Wisconsin voters line up outside of a Milwaukee polling place on Nov. 5, 2024. Wisconsin U.S. Senate candidate Eric Hovde is one of the Republican politicians who sowed doubt about the integrity of this year’s election. (Andy Manis | Getty Images)

President-elect Donald Trump may have quieted his lies about widespread voter fraud after his win earlier this month, but the impact of his effort to cast doubt on the integrity of American elections lingers on.

Although this post-election period has been markedly calmer than the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, there were isolated flare-ups of Republican candidates borrowing a page from Trump’s playbook to claim that unsatisfactory election results were illegitimate.

In Wisconsin, Republican U.S. Senate challenger Eric Hovde spread unsubstantiated rumors about “last-minute” absentee ballots in Milwaukee that he said flipped the outcome of the race. Though he conceded to incumbent Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin nearly two weeks after the election, his rhetoric helped stoke a spike in online conspiracy theories. The Milwaukee Election Commission disputed his claims, saying they “lack any merit.”

In North Carolina, Republican state Senate leader Phil Berger told reporters last week he feared that the vote-counting process for a state Supreme Court seat was rigged for Democrats. Karen Brinson Bell, the head of the State Board of Elections, skewered Berger for his comments, saying they could inspire violence.

And in Arizona, Republican U.S. Senate candidate Kari Lake, who has spent two years disputing her defeat in the 2022 governor’s race, hasn’t acknowledged her Senate loss. While she thanked her supporters in a video posted to X, the platform formerly called Twitter, she stopped short of conceding to Democratic U.S. Rep. Ruben Gallego.

Republicans’ disinformation campaigns have caused Americans’ confidence in elections to plummet and exposed local election officials to threats and harassment, and some observers worry about a return of the GOP’s destructive rhetoric the next time they lose.

“We have to turn this rhetoric down,” said Jay Young, senior director of voting and democracy for Common Cause, a voting rights group. “There cannot be this continued attack on this institution.”

Still, many politicians who either denied the 2020 election results or criticized their local voting processes won election. In Arizona, for example, voters chose state Rep. Justin Heap, a Republican, to lead the election office in Maricopa County, home to Phoenix and the largest jurisdiction in the critical swing state. Heap ran on a “voter confidence” platform and suggested at a Trump rally that Maricopa’s election office is a “national laughingstock.”

Trump tapped former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi to oversee the U.S. Department of Justice. Bondi, a Republican, served as an attorney for Trump while he disputed the results in 2020. She could use her position as U.S. attorney general to prosecute election officials involved in that election, as Trump promised in an X post in September.

While the rhetoric around stolen elections has been somewhat muted among the GOP ranks since Trump’s victory, conservatives attempted to flip the “election denial” script on Democrats in at least one race.

In Pennsylvania, Democratic U.S. Sen. Bob Casey refused to concede defeat until last Thursday, two weeks after The Associated Press called the race for Republican challenger David McCormick. Casey lost by fewer than 16,000 votes, less than half a percentage point.

Casey said he wanted to see the results of an automatic recount and various court cases filed on his behalf, but Republicans jumped on his refusal to bow out quickly.

Last week, Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican who resisted pressure from Trump in 2020 to “find” votes after he lost the state, lambasted Casey for not conceding the Senate race.

“Election denialism needs to end, now,” Raffensperger wrote in a statement. “We are a country of laws and principles, not of men and personalities. Do your job! Follow the law. Accept election results or lose your country.”

Even as Republicans mostly toned down their rhetoric this year, some left-wing social media accounts repeated a debunked conspiracy theory that Starlink, the internet provider owned by billionaire and Trump supporter Elon Musk, changed vote counts.

Those posts, however, aren’t comparable to GOP election denialism, according to the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, which fights strategic misinformation.

“While the claims are similar, the rumoring dynamics on the left are markedly different due to the lack of endorsement or amplification by left-leaning influencers, candidates, or party elites,” the center posted last week.

