][269][270] the western journal,[271][272][273][274] and breitbart.[275][276][277][268][274][278] some of these websites had lost advertisers in response to boycotts or were banned from being shared on some social media platforms such as facebook or google news, reducing their web traffic.[271][279][280] other conservative figures, most notably donald trump in the aftermath of the january 6th capitol attack, were deplatformed from social media for incitement of violence[281] or hate speech.[271] as such, "republican politicians and activists have alleged that the tech companies are unfairly censoring the right, threatening conservatives' ability to sway public opinion and win elections."[271] in 2021, republican legislators in texas and florida passed laws to limit the ability of social media organizations to moderate content on their own platforms. these laws were supported by republican attorneys general from 19 states.[282][283] republican introduced bills in many states allowed for civil lawsuits against social media companies over perceived "censorship" of posts, especially those related to politics or religion. as of march 2021, research has not supported the allegation that social media companies are biased against conservative viewpoints.[284] in 2022, under pressure from republican politicians and right wing activists, the united states department of homeland security shut down the disinformation governance board and canceled a project with a non profit to track death threats targeting election workers.[285] starting in 2023, academic and private researchers of disinformation have been subject to subpoenas, lawsuits and public records requests by the house judiciary committee (led by jim jordan) and america first legal (led by stephen miller), respectively, "accusing them of colluding with the [united states federal] government to suppress conservative speech online." these efforts, described as an "attempt to chill research", have not produced evidence "that government officials coerced [social media platforms] to take action against accounts" as of june 2023.[286] america first legal's efforts had been funded by conservative donors that are allied with trump and have spread false claims of fraud during the 2020 elections, including $27 million from the bradley impact fund and $1.3 million from the conservative partnership institute.[287] lawsuits have also been filed against the federal government by the attorney generals of missouri and louisiana, as well as by texas attorney general ken paxton, the daily wire and the federalist.[288][289] researchers had been subject to increased time demands, legal costs and online harassment.[288] lawyers involved in murthy v. missouri have alleged that jordan's subcommittee partially leaked closed door interviews to america first legal for use in its own lawsuits,[287] an allegation evidenced by the stanford internet observatory.[290] subpoenas (including threats of contempt) were also sent to large technology companies by the committee, alleging that they had a liberal bias.[291][282] these actions, combined with reduced content moderation by social media platforms and progress in generative artificial intelligence, have occurred alongside an increase in online misinformation and disinformation.[288] these actions also had a chilling effect on social media companies and federal government agencies sharing information with each other, including about foreign interference[292] and medical misinformation.[288] mark warner characterized the committee as a "concerted effort by partisan actors to intimidate and silence" misinformation researchers and expressed concern that its actions could hamper countering foreign disinformation and interference in the 2024 elections.[293] the u.s. cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency (cisa), which is responsible for protecting critical national infrastructure (including election security), has been repeatedly targeted by conservatives and republican politicians, including the committee.[292][294] under project 2025, the heritage foundation recommended that cisa be dismantled and that it stop addressing election misinformation.[294] these attacks had the indirect impact of discouraging collaboration with cybersecurity experts, including research that did not involve disinformation or elections.[295] by september 2024, director jen easterly stated that the agency would not request for social media organizations to remove posts containing election misinformation.[296] by january 2024, researchers, technologists and political scientists warned that "disinformation [posed] an unprecedented threat to democracy in the united states in 2024",[297] especially from social media.[298] by march 2024, the new york times reported that trump and his allies had "unquestionably prevailed" in their efforts to stop collaboration between social media companies, the biden administration, and academic researchers to protect against election disinformation.[287] by june 2024, one of the research groups targeted by the committee, the stanford internet observatory, had refocused its work and its election integrity partnership project had ended.[282][290] in july 2024, several republican lawmakers threatened against re authorization of the global engagement center,[299] which had closed in december 2024 after republicans had removed it from a funding bill.[300] false information, including ai slop,[301] conspiracy theories about the 2024 atlantic hurricane season,[302] the springfield pet eating hoax,[303] false claims about the 2024 united states elections,[304][305] misinformation related to abortion,[306][307] vaccine misinformation,[308][309][310][311] anti trans rhetoric,[312] promotion of raw milk,[313][314][315] climate change denial[316][317][318][319] and propaganda from the russian government[320][321][322] had been spread online repeatedly by republican politicians during the 2024 election cycle. between 2021 and 2024, high profile republican figures and supporters such as donald trump, elon musk, the republican national committee, colton moore, matt maddock and mark robinson; right wing outlets or social media accounts such as fox news, one america news network and libs of tiktok and organizations such as gays against groomers have been repeatedly accused of promoting or enabling on mass media conspiracy theories (including false claims of fraud during the 2020 united states presidential election), lies, dehumanization (such as anti lgbtq rhetoric, xenophobia and antisemitism), demonization of political opponents and/or threats of violence (including threats of assassination and civil war), all as a form of stochastic terrorism.[323][324][325][326][327][328][329][330][331][332][333][334][335][336][337][338] kurt braddock, a communications researcher, notes that stochastic terrorism is largely based on disinformation that viciously attacks political opponents; is significantly more common in the form of right wing violence than left wing violence; and the words of those accused of perpetrating violent attacks are very similar to the rhetoric of political figures accused of inciting stochastic terrorism.[339] in addition to physical violence, this rhetoric has also directly inspired legislation. for example, a tennessee bill that proposed banning gender affirming care for trans children was sponsored by legislators who credited matt walsh for inspiration.[326] in scientific american, author bryn nelson noted how disgust has been weaponized by instigators of stochastic terrorism against their targets.[340] as part of one of the 2022 break out sessions, the dallas cpac conference displayed a banner across their main stage with the phrase "we are all domestic terrorists."[341][342][343] in the aftermath of the attack on paul pelosi in 2022, hillary clinton stated: "the republican party and its mouthpieces now regularly spread hate and deranged conspiracy theories. it is shocking, but not surprising, that violence is the result."[344] a june 2024 article from salon argued that trump and his allies have gone beyond the indirect language of stochastic terrorism towards direct orders for their followers to engage in violence.[345] experts and former united states government officials had previously come to similar conclusions, with juliette kayyem describing trump's rhetoric as "true incitement" and "promoting terrorism."[346] an october 2024 joint intelligence bulletin from the fbi and department of homeland security warned that domestic extremists   motivated by election denial conspiracy theories, immigration, abortion, the lgbtq community, and the two assassination attempts of trump   posed a significant threat of violence during the election against politicians (incumbents and candidates), election staff, media staff and judges who are overseeing cases involving elections.[248] elon musk contributed at least $260 million to efforts to re elect trump, including through three super pacs (america pac, rbg pac, and the maha alliance).[347] steve bannon had credited musk financing trump's campaign as "the reason we won."[348] during the election campaign, musk had established a "war room" in pittsburgh, pennsylvania, believing that the state was crucial for trump to win the election. musk had promoted trump's campaign to his (musk's) followers on x/twitter, and had spread unfounded conspiracy theories about the democratic party.[349] x had colluded with the trump campaign to block links to a dossier of jd vance, suspending the account of the journalist who published the dossier.[349][350] musk had repeatedly shared deepfake media of kamala harris,[351][352] including with the use of grok 2, a text to image model created by xai.[351] he has claimed without evidence that, if trump did not win, the 2024 election would be the last in the united states.[350][353] academic researchers had found that, shortly after musk tweeted his endorsement of trump in july 2024, musk's x/twitter account had received a strong and sustained increase in engagement compared to other high profile political accounts; and that right wing accounts had higher post visibility compared to left wing accounts during the same time period.[354] an analysis from the washington post also found that, between july 2023 and october 2024, tweets from republican politicians had significantly more virality compared to those from democrats.[355] in july 2024, jerry nadler wrote a letter to the house judiciary committee asking for an investigation into whether x/twitter had limited users from following kamala harris' official presidential campaign account, with nadler and nbc news noting that at least 16 accounts had posted that they were unable to follow the account.[356] in august 2024, musk donated $1 million to early vote action, a pac founded by scott presler.