The election denial movement is more organized and more sophisticated than in 2020. Though just a small number of election officials have been identified as being election deniers or exhibiting anti-democracy behavior — 300 from the +2,600 election officials we researched —these actors have an outsized impact on the overall narrative of this election, and the threat posed to election administration. And that is their goal. They want to sow doubt. They want to create an atmosphere where mis- and disinformation can take hold. They are willing to disenfranchise voters for their preferred outcome.
These actors are trying to work from inside the system to delay and disrupt election administration. They’re seeking to exploit the levers of power they have, both within and outside of the law to foment an environment of misinformation to support their election denial.
Below, we’ve outlined vulnerable spots for election administration — both trends nationally and specific process points in states — that could become flashpoints for the election denialism movement in this coming post-vote period.
Their efforts will fail in the face of a strong democracy and resilient election administration system.
We offer these potential vulnerabilities to aid pro-democracy partners to direct corrective action to protect our election and uphold the foundation of our democracy.
These are the tactics we’re monitoring across the country during this coming post-vote period:
The anti-democracy actions that have received the most attention so far are extra-legal activities — activities not within the law — by election administrators who have control over various election processes.
We’ve already seen attempts in Georgia and Virginia to undermine local election certification. Delaying or refusing to certify is a tactic that’s been tested in other states, and we feel confident more actors will test this action in this post-vote period. It’s important to remember, failure to certify the election is not an option.
We want to specifically call out 20 counties where officials who previously delayed or refused certification remain in their positions:
Read more about our Counties of Concern here: On Our Radar: Counties of Concern
Similar to refusing certification, there are other process points that election officials could seek to exploit to illegally prevent votes from being counted by refusing to do their jobs. Fortunately, so far in all instances where this has been attempted, court systems or strong deterrence by law enforcement have foiled these disruptions, and we expect that pattern to continue should this tactic be used again.