Young, of Common Cause, said it’s clear that election disinformation of any kind has a devastating impact on the local officials tasked with administering the vote.

Threats to election workers continued even after Election Day. Bomb threats were called into election offices in California, Minnesota, Oregon and other states, forcing evacuations as workers were tallying ballots.

But this was just a slice of the onslaught many officials faced over the past four years. Local election officials need the resources to beef up the way they fight disinformation and physical attacks, Young said.

“We should be doing better by them,” he said.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and X.

Vice President Kamala Harris joined a bevy of popular music stars in Madison Wednesday night at the Alliant Center to encourage University of Wisconsin students to vote. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

Vice President Kamala Harris joined a bevy of popular music stars in Madison Wednesday night at the Alliant Center to encourage University of Wisconsin students and other young people to vote for her over former President Donald Trump.

Wisconsin is a key battleground state and both presidential campaigns are spending a lot of  time here with less than a week to go before Election Day. The last two presidential elections were decided by fewer than 20,000 votes in Wisconsin and the vote is expected to be close again this year. The same day Harris appeared  in Madison, one of the largest Democratic hubs in the state, Trump held a rally in Green Bay. Both candidates will return to Wisconsin Friday to hold dueling rallies in Milwaukee.

College students, including those from out of state, are eligible to vote in Wisconsin and could play an important role in deciding the results of the presidential election. Harris spoke directly to them.

“You all are rightly impatient for change. You who have only known the climate crisis are leading the charge to protect our planet and our future. You, who grew up with active shooter drills, are fighting to keep our schools safe. You who now know fewer rights than your mother or grandmothers, are standing up for freedom,” Harris declared from the Alliant Energy Center stage, speaking in front of a massive “Badgers for Harris-Walz” sign. “This is not political for you,” Harris added. “This is your lived experience.” 

Harris encouraged people to use the last six days before Election Day to vote, knock on doors, make calls and reach out to family and friends. Early in-person voting in Madison goes through Sunday and Election Day is Tuesday.

Some of the students at the rally had already voted early for Harris. Maya Wille, a UW-Madison senior who had Harris’ face temporary-tattooed on her bicep, said she’s excited by the prospect of  electing the first woman president of the United States and said Harris is “for the young people.”

“I want to be able to buy a house. I want to be able to raise a family and I think that she has policies that are going to make that a lot easier. I want gun control. I want better funding for public schools,” Wille said. 

The potential impact of voting in a swing state is what encouraged Hannah Tuckett, a UW junior from New York, and Lucy Murdock, a junior from Colorado, to vote in Wisconsin this year.

“I’m from Colorado, a historically blue state. My parents are always like, it’s so much more important for you to vote here than there,” Murdock said. “Both of us voted here, rather than in our home state, because we understand that, like, this is where we’re gonna make a way bigger splash.”

Murdock said human rights issues, including protecting women’s and transgender people’s right to health care, people’s right to marry whoever they want and addressing climate change, are the “guiding forces” behind her politics. 

“I think in this election human rights are more prevalent than they have been in several years,” Murdock said. 

Tuckett said voting in Wisconsin is “empowering” and she has been “inspired” by Harris and her campaign. She said the rally was also an opportunity to be in community with like-minded people and served as a “breath of fresh air” away from campus. She said certain events and political messaging on campus, including a visit from conservative radio host Charlie Kirk, have created a polarized environment.

The campaign brought a line-up of popular musical artists, including folk band Mumford and Sons, singer-songwriter Gracie Abrams, Aaron Dessner and Matt Berninger of The National and singer-songwriter Remi Wolf, to perform ahead of Harris at the rally, in front of more than  13,000 attendees. The campaign is betting the artists can serve as a trusted voice, delivering the message to fans to vote for Harris and to increase enthusiasm.

Tuckett said Mumford and Sons is her dad’s favorite artist. 