[357] shortly after the attempted assassination of donald trump in florida in september 2024, musk published and then deleted a tweet stating that "no one is even trying to assassinate" president joe biden and vice president kamala harris.[358] in an interview with tucker carlson on october 6, 2024, musk claimed, jokingly and then seriously, that if trump lost the election, that he would be imprisoned: "if he loses, i’m fucked. ... how long do you think my prison sentence is going to be? do you think? will i see my children? i don’t know." he further claimed that a hypothetical harris administration would imprison him and shut down x/twitter.[359] during town hall events in pennsylvania in october, musk spread false conspiracy theories about voting machines, linking voting machines from dominion to election losses for the republican party.[360] he advocated for elections to be run with only hand counted paper ballots, stating "i'm a technologist, i know a lot about computers. and i'm like, the last thing i would do is trust a computer program, because it's just too easy to hack."[360] he further advocated for only in person voting with identification, despite america pac supporting mail in voting and absentee ballots.[361] at a rally in pittsburgh, pennsylvania on november 5, 2024, donald trump stated: "[musk] really is watching this whole voting process. ... he looked at some that were just shipped in, some of these vote counting computers. he knew it before it even came in the door. he looked like at the back of it, 'oh, i know that one.' he knows this stuff better than anyone."[362] on his podcast shortly after election day, joe rogan told theo von that musk had "created an app" to know what the election results were four hours in advance.[363][364][365] as of november 2024, how the app worked and what data it used are unknown.[364] at a turning point usa conference in december 2024, ken paxton claimed that during a meeting on november 3, 2024 (two days before election day), elon musk told him that he was "now involved in every battleground state, and we're going to win every battleground state." during the conference, paxton said that he was "convinced that whatever rocket science thing [musk] did made a huge difference in this election".[366] during donald trump's pre inauguration rally on january 19, 2025, trump credited musk for his contributions to the campaign in pennsylvania,[367] stating "[musk] knows those computers better than anybody. all those computers. those vote counting computers. and we ended up winning pennsylvania like in a landslide."[368] democratic congresswoman jasmine crockett questioned whether trump had admitted that he and musk had committed electoral fraud,[369][370] while newsweek reported that dan goldman urged an investigation.[370] ethan shaotran, a member of the department of government efficiency,[371] participated in a 2020[372] hackathon at devpost to build software with the stated purpose of helping voters check their ballots for issues that may prevent those ballots from being counted, using street address and ballot images as input. the team wrote a python script that used opencv to generate "semi randomized ballots that fit certain satisfiability criteria" to test their work.[373][374] in october 2024, xai announced a team that included shaotran as a runner up for the company's hackathon.[375] the team's project documentation stated that they used grok and tweets from x/twitter as a multi agent system to "simulate entire communities' raw reactions to any topic (politics, consumer behavior, etc)."[376] america pac had posted digital ads asking viewers to register to vote, but viewers in swing states were asked to submit their address, cell phone number and age, without directing them to a voter registration page. the pac's privacy policy allows it to use this data for "other [political] activities and/or fundraising campaigns" such as door to door canvassing.[377] as a result, the michigan secretary of state's office and the north carolina board of elections have opened investigations into the pac in august 2024,[378][379] while the north carolina attorney general's office started to informally review the pac.[379] as of october 2024, michigan had not found evidence of the pac violating state campaign finance law.[380] at least 18 pennsylvania residents   mostly registered democrats   have received checks from america pac petition despite not having signed the petition or no knowledge of family members or friends who signed them up.[381][382][383][384][385] the petition's stated goal was to sign up 1 million registered voters in swing states to show support for the first and second amendments,[383] giving away $1 million to one petition signee every day until election day (in addition to $100 per petition referral),[380] and had asked for their full names, addresses, phone numbers and email addresses.[383] voter registration data in pennsylvania   which includes names, addresses, registration status, and political affiliation   can be purchased from the pennsylvania state department for $20.[384] while america pac stated that it would verify the information of the check recipients for accuracy, many of these recipients stated that no verification process had occurred.[382][383] as of december 2024, about 20 complaints have been sent to the pennsylvania attorney general office's bureau of consumer protection.[385] the majority of petitioners who were selected as winners of the $1 million sweepstakes were from pennsylvania.[386] one of the sweepstakes winners had worked on the trump campaign between june and october of 2024.[387] another sweepstakes winner[388] had the same name and lived in the same town as a person who ran for county supervisor in 2022.[389] on election day 2024, musk stated that he planned for america pac to be involved in the 2026 united states midterm elections, "any intermediate elections, as well as ... elections at the district attorney level."[390] larry krasner, the philadelphia district attorney, had filed a lawsuit against musk and america pac a week prior on october 28 over the pac's $1 million giveaway scheme.[391] over 1 million people in seven swing states had signed up with the petition, with krasner arguing that they were "scammed for their information."[392][393] on november 4, a judge dismissed the lawsuit,[392] arguing that krasner "failed to provide any evidence of misuse beyond mere speculation."[393] the wall street journal reported in october 2024 that musk had been in regular contact with vladimir putin, sergey kiriyenko, and other high ranking russian government officials since late 2022, discussing personal topics, business and geopolitical matters.[394] on november 15, democratic senators jack reed and jeanne shaheen asked the pentagon and department of justice to investigate these contacts, citing national security concerns.[395] musk has a security clearance with the united states federal government,[394] and several federal agencies such as the pentagon, the space force and nasa depend on technology from musk's company spacex.[394][395]

following the 2020 united states presidential election and the unsuccessful attempts by donald trump and various other republican officials to overturn it, republican lawmakers initiated a sweeping effort to make voting laws more restrictive within several states across the country.[2][3] according to the brennan center for justice, as of october 4, 2021, more than 425 bills that would restrict voting access have been introduced in 49 states with 33 of these bills enacted across 19 states so far.[4] the bills are largely centered around limiting mail in voting, strengthening voter id laws, shortening early voting, eliminating automatic and same day voter registration, curbing the use of ballot drop boxes, and allowing for increased purging of voter rolls.[5][6] republicans in at least eight states have also introduced bills that would give lawmakers greater power over election administration after they were unsuccessful in their attempts to overturn election results in swing states won by democratic candidate joe biden in the 2020 election.[7][8][9][10] the efforts garnered press attention and public outrage from democrats, and by 2023 republicans had adopted a more "under the radar" approach to achieve their goals.[11] supporters of the bills argue they would improve election security and reverse temporary changes enacted during the covid 19 pandemic; they point to false claims of significant election fraud, as well as the substantial public distrust of the integrity of the 2020 election those claims have fostered,[a] as reasons to tighten election laws.[14][15][16] opponents argue that the efforts amount to voter suppression,[17] are intended to advantage republicans by reducing the number of people who vote,[b][22] and would disproportionately affect minority voters;[23] they point to reports that the 2020 election was one of the most secure in american history[c] to counter claims that election laws need to be tightened and argue that public distrust in the 2020 election arises from falsehoods pushed by republicans, especially former president donald trump.[31][32][33] the insistence by trump and republicans that the election had been stolen from him by fraud came to be characterized as an implementation of "the big lie" and was also used by republicans to justify efforts to take control of the administrative management of elections at the state and local level.[34] for decades, the republican party has supported election integrity initiatives measures to reduce voter fraud (which is exceedingly rare in the united states[35][36]) but which critics have alleged are attempts at voter suppression.[37][38][39][40] as summarized by the associated press, "stronger voting regulations have long been a conservative goal, driven by old   and some say outdated   conventional wisdom that republicans thrive in elections with lower turnout, and democrats in ones with more voters. that has translated to gop efforts to tighten voter identification laws and require more frequent voter roll purges. both efforts tend to disproportionally exclude black and latino voters, groups that lean democratic."[41] in recent history, there have been several waves of voter restriction proposals. several proposals followed 2000 presidential election when, according to lawrence norden, "political operatives realized that small shifts in voting laws could potentially alter the outcome of an election".[42] another period of increased proposals came in 2013, when the supreme court struck down the preclearance provision of the voting rights act of 1965, which required southern states with histories of racial discrimination in voting to pre clear any changes to voting administration with the federal government.[43][44] finally, there was heightened interest after the 2016 presidential election, which donald trump (the winner of the election) claimed was marred by voter fraud.