There is one thing about Trump and his fetish for setting up conspiracies, as well as his ability to find untold numbers of co-conspirators, that alarms me. We must be on guard up to election day and on election day to guard the vote and the voters.
Kevin Roberts, head of the Heritage Foundation, has said he has a stable of lawyers waiting to handle any possible issues that may arise.
What troubles me is that I suspect that he has enlisted precinct workers and watchers to work at the polls and make as many legally permissible hurdles as possible for Democratic voters. They will stretch the boundaries of any legality as possible.
We need to set up Democratic volunteer poll watchers to challenge any voter intimidation, refusal to allow voters to vote, or close the polls early to disallow late-comers from voting.
We know we cannot trust Trump or his minions. We know from 2020 just how extensive his supply of co-conspirators is and can be. We must be prepared to protect the vote and the voters. But we must do so completely within the bounds of the law.
Yes.
I'm glad to discover your substack, Carol Clark. I could add anecdotes from my experience as a candidate. The playbook going forward seems to be that candidates can expect to have objections filed against their petitions, thus causing the candidate to spend time and money defending them. Any slight infraction, such as an error in categorization of an expense will result in an FEC filing, even if the dollar amount in question is pennies compared to what the opposing candidate has. Democratic candidates can expect to be baited in public settings to say small phrases that are then played on Fox News repeatedly and out of context for the rest of the campaign. Any professional license will be called into question, and complaints or attacks through social media will be launched. The net result is that Democratic candidates can expect to be constantly on the defense, rather than able to go on the offense or able to promote their platforms free of distractions.