“I’m here, listening to them for him. He said he would have flown from New York to be here for this. I’m super excited,” Tuckett said. She said the endorsements from “not just artists, but actors, athletes, any person with some sort of platform coming out and endorsing Harris for president just shows that this election really does mean so much.”

Abrams, who has grown a loyal fanbase and who has opened for artists including Taylor Swift, spoke directly to young people while making the case for Harris. She called Harris “the right leader at a very tricky time.” 

“For many of us, here on this stage and in the crowd tonight, this is only the first or second time that we’ve had the privilege of voting in a presidential election, and as we know, we’ve inherited a world that is struggling and it’s easy to be disconnected and disillusioned. Between the advent of social media in our childhood and COVID and relentlessly targeted disinformation, we’ve been through some things and it’s easy to be discouraged, but we know better,” Abrams said. 

“We know unless we vote and keep our democracy intact there will be nothing we can do to fix it when it is our turn,” Abrams continued. “We have values and ideas that deserve a platform. We know that a better, greener, more fair, equitable and just future is possible. We understand that community matters, that character matters, that basic decency matters. That dignity matters. That democracy matters.” 

Even before the rally began, attendees tapped into the current pop culture moment. A station was set up inside the venue to make friendship bracelets (a trend popularized by Swift fans) and attendees wore ‘Kamala is brat’ t-shirts — a reference to a post by musician Charli xcx. Many in the audience also wore Harris-Walz camo hats.

Emma Heisch, a freshman at UW-Madison and Wisconsin native, was making a bracelet before the start of the rally when she told the Examiner about a conversation she had with her roommates last week about the importance of celebrities joining Harris on the campaign. 

“A lot of people have been saying that they think it’s unprofessional and it’s a silly tactic but I don’t think that at all,” Heisch said. “Their support reaches out to a lot of Gen Z and it can make a lot of young people, who may not have originally been interested in politics, start to show interest. And even people who may not have been very interested in coming to the rally specifically for politics in the first place might come just for a celebrity and then show interest in what Kamala has to say.”

Heisch voted for the first time this year. She said reproductive rights is one of her top issues. The issue was another big point of the night with Harris receiving thunderous applause and cheers during the rally as she committed to signing a bill to restore protections for reproductive health care access if one is sent to her by Congress.

“I’m a woman and I want control over my body and I don’t think anyone should have that control except for me,” Heisch said.

PHOENIX, ARIZONA - AUGUST 23: Former Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. gives remarks at the Renaissance Phoenix Downtown Hotel on August 23, 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona.Kennedy announced that he was suspending his presidential campaign and supporting Republican presidential candidate, former U.S. President Donald Trump.(Photo by Rebecca Noble/Getty Images)

With early voting underway in Wisconsin and a week before Election Day, the U.S. Supreme Court denied an effort Tuesday by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to be removed from the state’s ballots.

Kennedy, an independent, was placed on the presidential ballot after filing paperwork on Aug. 6, which included the signatures of thousands of Wisconsin voters who wanted him to run. He dropped out of the presidential election less than three weeks later and endorsed former President Donald Trump. He then launched an effort to be removed from Wisconsin’s ballot.

The Wisconsin Elections Commission was the first to deny his request to be kept off the ballot; officials cited state law requiring anyone who files the paperwork be placed on the ballot. Kennedy filed an emergency request with the U.S. Supreme Court last week after other appeals failed at appellate and state Supreme Courts. His name had already been printed on ballots with some being mailed out as the effort took place. In-person early voting in Wisconsin also started last week. 

Kennedy argued in his lawsuit that keeping him on the ballot violates his First Amendment right to endorse Trump. His attorneys had also argued that his name could be covered with a sticker, pointing to a state statute that allows clerks to do so if a candidate dies before the election takes place. Election officials warned voting machines hadn’t been tested with stickers and they could cause the machines to break. 

The U.S. Supreme Court did not explain its decision to reject the request. The Court also denied Kennedy’s effort to be removed from Michigan’s ballot on Tuesday.