[45][46] however, the quantity of proposals reached its highest level following the 2020 united states presidential election.[47][48] the 2020 election took place during the covid 19 pandemic. as a result, many states implemented measures to expand voting access.[49][50] in particular, mail in voting (which was seeing significantly increased use in states that already offered no excuse absentee voting) was expanded in many states.[51][52] in response, incumbent president donald trump spent weeks claiming that mail in voting would allow the election to be rigged against him.[53] this echoed his 2016 strategy of making unfounded and often conspiratorial claims of voter fraud in the 2016 presidential election.[d] immediately following the 2020 election, donald trump and his allies in the republican party used the false claims of electoral fraud trump had been propounding for months,[56][57][58] as well as a fabricated narrative of an international communist conspiracy involving hugo chavez and dominion voting systems,[59][60][61] as pretext to initiate an unprecedented effort to overturn the victory of democratic candidate joe biden.[e][65] they launched over 60 lawsuits,[55][66] encouraged officials in states with narrow biden victories to challenge vote certification processes,[67][68] and attempted to reject the results of several states biden had won during the congressional certification of the electoral college results,[69][70] including by trying to force vice president mike pence to reject those states' electoral votes.[71] supporters of trump engaged in a "stop the steal" protest movement,[72][73] while conservative media networks and political commentators, including newsmax, one america news network, and fox news commentators like sean hannity and lou dobbs, amplified claims that biden's win was illegitimate.[74][75] trump personally pressured georgia secretary of state brad raffensperger to "find 11,780 votes" (the number of votes needed to flip the state),[76] repeatedly urged georgia governor brian kemp to convene a special session of the legislature to overturn biden's certified victory in the state,[77] and fired the director of the cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency (cisa) shortly after the director refuted claims of election fraud.[78][79][80] the effort ultimately culminated in the 2021 storming of the united states capitol, in which supporters of donald trump occupied the capitol building in an unsuccessful attempt to prevent congress from certifying the results of the electoral college. trump was impeached but not convicted for his role in inciting the mob.[81][82][83] as a result of this effort, more than half of republicans believed that the election was stolen from donald trump.[84][12] this belief, often referred to as the "big lie",[85][86] has supercharged republican voting reform efforts, with republican officials frequently citing false claims of election fraud or the fact that many in the public believe there was fraud as reason to tighten election laws.[47][31][87] the effort has also been linked to an attempt to entrench minority rule for the republican party.[88] according to the new york times, "out of power in both congress and the white house, the [republican] party views its path to regaining a foothold in washington not solely through animated opposition to mr. biden's agenda, but rather through an intense focus on re engineering the voting system in states where it holds control".[6] additionally, some republican politicians and conservative commentators have argued that some "low quality" people shouldn't be able to vote.[89][90][91] altogether, this has led to a concerted effort to enact voting restrictions, particularly on mail in and early voting, automatic and same day voter registration, the use of ballot drop boxes, and voting without a photo id,[47][6] as well as give partisan lawmakers more control over election administration.[7] it has been particularly pronounced in several swing states especially traditionally red states that swung to biden in the 2020 election like georgia and arizona as well as in texas, a red state that has been trending toward the democratic party.[1][92][93] despite a lack of concrete evidence of election fraud, trump and his supporters continued to insist he won and claimed that the real "big lie" was the idea that he lost. some republican activists continued throughout 2021 to pressure state election officials to examine allegations of fraud, asserting they were acting to protect democracy. michigan secretary of state jocelyn benson, who had been a target of such efforts, characterized it as "a political strategy to break down our democracy and put people in charge of our states who are unaccountable and will act in a way that doesn’t reflect the will of the people." polls indicated a large majority of republicans continued to agree believe that the election was stolen, leading to not only voting reform laws, but also efforts to control the administrative management of elections. trump ally steve bannon said in december 2021 that "we are going to take over the election apparatus." fascism scholar timothy snyder observed: "the lie is so big that it reorders the world. and so part of telling the big lie is that you immediately say it's the other side that tells the big lie. sadly, but it's just a matter of record, all of that is in mein kampf."[94] lawmakers in alabama have introduced more than two dozen election related bills since the 2020 presidential election,[95] including republican backed bills that would restrict early and absentee voting.[96] house bill 285, for instance, would ban curbside voting (the bill passed the alabama house of representatives in a party line vote on march 18, 2021[97]) while another would shorten the time voters have to mail in absentee applications from five days before an election to 10.[98][99] republican rep. danny garrett actually proposed a bill that would increase the number of sites that voters can drop off their absentee ballots, which recently[when?] passed the constitution, campaigns and elections house committee, but it has faced consternation among other members of his party, with some objecting that it would "provid[e] for early voting".[96] rep. chris pringle, for instance, claimed that it would lead to "primaries that are going to be stolen using this...they’re going to bus them in and pack them out".[96] republicans have also broadly opposed bills proposed by democratic lawmakers that would authorize no excuse absentee voting (existing law requires voters to provide a valid excuse) and institute two weeks of early voting.[98][95] following the announcement in early march that alabama secretary of state john merrill would be appointed co chair of the republican state leadership committee's group on election integrity, which is set to make recommendations on new policies related to voter rolls, voter id, and absentee voting, republican "election integrity" efforts are expected to accelerate.[100] alleging election fraud, in april 2021 arizona republicans hired a private firm to conduct an audit of the 2020 presidential election results. the auditors released a report five months later finding no proof of fraud and that their ballot recount increased biden's margin of victory by 360 votes. county election officials released a final report in january 2022 finding that nearly all of the auditors' allegations of irregularities were false or misleading. after a six month investigation, arizona attorney general mark brnovich, a republican running for senate in 2022, said in april 2022 he found no proof of 2020 election fraud.[101][102][103][104][105] at least two dozen republican voting measures have been introduced in arizona.[106] a measure passed in the arizona senate would require voters to include photo identification with mail in ballots (which account for 80% of ballots cast in arizona).[107] proposed bills include provisions that would limit or eliminate no excuse absentee voting,[108] require signatures on absentee ballots be notarized,[109] allow officials to purge voters from the permanent early voting list (a list of people automatically sent mail in ballots) if they have not voted in both the primary and general elections for two consecutive cycles,[109] require absentee ballots be turned in by hand rather than by mail,[110] require mail in ballots be postmarked by the thursday before the election, even if they arrive by election day,[111] preemptively forbid same day voter registration (which the state does not currently offer),[110] outlaw private donations to help conduct elections, including for voter education,[110] and give the state legislature the power to choose the state's electors in the electoral college, regardless of the outcome of the state's popular vote.[112] another proposal would significantly decrease the number of polling locations in the state, including decreasing the number of locations in maricopa county from 100 to 15.[113] rep. athena salman (d), the top ranking democrat on the house government and elections committee, argued that "[republicans] definitely came in with a plan to make sure the historic voter turnout we saw in 2020 never happens again".[111] in april 2022, the arizona supreme court dismissed a lawsuit brought by state republicans to end early voting, including mail in balloting. more than 80% of arizona voters use the early voting system that has existed for over 30 years.[114] mail in balloting has existed in arizona for over a century.[115] on march 3, 2021, arkansas governor asa hutchinson signed into law house bill 1112, which eliminates a provision that allows voters to sign a sworn statement in order for their provisional ballots to be counted in lieu of presenting a photo id.[116] on march 4, 2021, hutchinson signed into law house bill 1244, which eliminates non photo id's as valid forms of identification to vote.[117] republicans have also introduced a bill that would shorten early voting (senate bill 485).[118] on february 19, 2021, florida governor ron desantis introduced a slate of voting proposals focused largely on making vote by mail more restrictive.[119][120] these included a ban on vote by mail ballots from being automatically sent out to voters, restrictions on ballot boxes, stricter signature verification, a ban on ballot collection, a prohibition on counties accepting financial help from private organizations for get out the vote initiatives and a requirement that counties report voter turnout data in real time.[120][121] desantis had earlier advocated for faithless electors from states president donald trump had lost in the 2020 election to vote for him anyway, circumventing their states' voters.[122] desantis also called for a measure that would cancel current absentee ballot requests for the 2022 gubernatorial election.