Could the midterm ‘counting window’ disrupt results? experts warn
Mounting fears that loyalists in key states could use fragile period when votes are counted to escalate false claims
Experts are warning Donald Trump’s administration could use the crucial hours and days after November's midterm elections to challenge or disrupt the reporting of election results.
As the election enters its final six weeks and control of the US Congress is in the balance, the counting window is seen as a precarious moment by former US federal government officials.
The US president’s attempt to crack down on mail-in ballots with sweeping restrictions was rejected by the Supreme Court this month but there is apprehension that Trump and his allies could use the period by actively undermining the integrity or rules of the election process in a bid to challenge results that don't go their way.
In this connection, Caitlin Durkovich, a former deputy homeland security advisor for resilience and response on the national security council said; “ I think because the administration has lost so many of their attempts to disrupt the normal process in court, that they are going to use the claim of foreign interference at the end of voting days to either seize equipment or to seize ballots, whether they’re legally justified to do so or not.”
According to the vice-president of elections and government, Larry Norden at Brennan Center, state-election officials are trying to prepare the public to understand the entire process, challenging the validity of votes and mitigate the risk of Trump unveiling emergency measures in voting machines around election day.
This month, a Supreme Court decision affirmed the lower court’s injunction against the Trump administration using the US Portal Service and the Department of Homeland Security to vet mail-in ballot deliveries.
The federal government’s claims of illegally registered voters showed that numbers do not stand up to scrutiny and Trump’s rhetoric alleging fraud without evidence has supported a disinformation campaign to undermine confidence in the elections.
Experts make a distinction between foreign influence between foreign influence, propaganda, and foreign interference or the manipulation of vote counts.
Further, Geoff Gales, former chief of joint defense collaborative partnerships at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency said, “ This means that cybersecurity services have been reduced, funding for information sharing environments have been cut, the threat briefings about nation-state adversaries that used to occur dozens of times a year are occurring rarely or not at all.”