Six third-party candidates, including Kennedy, Jill Stein and Cornel West, will appear on ballots in Wisconsin, a key battleground state, and are seen as potential spoilers in the presidential election because they could siphon votes from the major party candidates in what appears to be a very close race.

Correction: This story has been updated to correct the number of third-party candidates on ballots in Wisconsin. 

Ahead of the 2024 presidential election, Farm Foundation hosted a Farm Foundation Forum to examine the agricultural platforms of the candidates for president of the United States. Held on September 9 at the National Press Club in Washington D.C., the Forum was moderated by Kristina Peterson from the Wall Street Journal, with Kip Tom, co-lead of the Farmers and Ranchers for Trump Coalition, representing the Republican platform and Rod Snyder, former senior advisor for agriculture for EPA in the Biden-Harris Administration, representing the Democratic platform. 

The speakers touched on a variety of issues, including the farm bill, tax policy, environmental policy, nutrition, agricultural trade, farm labor and immigration, and biofuels. 

“In such a wonderful Farm Foundation-way, they engaged on some really difficult topics and different perspectives,” said Farm Foundation President and CEO Shari Rogge-Fidler, reflecting on the tenor of the conversation between the two speakers. While not official members of the campaigns, each speaker is closely connected with the campaigns but was careful to anchor their statements on past policies while clarifying where they thought each platform might go on policy in the future. 

The event marked Farm Foundation’s return to in-person Forums at the National Press Club since moving the Forums virtual at the start of the pandemic. It attracted 769 registrants from seven different countries, with 522 attending live either in person or via livestream.  

The two-hour discussion, including the audience question and answer session, was recorded and is archived on the Farm Foundation website.  

Farm Foundation plans to hold another Forum at the National Press Club in 2025 but will maintain its virtual strategy for the bulk of future Forums to preserve greater audience access and reach. Forums are free to watch or attend, due to the generous support from Farm Credit Council. 

The post Farm Foundation Forums Return to Washington D.C. to Discuss the Agricultural Platforms of the Candidates for President of the United States  appeared first on Farm Foundation.

A Dane County judge has rejected a request from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., shown here campaigning for president in Iowa in August 2023, to have his name removed from Wisconsin's presidential ballot in November. (Jay Waagmeester | Iowa Capital Dispatch)

A Dane County judge on Monday rejected a request from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to have his name removed from the presidential ballot in Wisconsin this November. 

An attorney for Kennedy said immediately after the decision that he plans to appeal. A separate case on the issue had already been separately filed with the more conservative District 2 Court of Appeals, which covers the suburban counties around Milwaukee. 

Dane County Judge Stephen Ehlke ruled that state law does not allow a candidate to withdraw from the presidential race once they file nomination papers. Ehlke said Kennedy was asking him to make an exception to the law for only him. 

“However, courts are required to apply the law as written, not as some party wishes it were written,” Ehlke said. 

Kennedy dropped out of the race in August, after he’d filed to get his name on the ballot in Wisconsin. After ending his campaign, Kennedy endorsed former President Donald Trump. Polls show that Kennedy’s candidacy likely pulled supporters from Trump. 

Last week in a similar case, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that Kennedy’s name must be removed from the state’s ballots, causing a delay of up to two weeks. 

The Wisconsin Elections Commission previously ruled that Kennedy’s name must appear on the ballot, finding that if a candidate successfully files nomination papers to appear on the ballot, the only event that can cause the candidate’s removal is death. 

In Wisconsin, a ruling to take Kennedy’s name off the ballot would cause delays and added expenses to county clerks responsible for printing ballots. Ballots with his name on them have already been printed across the state because county clerks must get them in the hands of municipal clerks by Wednesday. The first absentee ballots for requests that clerks already have on file must be sent this week. 

If a candidate dies after ballots have been printed, the candidate’s name may be covered by a white sticker on the ballot. Kennedy’s attorneys pushed for his name to be similarly covered with stickers. 