[f][123] the state legislature's republican leaders announced that they "join the governor in his efforts to continue to make florida the national leader on election integrity" and "look forward to working with him on this important issue".[120] according to a tampa bay times analysis, desantis's signature match proposal could have led to rejections of his own mail in ballots due to changes in his signature history over time; voting rights experts argued that the signature matching proposal could be used to disenfranchise voters whose signatures varied over time.[124] opponents of the governor's agenda argue that desantis used false claims of widespread voter fraud pushed by trump to advance voter suppression efforts to give advantage to republicans.[120] arguing that the measures are politically motivated, they point out that florida republicans had praised the state's 2020 election as "the smoothest, most successful election of any state in the country", that the push to limit mail in voting came only after democratic voters outnumbered republican voters in vote by mail for the first time in 2020 and that there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.[125][123] the changes to mail in voting were notable given that republicans had traditionally voted by mail more than democrats, though democrats had outvoted republicans by mail in 2020.[126] fearing that traditionally republican leaning constituencies, such as the elderly and members of the military, would vote in lower numbers under stringent mail voting rules, republicans sought to exempt those two groups from the requirements that other voters would face.[127] however, in republican negotiations over the language of the legislation, the exemptions were rejected because it would be legally impermissible.[127] desantis officially signed the measures into law on may 6, broadcast live on fox & friends. media outlets that were not fox news were banned from attending the event.[128] on march 31, 2022, u.s. district court judge mark e. walker ruled that senate bill 90 violated the voting rights act of 1965. walker issued a permanent injunction against the law's restrictions on absentee ballot drop boxes and required florida to obtain preclearance from federal courts before enacting election laws.[129][130][131] desantis and florida attorney general ashley moody have since appealed walker's ruling. on march 25, 2021, georgia became the first swing state to impose new voting restrictions following the 2020 presidential election,[133][134][135] in which joe biden became the first democratic candidate since 1992 to carry the state (additionally, both of the state's senate seats flipped to the democratic party in that year's senate elections).[136] the 98 page election integrity act of 2021 (sb 202) was the culmination of a months long flurry of proposals; it includes a great many of the proposals floated, like voter identification requirements for absentee ballots, restrictions on ballot drop boxes, and a prohibition on handing out food and water to voters waiting in line, but drops some of the more controversial proposals, most notably the attempt to ban sunday early voting, when black churches traditionally run "souls to the polls" get out the vote efforts.[136] supporters argue the bill is needed to combat voter fraud and restore confidence in the state's elections,[137] which have seen significant decreases in public trust after the state became a focal point of then president donald trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election, which centered on false claims of widespread voter fraud.[136] opponents argue that it is little more than an effort to push back against the victories of president joe biden and democratic senate candidates jon ossoff and raphael warnock[138] and appears targeted at black voters,[139] with democratic voting rights activist stacey abrams going so far as to call it "nothing less than jim crow 2.0".[140] it also follows a controversial statewide voter roll update in 2019 that a report by the american civil liberties union (aclu) concluded likely wrongfully removed nearly 200,000 people from voter rolls.[141] the act has already prompted a number of ongoing legal challenges.[138] the republican effort began in early january, when georgia republicans appointed state representative barry fleming chair of the georgia special committee on election integrity (as attorney of hancock county, fleming had earlier defended a controversial voter roll update that challenged the eligibility of nearly 20% of sparta, georgia's residents almost all black).[142] by late february, the first elections bill had cleared a chamber of the georgia general assembly.[143] passed in the georgia state senate on february 23, 2021, in a nearly party line vote, senate bill 67 would have require a photo id when requesting an absentee ballot. concurrently, a broader elections bill, house bill 531, was being considered in the georgia house of representatives.[143] the bill would have restricted where ballot drop boxes can be located and when they can be accessed, required photo identification for absentee voting, shifted back the deadline to request an absentee ballot, made it a misdemeanor for political organizations to hand out food or drink to voters waiting in line, and limited early voting hours on weekends, among many other changes.[144][145] most controversially, it would have restricted early voting on sundays, when black churches traditionally run "souls to the polls" get out the vote efforts;[146] according to the economist, black voter turnout is 10 percentage points higher on sundays.[147] the sunday restriction is similar to a north carolina law that also would have ended sunday early voting but was struck down in 2016 by a federal court for targeting black voters.[g][148] the restriction has been defended on the basis that there should be no voting on the sabbath.[149] house bill 531 passed the house in a party line vote on march 1, 2021. after outcry, the sunday early voting restriction was dropped in the senate version of the bill.[150][151] while house bill 531 was being considered in the senate, and nearing the march 8 deadline a bill must pass one of the two chambers, the senate passed senate bill 241, which would have eliminated no excuse absentee voting (something the state has offered since 2005), restricting it only to those who are over 65 years old, have a physical disability, or will be out of town on election day,[152] and senate bill 202, which would have prohibited organizations from sending absentee ballot applications to voters who have already requested a ballot.[153] on march 12, 2021, the georgia chamber of commerce, an organization representing businesses based in georgia like coca cola and home depot, issued a statement opposing the republican voting reforms.[154] as the end of march neared, with no election bill passed by both chambers (the georgia general assembly adjourns on march 31), republicans raced to finalize changes to their election law proposals.[155] republican efforts consolidated around two omnibus bills: the 45 page house bill 531, passed in the house on march 1, 2021; and the significantly expanded[156] 95 page senate bill 202, passed in the senate on march 8, 2021.[157] on march 25, 2021, both chambers passed senate bill 202, now called the "election integrity act of 2021"; it was signed into law by governor brian kemp that evening.[158] the bill imposes voter identification requirements on absentee ballots, gives the legislature greater control over election administration, limits the use of ballot drop boxes, reduces the amount of time people have to request an absentee ballot, and makes it a crime for political organizations to give food or water to voters waiting in line (although poll workers are still allowed to).[158][134] it also shortens runoff elections a republican priority in the state after both of its 2020 senate runoffs were won by the democratic candidates[h][159] and includes a provision removing the secretary of state from the board of elections, a measure seemingly targeted at brad raffensperger, the republican secretary of state who oversaw the 2020 election in georgia and famously rebuffed attempts by donald trump and state lawmakers to overturn georgia's election results.[i][164] providing justification for itself, a preamble to the bill declares that "many electors [are] concerned about allegations of rampant voter fraud" despite no evidence of meaningful levels of fraud.[159] the bill quickly drew a number of legal challenges, with groups challenging the law including the american civil liberties union (aclu), the naacp legal defense and educational fund, the southern poverty law center, the league of women voters of georgia, the new georgia project, black voters matter, the sixth district of the african methodist episcopal church, the lower muskogee creek tribe, the georgia muslim voter project, women watch afrika, the latino community fund georgia, and delta sigma theta sorority.[165][166][167] they argue that the bill violates the 14th amendment to the united states constitution and section two of the voting rights act of 1965, which forbids racially discriminatory voting rules.[168] the georgia naacp further alleges that republican officials are purposefully attempting to discriminate against black georgians "in order to maintain the tenuous hold the republican party has in georgia" (democratic wins in the state in 2020 especially the two senate races were fueled by high black turnout[169][170]).[168] the bill also drew condemnation from a number of companies, including georgia based delta air lines and the coca cola company.[171] georgia house republicans retaliated against delta by passing a bill ending a tax break on jet fuel (it failed to advance in the state senate).[172][173] commenting on the bill, state house speaker david ralston quipped, "you don't feed a dog that bites your hand".[172] additionally, major league baseball announced plans to move the 2021 all star game out of atlanta in protest of the law.[174] former president donald trump, who was the central promoter of false claims of widespread election fraud and the principal agent in the attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election, called on republicans and conservatives to boycott major league baseball, coca cola, and delta air lines, as well as a host of other companies that condemned the bill.[175] republican lieutenant governor geoff duncan said during an april 2021 cnn interview that momentum for the legislation grew from "the fallout from the ten weeks of misinformation that flew in from former president donald trump. i went back over the weekend to really look at where this really started to gain momentum in the legislature, and it was when rudy giuliani showed up in a couple of committee rooms and spent hours spreading misinformation and sowing doubt across, you know, hours of testimony."[176] republicans in idaho have introduced bills that would make ballot collection a felony, bar absentee ballots for presidential elections except for active duty members of the military, limit which forms of photo id can be used to vote (e.g. student ids would no longer be accepted), and make it more challenging to qualify voter initiatives for the idaho ballot.[177][178] while defending recent republican voting proposals in the state, representative mike moyle stated, "you know what? voting shouldn’t be easy".[179] the first bill to advance was the ballot collection bill (hb 88, introduced by mike moyle), which has been amended to be less restrictive.[180] moyle has justified his bill by pointing to false claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election.[179] a republican authored bill that would have required individuals applying to vote by mail to provide their driver's license numbers or the last four digits of their social security numbers. the bill was not reported out of committee in 2021.[181][182] on march 8, 2021, iowa governor kim reynolds signed into law a republican backed bill reducing early voting by 9 days,[j] requiring most mail in ballots to be received by election day,[k] banning county election officials from sending out absentee ballot request forms unless requested,[l] and shortening election day voting by one hour.[184] republicans claim the bill is necessary to defend against voter fraud, despite no history of meaningful levels of fraud in the state.[184] during debate over the bill, republican state senator jim carlin stated that "most of us in my caucus and the republican caucus believe the 2020 presidential election was stolen".[31] an earlier proposed bill would have required mail in ballots to be turned into the us post office ten days before election day.[185] shortly after the inauguration of joe biden, republicans in the state began rolling out a number of voting reform proposals. among them, one would make it a felony for anyone besides a family member or caregiver to return another person's absentee ballot;[186] one would disallow the kansas secretary of state from extending the deadline absentee ballots postmarked by election day must be received by the state,[m][187] which critics worry could disenfranchise voters if the us postal service were to experience delays;[187] and one would call on congress to oppose h.r. 1, a voting rights bill.[188] in late march, the state senate approved a number of measures that would, according to the kansas city star, "give the legislature virtually complete control of elections" by stripping the governor, the secretary of state, and the courts of their ability to regulate elections.[189] another bill passed would limit ballot collection by churches, civic groups, neighbors and candidates; republicans cited the example of former democratic state representative tim hodge, who won his 2018 election by only 88 votes some of them picked up and returned by his campaign as reason to end ballot collection.[190] the ballot collection bill was opposed by the naacp, the aclu, and the disability rights center of kansas.[189] hb2183[191] and hb332[192] were both passed and went into effect on july 1, 2021. hb2183 made an expanded definition of impersonation of an election official a felony. the district attorney of douglas county, kansas said the provisions were too vague and that she would not enforce them. however, kansas attorney general derek schmidt promised to do so,[193] causing the non partisan organizations league of women voters of kansas and loud light to halt voter registration drives, including those on college campuses at the beginning of the school year.[194] the state is also being sued by the american civil liberties union for $4 million worth of legal fees after the organization's successful five year legal effort to overturn a kansas law that required potential voters to prove their citizenship when registering to vote, which blocked the registrations of more than 35,000 eligible kansas voters.[195] republicans in kentucky have largely bucked the trend of state republicans advancing partisan bills that would make voting laws more restrictive, instead backing a bipartisan bill that would make certain policies implemented during the covid 19 pandemic to ensure voter access permanent, including a short period of early voting (prior to the pandemic, kentucky was one of only a few states not to offer early voting) and allowing voters to fix errors made on mail in ballots.[196] this distinction was made explicit by the republican secretary of state, who told lawmakers, "in many other states right now, legislatures are debating restricting access of their voters to the ballot. not here in kentucky. what you all are debating today, and hopefully considering, is actually making it easier for our voters to vote".[196] the bill does also include certain election security provisions popular with republicans nationwide, including a ban on ballot collection and rules making it easier to remove people who have moved out of kentucky from the state's voter rolls,[196] but the bill is generally considered to expand voting access rather than restrict it.[197] the bill passed the kentucky house of representatives 93 4 in late february.[196] in 2023, state representative brent powell introduced house bill 1310 for debate in the mississippi house of representatives which would provide notice to voters who had not cast any ballot within a period including two federal elections. if, after four subsequent years, notice recipients had not responded, voted in any election, responded to jury duty, or been active or reserve military personnel, they would be removed from voting rolls.[198] in march 2020, in a party line vote[199] the montana house passed a bill that would end same day voter registration, which has been offered in the state since 2005, and instead require voters to register by noon on the monday before election day.[200] supporters say it would ease the workload of election officials on election day, while critics say it would unnecessarily eliminate an effective voting measure and may disproportionately impact native americans living on tribal reservations, who often face long travel times to polling locations.[201][200] another proposed bill would make montana's voter id laws more stringent, requiring voters to present a second form of identification when using certain forms of photo identification that are currently accepted, like student ids.[202] opponents say the bill could disenfranchise otherwise eligible voters, including college students and disabled or elderly people who don't drive, and would disproportionately affect native americans,[202] who are more likely to lack photo id and often have non traditional addresses.[203] some republicans are backing a bill introduced by democratic representative sharon stewart peregoy that would make voting easier for native americans by requiring at least two satellite elections offices on every reservation and allow tribal citizens to vote using a non traditional address on their reservation.[204][205] republicans in nevada have proposed a bill (ab 163) that would require voters to provide proof of identity at the polls and require absentee ballots to be received by 7 p.m. on election day (under existing law, as long as ballots are turned into the post office by election day they are accepted up to a few days after election day).[185] it also includes a provision requiring the nevada secretary of state to crosscheck the names of dead nevadans with voter registration lists at least once a month, likely prompted by former president donald trump's false claims that over 1,500 deceased people voted in nevada in the 2020 presidential election.[185] nevada was one of six states targeted by trump and his republican allies in their attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election. however, with democrats in charge of both chambers of the legislature, republican election bills have almost no chance of passing.[206] with more students per capita than any other state (fully 12% of the state's overall population are university students), republican efforts have focused on student voting.[n][208][209] as reported by abigail weinberg in mother jones: after republicans took control of the state’s legislature in 2020, house lawmakers introduced three bills restricting student voting: hb 554, hb 362, and hb 429. hb 554 prevents people from voting in new hampshire if they maintained a domicile address in another state; hb 362 forbids students from registering to vote at their college address; and hb 429 prohibits the use of a college id as a voter id. as of february 8, 2021, at least seven other bills that would restrict voting access have been introduced.[210] another bill would end the winner take all system for new hampshire's electoral votes in the electoral college, replacing it with a district system similar to maine's.[o][211] on july 30, 2021, governor chris sununu signed sb 89, which rejects the for the people act.[212] in case the latter becomes a law, it will not apply to the local elections in new hampshire. in february 2021, republican state representative sean roberts introduced two election related bills, one that would prohibit the use of electronic voting machines and another that would require all registered oklahoma voters to re register before the next general election.[213] another bill would call for an amendment to the u.s. constitution that would prohibit absentee ballots from being mailed to voters unless their absentee ballot application had been notarized or signed by two witnesses.[185] in november 2020, shortly after the 2020 presidential election, two republican senators introduced a bill that would "call on the legislatures of each state that did not report results on election day to use their power to audit and recount their election results" and another that would require the oklahoma state legislature to select the state's electors for the electoral college rather than have the state's electors determined by the statewide popular vote unless congress were to pass an election integrity bill.[214] according to the texas tribune, "republicans are staging a sweeping legislative campaign to further tighten the state's already restrictive voting rules and raise new barriers for some voters, clamping down in particular on local efforts to make voting easier".[216] state gop chairman allen west has declared that "election integrity" would be a top priority in the 2021 legislative session,[217] a sentiment that was affirmed by republican governor greg abbott, who proclaimed "election security" to be an emergency legislative item.[218] bills proposed would ban drive thru voting and reduce early voting hours,[q] restrict the number of voting machines allowed at polling centers, and prohibit local election officials from sending out mail in ballot applications to all voters.