Assistant Attorney General Stephen Kilpatrick said that the labor required to cover Kennedy’s name on ballots and the unknown effect the stickers would have on vote tabulating machines made that an impossible request that would also force clerks to miss state and federal deadlines.

Wisconsin Secretary of State Sarah Godlewski in her office, displays real and fake electors' documents | Wisconsin Examiner photo

Over the past four years, Congress and state governments have worked hard to prevent the aftermath of the 2024 election from descending into the chaos and threats to democracy that occurred around the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

A new federal law cleaned up ambiguities that could allow for election subversion. New state laws have been enacted across the country to protect election workers from threats and harassment. Technology experts are working to confront misinformation campaigns and vulnerabilities in election systems.

But untouched in all of these improvements is the underlying structure of presidential elections – the Electoral College.

Here is a quick refresher about how the system works today:

After citizens vote in the presidential election in November, the Constitution assigns the task of choosing the president and vice president to electors. Electors are allocated based on the number of congressional representatives and senators from each state. The electors meet in their separate state capitals in December to cast their votes. The ballots are then counted by the vice president in front of members of Congress on Jan. 6 to determine which ticket has won a majority.

The widely varied pros and cons of the Electoral College have already been aired and debated extensively. But there is another problem that few have recognized: The Electoral College makes American democracy more vulnerable to people with malicious intent.

A state-centric system

The original brilliance of the Electoral College has become one of its prime weaknesses. The unusual system was devised at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 as a compromise that prioritized the representation of state interests. This focus helped win over reluctant delegates who feared that the most populous states would disregard small states’ concerns.

Nowadays nearly every state has chosen to award all of its electoral votes to whichever ticket wins more votes in the state. Even if a candidate gets 51% of the popular vote, use of the winner-take-all rule in these states means they will be awarded 100% of the electoral votes.

This is what leads to the “battleground state” phenomenon: Presidential candidates focus their rallies, advertisements and outreach efforts on the few states where campaigns could actually tip the balance. In 2020, 77% of all campaign ads ran in just six states that were home to only 21% of the nation’s population.

In this way, the Electoral College system naturally draws campaign attention to issues that might tip the balance in these hotbeds of competitiveness.

A road map for bad behavior

By doing so, the system essentially identifies the states where malicious people who want to alter or undermine the election results should focus their energies. The handful of battleground states are efficient targets for harmful efforts that would otherwise not have much success meddling in elections.

Someone who wants to infiltrate the election system would have difficulty causing problems in a national popular vote because it is decided by thousands of disconnected local jurisdictions. In contrast, the Electoral College makes it convenient to sow mischief by only meddling in a few states widely seen as decisive.

In 2020, the lawsuits, hacking, alternative electors, recount efforts and other challenges did not target states perceived by some to have weaker security because they had less strict voter ID laws or voter signature requirements. Opponents of the results also did not go after states such as California and Texas that account for a large share of the country’s voters.

Rather, all of the firepower was trained on about a half-dozen swing states. By one account, there were 82 lawsuits filed in the days after the 2020 presidential election, 77 of which targeted six swing states. The “fake elector” schemes in which supporters of Donald Trump put forward unofficial lists of electors occurred in only seven battleground states.

The popular vote alternative

A majority of Americans say in surveys they prefer to scrap the Electoral College system and simply award the presidency to the person who gets the most votes nationwide.

Dumping the Electoral College would have a variety of consequences, but it would immediately remove opportunities for disrupting elections via battleground states. A close election in Arizona or Pennsylvania would no longer provide leverage for upending the national result.

Any election system that does not rely on states as the puzzle pieces for deciding elections would remove opportunities like these. It could also seriously reduce disputes over recounts and suspicion about late-night ballot counts, long lines and malfunctioning voting machines because those local concerns would be swamped by the national vote totals.

Although not without its own concerns, an agreement among the states to award their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote is probably the most viable method for shifting to the popular vote, in part because it does not require passing an amendment to the Constitution.