[220] republicans are placing special emphasis on targeting procedures that were used in harris county, a heavily democratic county that includes houston, texas, which offered more expansive voting options like drive through voting[r] and longer hours at polling locations.[222][223][224] by february 1, 2021, eight bills that would reduce voting access had been introduced,[217] including house bill 25 and senate bill 208, which would limit who can send absentee ballot applications to voters without an affirmative request;[225] house bill 1924 and house bill 335, which would expedite removal of deceased persons, the mentally incapacitated, and those charged with felonies from voter rolls; house bill 61, which would tighten signature requirements on absentee ballot requests; house bill 329, which would require the texas secretary of state to cross reference its voter registry with the u.s. department of homeland security's non citizen resident database at least twice a year;[217] and house bill 895, which would allow election officials to photograph the faces of voters if the officials question the authenticity of the documentation presented by the voters. in march 2021, texas republicans rolled out a slate of "restrictive election bills".[221] among the over two dozen proposals[226] are initiatives to make voter id laws more stringent, cut early voting hours in urban areas, restrict drive through voting, ban the sending of absentee ballots to po boxes, and increase criminal penalties for fraud or mistakes made by voters or officials.[s][221][227] by late march, republican efforts had consolidated around two election bills: house bill 6 (hb6), introduced by rep. briscoe cain (who had previously volunteered with the trump campaign in pennsylvania as it attempted to overturn the outcome of the presidential election[228]), and senate bill 7 (sb7), introduced by sen. bryan hughes et al. hb6 would ban drive through voting, make it a felony for local election officials to send unsolicited absentee ballot request forms, require counties to provide the same number of voting machines in each polling location regardless of population density, and tighten the state's already strict absentee ballot qualifications (only the elderly, people with disabilities, and those who will be away from home can vote by mail) by requiring voters with disabilities to provide proof that they are incapable of voting in person (which critics argue amounts to a poll tax, since it would require disabled people who are unable to vote in person to pay for a doctors visit[220]).[229][230][228] sb7 would similarly limit drive through voting, prohibit sending unsolicited absentee ballot request forms, and require disabled voters to provide proof they are unable to vote in person, and would also limit voting hours from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. a "direct response to harris county having voting centers open until 10 p.m".[231] on april 1, 2021, the state senate passed sb7, amended to allow voting hours from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m.[219] republicans argue these bills are necessary to prevent voter fraud, despite fraud being nearly nonexistent in the state.[t] state sen. paul bettencourt, a cosponsor of sb 7, has defended republican election bills by saying "the november 2020 election demonstrated the lack of transparency and lack of integrity within the election process", drawing on claims from the months long effort by republican officials to de legitimize the 2020 election.[234] critics, including former house representative beto o'rourke, have decried the efforts as "voter suppression".[235][236] the texas democratic party called the bills an "assault on voting rights".[237] on july 12, 2021, at least 59 democratic lawmakers left the state to prevent republicans from having quorum to act on their legislation.[238] a new bill, sb 1, was passed into law on september 7, 2021. the law expands the voting hours as proposed in the earlier sb7, but critics stated this reduced voting hours in the state's most populous areas. the law also bans drive thru and overnight early voting, and introduced identification requirements for absentee voting. multiple groups challenged the law on the day it was passed.[239] the u.s. department of justice also filed suit against the state in november 2021, asserting the law's change to accessibility at voting places and absentee ballots violates the voting rights act. the doj also joined some of the other suits challenging sb1.[240] on february 15, 2021, utah governor spencer cox signed into law house bill 12, which the brennan center for justice claims will "make faulty [voter] purges more likely".[117] specifically, the brennan center explains that: the bill requires county clerks to cross reference all death certificates against voter registration rolls and remove the names of dead voters within 10 days. because the law does not require any notice to the voters being removed, does not require auditing of the source data, and does not specify how many data points must be matched, it creates a risk that county clerks will remove the wrong names from their voter registration rolls. on february 8, 2021, the wyoming republican party published a resolution calling for a significant tightening of the state's election laws, including a ban on mail in voting, curbside voting, and ballot drop boxes, strict limits on who qualifies for absentee voting (currently, the state has does not require an excuse to vote absentee), a requirement that people register to vote in person rather than on the internet or by mail, and a prohibition of electronic voting machines.[241] according to the casper star tribune, the resolution "parrot[s] numerous concerns pushed by former president donald trump, who claimed numerous instances of voter fraud in several states he lost despite providing no evidence to support those claims".[241] the state party has also called h.r. 1, a federal voting rights and campaign finance reform bill, a "federal invasion" of states' rights.[242] on april 6, 2021, republican lawmakers passed hb0075, which requires residents to present an id to vote (previously, voters had to present an id when registering to vote, but not when voting).[243] supporters say the bill is necessary to prevent voter fraud, despite no evidence of significant levels of fraud in the state (there have been only four convictions for voter fraud in the state over the past several decades[244]).[245] the first bill to be heard in the 2021 session of the alaska legislature was senate bill 39 , which would "partially dismantle voting by mail systems used by anchorage, juneau and other cities across the state", according to the associated press, by prohibiting cities and boroughs from automatically sending ballots to registered voters.[246] supporters say it would strengthen the security of the state's election system, while opponents have called it an attempt at voter suppression.[247] republicans in colorado have introduced five election related bills since the 2020 presidential election.[248] the bills would repeal automatic mail ballots, require an annual audit of voter rolls, allow any voter to request a recount, require proof of citizenship to register to vote, and not count ballots received after election day, even if they are postmarked by election day.[248][249] with democrats in control of both chambers of the colorado legislature, the bills are not expected to pass.[248] the republican minority in the connecticut general assembly is opposing two elections related constitutional amendments democratic lawmakers hope to put on the ballot in 2022 (changes to voting law in connecticut require amending the state constitution): one that would allow no excuse absentee voting and another that would allow early voting.[250] republican lawmakers have also proposed bills that would end same day voter registration and make signature verification of absentee ballots stricter.[251] on february 4, 2021, maryland republicans introduced a slate voting proposals, including bills that would require photo identification to vote, restrict ballot collection, and strengthen signature verification on absentee ballots.[252][253] on march 24, 2021, michigan republicans introduced a package of 39 election reform bills that would introduce new restrictions to voting access,[254] targeting in particular forms of voting that were the focus of former president donald trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 united states presidential election (which focused heavily on michigan and five other six swing states).[255] the bills would limit the availability of ballot drop boxes, require photo id when applying for an absentee ballot, prohibit absentee ballot applications from being made available online, bar the secretary of state from sending out absentee ballot applications unless specifically requested by the voter,[u] and ban clerks from supplying prepaid return postage for absentee ballots.[256][254] another bill would allow election challengers and poll watchers to videotape the tabulating of votes after trump and his supporters made poll watching in detroit a centerpiece of their effort to discredit 2020 election results in michigan.[255] the bills also contain two provisions that would expand ballot access: one that would require local clerks to open for early voting on the second saturday before an election and another that would pre register 16 and 17 year olds who get their drivers license.[257] senate majority leader mike shirkey (r) said the bills are intended to make it easier to vote and harder to cheat while state sen. erika geiss (d) said the bills "put lipstick on jim crow".[254] the senate minority leader jim ananich (d) argued that the bills emanate from republican attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, saying "no one should be fooled: this is nothing more than an extension of lies and deceit about the last election. we cannot and should not make policy based on the big lie".[v][254] the bills are unlikely to become law (with the exception of several inoffensive measures that may draw bipartisan support) in the current legislative session as the state's democratic governor would almost certainly veto them.[256] however, republican leaders in the state have developed a plan to subvert the governor's veto power by using a statute that allows the legislature to avoid a governor's veto if enough signatures (in this legislative session, more than 340,000 would be needed) are collected.[259] republicans in minnesota are focusing on efforts to limit the number of people who can vote by mail and to require photo identification to vote.[w][261][262] owing to the covid 19 pandemic, minnesota introduced no excuse mail in voting, enabling a record 58% of minnesota to vote by mail; several republican proposals would revert minnesota to its pre pandemic system, which required voters to have a valid excuse to qualify for absentee voting.[261] the democratic secretary of state steve simon criticized the voter id bill as unnecessary, saying voter fraud in minnesota is "minuscule" and that the id requirement could disenfranchise "hundreds of thousands of eligible voters", particularly older people.[260] republican backed bills introduced in the state senate, where republicans have a majority, are unlikely to become law, owing to opposition in the democratic controlled state house of representatives and a democratic governor.[260] on february 12, 2021, the mississippi senate passed senate bill 2588 in a party line vote. the bill allows for quicker purging of names from voter rolls and requires county election commissioners to remove the name of any person who does not vote at least once during a four year period and fails to respond to a mail notice.[x][263] estimates for the number of people who would receive notices, which if not responded to would result in removal from the voter roll, range from 250,000 to 600,000.[264] state republicans argue the bill would prevent voter fraud.[265] opponents note that there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in mississippi and argue that the bill amounts to voter suppression.[265] the mississippi branch of the american civil liberties union (aclu) has called the bill a "serious attempt at voter suppression".[263][266] democratic state lawmakers have derided the bill, with state senator david lee jordan arguing that the bill could disenfranchise black mississippians[264] and state senator hob bryan saying "for tens of thousands of people in mississippi, eligible voters who haven’t done a thing in the world except choose not to vote in every single election and didn’t get a postcard, or whatever the thing is, they are going to be denied their right to vote by the tens of thousands".[263] a senior staff attorney for the southern poverty law center action fund has argued that the bill violates the national voter registration act of 1993, which prevents voters from being removed from registration rolls for unnecessary or discriminatory reasons.[265] other bills introduced include hb 543, which would prohibit driver's licenses from states other than mississippi from being used as photo identification for the purposes of voting, and ms sb 2254, which would require people attempting to register to vote to present a birth certificate, passport, naturalization document, or other method of proof of citizenship established by the federal immigration reform and control act of 1986. in missouri, which has voting laws that are among the strictest in the country,[267] at least 9 bills that would restrict voting access have been introduced.[268] the largest effort is to restore voter id provisions that were struck down by the missouri supreme court in 2020 as unconstitutional.[269] such a photo id bill was passed by the missouri house of representatives on february 24, 2021.[270] republican state lawmakers are also advancing a bill that would make it harder for voters to amend the state constitution through ballot initiatives, raising the share of votes needed from a simple majority to a two thirds supermajority.[y][271] a bill introduced by republican state senator julie slama (lr3ca) would require photo identification to vote.[272] slama also proposed a second bill (lb76) that would revert the state to a winner take all system in the electoral college.[z][273] in march 2021, several republican lawmakers introduced senate bill 326, also known as the "election integrity act", which would reduce the amount of time voters have to turn in absentee ballot requests by one week, require absentee ballots to be received by 5pm on election day (existing law allows ballots that are turned into the post office by election day to be received by county officials up to three days after election day), and prohibit county boards of election and the state board of election from accepting private donations to administer elections.[274][275] it would also set aside $5 million from the state's general fund to help those without a photo id obtain one (north carolina requires a photo id to vote).[274] several democrats have registered their opposition to the bill, with state senator don davis (d) saying "i believe that we should make [voting] easier. if that ballot is cast by election day, then that ballot should be counted."[276] republicans have introduced a number of bills that would tighten election laws. house bill 1289 would lengthen residency requirements, house bill 1312 would place additional restrictions on who can vote absentee, and house bill 1397 would adjust the congressional redistricting process.[277] senate bill 2271, introduced by republican senator robert erbele and passed 43 3 (republicans hold a 40 vote majority in the senate), would withhold the state's vote count from the public until after votes in the electoral college have been cast; the measure is intended to prevent the implementation of the national popular vote interstate compact, a multi state agreement to implement a national popular vote for the election of the president.[aa][278] in pennsylvania, at least 8 laws that would restrict voting access have been introduced.[5] a central focus of republicans in the state in 2021 has been eliminating no excuse absentee voting, which was enacted in 2020 in a bipartisan vote.[279][280][281] bills tightening voting laws are not expected to pass in pennsylvania, as the state's democratic governor has stated he is "opposed to any efforts to disenfranchise voters".[282] republicans in south carolina are advancing a bill that would make it harder for voters to meet witness requirements for absentee ballots.[283] another bill (h.3444) would tilt the partisan balance of the state election commission towards the republican party (shifting it from a 4 4 split to 6 3 in favor of republicans) while simultaneously granting the commission greater power to regulate election procedures.[284] republicans in south dakota are pushing a series of bills that would make election laws more stringent, including one (passed by the state house) that would bar the secretary of state from sending out applications for absentee voting and another that would increase scrutiny of ballot initiatives.[285][286] republicans say the bills are needed to prevent fraud that donald trump falsely claimed affected the 2020 presidential election, while state democrats say they are worried republicans are using falsehoods to clamp down on voting access.[285] republican bills to restrict voting access include one introduced by republican state senator janice bowling, which would abolish early voting, end the use of voting machines, and require watermarked paper ballots hand marked by voters (it was later withdrawn);[287][288] one that would require voters to provide a fingerprint to vote;[289] and another that would mandate the names of people who request absentee ballots to be posted to the county election commission website.[290] the republican dominated state house is also moving forward with a bill that would remove the judge who approved an expansion of absentee voting in the 2020 presidential election, sparking concerns of an "unprecedented breach of judicial independence".[291] two bills introduced by a number of republican state lawmakers (senate bill 5143, house bill 1377) would limit or eliminate all mail voting, which has existed in washington since 2012.[292] the bills cite false claims that there were "credible allegations of voter fraud, ballot tampering, and foreign interference" in the 2020 election as justification for the overhaul of the state's election system.[292][293] another bill would require photo identification to vote by mail.[292] in wisconsin, republicans are supporting a series of bills intended to limit absentee voting (some are also backing bipartisan election reforms that would institute ranked choice voting and open primaries).[294][295] the measures on absentee voting were introduced by two republican state senators on february 24, 2021, as a package of 10 bills. important provisions include those that would require absentee voters to provide an id for every election and limit who can automatically receive absentee ballots.[294] the bills also include new regulations on ballot boxes, bar election officials from adding missing information (like an address) to a voter's absentee ballot envelope (even if they have access to official government documents that provide the missing information), restrict ballot collection to immediate family members, and prohibit people who work for political advocacy groups from serving as poll workers.[295] responding to a political controversy over indefinitely confined voters (voters who have a medical condition) in the 2020 presidential election,[ab] the lawmakers included a significant number of provisions related to indefinitely confined voters, including:[295] one of the republican lawmakers who introduced the bills says they are necessary because "far too many people have sincere concerns about our electoral system...these bills will help restore trust and make sure our elections are handled fairly for everyone."[297] wisconsin democrats have meanwhile labelled them an "attack on voter rights",[297] with the three democratic members on the assembly elections committee going so far as to say they are a "full on assault on our elections and the ability for wisconsinites to vote".[294] republican leaders in the state say the measures represent a legislative priority for them and intend to move forward with the bills, even though democratic governor tony evers is unlikely to sign them into law (according to the associated press, the measures are intended to show "what [republicans] may try to enact if a republican is elected governor in 2022."[294]).[298] the new york times reported in may 2021 that so far that year, republicans had introduced 144 bills to restrict ballot initiatives in 32 states, 19 of which had been signed into law by nine republican governors. although ballot initiatives had historically been used by both parties, democrats had been especially successful using the process in recent years in states where they do not control the state government. in three states, republican legislators asked voters to approve ballot initiatives that would restrict their right to bring and pass future ballot initiatives.[299] following the 2020 presidential election, conservative political organizations began a major fundraising effort to advance republican voting restriction efforts.[6] the republican national committee (rnc) created an "election integrity" committee consisting of 24 members, many of whom were "deeply involved" in the stop the steal effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election, to develop election law proposals.