There is no ideal way to run a presidential election. The Electoral College has survived in its current form for almost two centuries, a remarkable run for democracy. But in an era where intense scrutiny of just a few states is the norm, the system also lights the way for those who would harm democracy.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

A protester holds a Trump flag inside the U.S .Capitol Building near the Senate chamber on Jan. 6, 2021 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Capitol Police are welcoming a special security designation from the Department of Homeland Security for Jan. 6, 2025, when Congress will gather to certify the Electoral College vote count for the winner of the presidential election.

The last time Congress undertook the responsibility, a pro-Trump mob attacked the building, eventually breaking through police barricades, severely injuring officers and disrupting the process.

The rioters were spurred on by false claims from former president and current Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump that he won the 2020 election when he had in fact lost both the popular vote and the Electoral College.

Members of Congress and then-Vice President Mike Pence were evacuated or told to shelter in place in their offices as one of the most secure buildings in the country was overrun.

Federal prosecutors have since secured convictions or plea deals for hundreds of the people who attacked law enforcement and obstructed Congress’ responsibility to certify the vote that day.

United States Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger released a written statement Thursday saying the “National Special Security Event designation will further strengthen our work to protect the Members of Congress and the legislative process.”

“The United States Capitol Police has been preparing for the January 6 count, as well as the Inauguration, for several months,” Manger added. “We have made hundreds of changes and improvements over the past three years, and we are confident that the Capitol will be safe and secure.”

National Special Security Events, or NSSEs, are somewhat expected for major events, like State of the Union speeches, presidential inaugurations and the presidential nominating conventions that the Democrats and Republicans hold every four years.

This, however, will be the first time that one has been issued for Congress’ certification of the Electoral College vote.

The designation means the U.S. Secret Service will be the lead federal law enforcement agency planning security for the event, despite it being held in the U.S. Capitol, where USCP typically holds the top jurisdiction.

“National Special Security Events are events of the highest national significance,” Eric Ranaghan, special agent in charge of the U.S. Secret Service’s Dignitary Protective Division, said in a written statement released Wednesday. “The U.S. Secret Service, in collaboration with our federal, state, and local partners are committed to developing and implementing a comprehensive and integrated security plan to ensure the safety and security of this event and its participants.”

PHOENIX, ARIZONA - AUGUST 23: Former Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. gives remarks at the Renaissance Phoenix Downtown Hotel on August 23, 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona.Kennedy announced that he was suspending his presidential campaign and supporting Republican presidential candidate, former U.S. President Donald Trump.(Photo by Rebecca Noble/Getty Images)

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has asked Wisconsin’s District 2 Court of Appeals to remove his name from the state’s presidential ballot, saying he’s “running against the clock.” 

The request comes after a Dane County Circuit Court judge, working in a different appellate district, rejected Kennedy’s request to issue an injunction last week before the Wisconsin Elections Commission had a chance to respond. The judge, Stephen Ehlke, instead set a scheduling conference that happened on Wednesday. 

Kennedy’s legal maneuvers come after he ended his presidential campaign last month and endorsed former President Donald Trump. Polls show Kennedy’s presence on the ballot largely pulls support from Trump. 

Kennedy had asked the WEC to remove his name from the ballot, a request the body denied earlier this month. His campaign had filed nomination papers with the state on Aug. 6 and state law does not include a mechanism to take back that filing. 

His attorneys argued to the more conservative friendly 2nd District that the briefing schedule in the Dane County case would take too long and by the time a decision is reached, ballots will already be printed and sent out. 

County clerks across the state have already begun printing ballots, with the first absentee ballots required to be put in the mail Sept. 19. In 2020, the state Supreme Court denied an attempt by the Green Party to have its candidates put on the ballot because the lawsuit was filed after ballots had been printed. 

Kennedy’s attorneys argued the appeals court should take up the case so the WEC can’t run out the clock. 

“Its victory will not be one of principle and precedent but procrastination,” Kennedy’s attorneys argued.