[6] heritage action, the lobbying arm of the heritage foundation, announced a $24 million effort to back republican efforts to amend state voting laws, including a $700,000 ad campaign in georgia;[6][41] internal documents indicate that heritage plans to coordinate with the american legislative exchange council (alec) and the state policy network.[6] the anti abortion group susan b. anthony list[ac] and the american principles project partnered together to create the election transparency initiative,[41] which started with $5 million in funding.[300] freedomworks has dedicated $10 million to republican efforts to tighten voting laws. kelly loeffler, after being unseated by democratic candidate raphael warnock in the 2020 21 united states senate special election in georgia, launched greater georgia, an effort to promote republican electoral policies in georgia, as well as register likely conservative voters;[302] loeffler (whose net worth is estimated at over $800 million) has personally invested at least $1 million in the organization.[303] relatedly, in january 2021 cnbc revealed that the dark money organization donors trust had funneled millions of dollars toward conservative organizations that pushed claims of election fraud in the 2020 election.[304] a report by public citizen revealed that a variety of corporations, including at&t, comcast, philip morris usa, unitedhealth group, walmart, verizon wireless, general motors, and pfizer, had in recent years donated over $50 million to politicians who have proposed voting restrictions or voted in favor of them.[305] some major corporations voiced opposition to georgia's election integrity act and faced backlash from republican politicians, including calls to boycott the companies.[306][307][308] on april 10, 2021, more than 100 corporate ceos and leaders gathered online to discuss options in response to the new laws, including halting donations to politicians who support the bills and suspending investments in states that enact the laws.[309] on april 14, 2021, a letter published in the new york times, the washington post and the wall street journal, among other outlets, and signed by over 300 companies, executives, and celebrities stated they "stand for democracy" and stated opposition to the efforts.[310][311][312][313] a coalition of sixty major law firms said it would "challenge any election law that would impose unnecessary barriers on the right to vote and that would disenfranchise underrepresented groups in our country," according to the group's organizer.[314] republicans have opposed corporate efforts against their voting laws with mitch mcconnell calling on corporations to "stay out of politics" and that it "will invite serious consequences" if they continue to oppose the law.[315] mcconnell later clarified that his statement did not exclude corporate donations to the republican party, which created calls of hypocrisy by liberals.[316] during a discussion on fox business's varney & co. about his push to remove the mlb's anti trust exemption after the mlb's reaction to changes to georgia's voting laws, ted cruz also claimed that corporations had become "the woke enforcers of the democratic party".[317] observers have argued that this increased republican criticism of corporations are part of the parties rebrand into a more "working class" party[318][319] and of a growing shift between republicans and corporate america[320][321] though, others have argued that this shift is not happening.[322][323][324] some republicans have also called out companies that operate in china, claiming their opposition to voting restrictions is hypocritical due to their perceived silence on human rights abuses in china.[325][326] former president donald trump has called on his supporters to boycott "woke companies" that are in opposition to voting rights restrictions.[327][328] president joe biden has called republican efforts to limit voting rights "un american" and "sick" and compared them to jim crow voting restrictions.[329] a yougov/economist poll from march 20 22 found that 44% of americans oppose more restrictive voting laws compared to 39% who support them.[330] a hill/harrisx poll of 2,827 registered voters conducted in april 2021 found that 43% (including 70% of republicans and 41% of independents) supported stricter voting laws, while 31% (including 50% of democrats) stated that new laws should be passed to make voting more accessible. another 27% expressed opposition to changing existing voting laws.[331] in january 2022, a yahoo news/yougov poll found that 17 percent of republicans and republican leaning independents labeled "stopping democrats from rigging and stealing elections" as the third most important issue they wanted future candidates to focus on most which was the third most important issue behind "bringing down inflation" at 19 percent and "securing the border" at 23 percent. 56 percent also stated they wanted the republican party to launch another investigation of the 2020 presidential election should they retake the u.s. congress in the 2022 united states elections.[332] there is debate over the effects republican proposals would have. available evidence on the effects of forms of voting being targeted by republicans are as summarized below: the republican effort has been contrasted with a simultaneous effort by democratic party lawmakers to expand voting access.[354] at the federal level, democrats advanced the for the people act, a voting rights and anti corruption bill (see below).[355][356] in state legislatures, democrats are advancing bills to expand mail in and early voting, enact automatic and same day voter registration, loosen photo id laws, and increase the use of ballot drop boxes,[5] and have already approved certain landmark[357] bills like the voting rights act of virginia.[358] many of the proposals being advanced by state republicans would be prohibited under the for the people act (h.r. 1), a voting rights bill currently in the senate after it was passed in the house of representatives on a nearly party line vote (one democrat voted against) in early march.[359][360] the bill would mandate automatic and same day voter registration, require states to offer 15 days of early voting, expand mail in voting, and place restrictions on voter id laws and so called "voter roll purges", among other things.[356] on june 22, 2021, a vote on the bill was held in the senate. it received unified support from the democratic caucus, but senate republicans blocked the bill with a filibuster, as it lacked the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture after a party line vote. some senate democrats expressed support for abolishing the filibuster for the bill, but others in their caucus remained opposed or expressed reservations about doing so, including president biden.[361][362][363][364] the john lewis voting rights act would restore the federal pre clearance requirement in the voting rights act of 1965 that was struck down by the supreme court in a 2013 decision. this would mean that states with a history of voting rights violations would have to seek approval from the federal government to change voting policies. if the vra's pre clearance requirement had been left in place, it may have blocked new restrictive election laws like the one passed in georgia.[365][366]
trump administration the margin between the congressman and his trump backed challenger is just slightly above the threshold for a state funded recount. his opponent has already declared victory, and both are election deniers. by maya c. miller reporting from washington the republican primary between representative bob good of virginia, the chairman of the ultraconservative house freedom caucus, and his trump backed challenger was still undecided on monday almost a week after the balloting, as the two election deniers settled in for a lengthy and ugly fight over who was the true winner. john j. mcguire, a state senator and former navy seal who attended the “stop the steal” rally outside the white house on jan. 6, 2021, held a lead of just under 375 votes out of the nearly 63,000 votes cast, according to the associated press. he declared victory last tuesday night before all the votes were counted, and on monday, former president donald j. trump, who endorsed him, declared mr. mcguire the winner in a social media post. but the a.p. said on monday that the contest was too close to call, noting that while it would be unusual for a recount to shift the outcome of such a race, it would not be impossible. and mr. good has already made it clear he will seek a recount, an option under virginia law, which allows such a request if the winner of a race is less than one percentage point ahead of his opponent. “while not unprecedented, it is rare for a race of this nature to shift by a few hundred votes during a recount,” the a.p. said in explaining its finding that the race was “too close to call.” “however, a.p. research has found that virginia has a history of making small vote corrections after election day and that some past statewide races have shifted by hundreds of votes during a recount.” mr. good would have to pay for the recount himself because he trails mr. mcguire by 0.6 of a percentage point, just above the 0.5 percentage point difference below which the state would finance it.

discussions in a nail biting republican primary in virginia's 5th district, rep. bob good is trailing behind state sen. john mcguire by a slim margin and has vowed to block the certification of the election results. the race, which has not yet been called, is under intense scrutiny as both candidates are known election deniers. good, who initially supported ron desantis for the 2024 gop presidential primary before switching allegiance to trump, is now seeking funds for a recount. the margin between good and mcguire is just above the threshold for a state funded recount, adding another layer of tension to the contest. as the drama unfolds, good's determination to challenge the results underscores the high stakes and deep divisions within the republican party. @isidewithasked…8mos8mo how would you feel if a candidate you supported refused to accept the election results? @isidewithasked…8mos8mo how important is it for politicians to concede defeat gracefully? @isidewithlinked…8mos8mo rep. bob good wants to block certification in 5th district primary https://farmvilleherald.com this election must not be certified!” that was what incumbent 5th district u.s. rep. bob good told his supporters @isidewithlinked…8mos8mo with virginia primary undecided, rep. bob good seeks funds for recount https://nytimes.com the margin between the congressman and his trump backed challenger is just slightly above the threshold for a state funded recount. his opponent has already declared victory, and both are election deniers. @isidewithlinked…8mos8mo bob good says he’ll try to block certification of primary results in key city https://news.yahoo.com