ВИБОРЧА ГАЗЕТА

Republicans, Democrats work to preempt fraud claims ahead of election

ANN ARBOR, FLINT AND DETROIT, MICHIGAN — U.S. election officials in battleground states are pushing back against disinformation about election integrity and working to assure Americans that their votes will be counted.

Officials from both major parties in six states — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — met in Ann Arbor, Michigan, last month for panel discussions hosted by the nonpartisan group Keep our Republic. The group seeks to educate the American public about threats to the U.S. election system and build trust in the electoral system.

They’re working to avoid a repeat of November 2020 scenes in nearby Detroit and other American cities where supporters of then-President Donald Trump, riled up by his baseless accusations of election fraud, pressured officials to stop counting the votes.

This year, many Trump supporters who spoke with VOA say they worry about fraud in this election.

“Right now, our government, you’re going to question everything about it,” said Marvin Minton, a Trump supporter who attended the Republican presidential nominee’s town hall event in Flint, Michigan, in September. “I wish I could say differently, but that’s not how America feels. We don’t trust nobody.”

Angelina Kandow, who was also at the Flint event, said, “Was [the 2020 election] stolen or not? One case, one case is enough to question the whole system.”

Some Trump supporters quoted alleged instances of 2020 election fraud that were disproven during court cases triggered by the more than 60 lawsuits filed by Republicans and the Trump campaign after that year’s election.

Disinformation around election integrity has gained traction among Republicans, according to an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and USAFacts poll, released in August.

The poll found 67% of Republicans trust Trump and his campaign for accurate information on the outcome of the election. Only 51% of Republicans said they trust the government’s certification of election results.

In contrast, 87% of Democrats trust government certifications, while 82% trust Vice President Kamala Harris, the party’s presidential nominee, and her campaign.

Dangerous disinformation

Officials in battleground states say disinformation can be dangerous.

“They can in some cases lead to people making threats to election officials or worse, based on lies or misinformation they have been told about elections,” said Jonathan Brater, director of the Michigan Bureau of Elections.

“Even if it doesn’t result in any sort of physical violence, it does undermine trust long term in the election system, which is bad for our republic and is bad for our democracy,” he told VOA.

Meagan Wolfe, an election official in Wisconsin, another battleground state, has been targeted with intimidation, even death threats. Republicans loyal to Trump have attempted to oust her over false claims that she helped to rig the 2020 vote in favor of President Joe Biden.

Wolfe encouraged people who don’t trust the election process to become involved.

“They can become a poll worker. They can become a poll observer. They can watch the audits of the voting equipment,” she told VOA.” All of that is open for [the] public to view.”

In many states, efforts to ensure voters that elections are secure are supported by Republicans. Justin Roebuck, a Republican election official in Ottawa County, Michigan, acknowledges it’s an uphill battle.

“Our political leaders at every level need to also seek facts and to seek data,” he told VOA. “And I think until that happens, we will have a problem in terms of our confidence and trust in the process.”

Roebuck said he is working directly with citizens, instead of through the campaigns.

“We have very decentralized elections in the United States. There are always things that we can do better,” he said. “Sometimes we have to work through those challenges and work through those messes.”

Messy in Michigan

It’s already looking like it could become messy in Michigan. Republicans loyal to Trump have sued Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, over absentee ballot processing guidelines and voter registration lists.

“If Jocelyn Benson is not responding to what is required under the law, we will take her to court to get the courts to compel her to do that,” Michigan Republican Party chairperson Pete Hoekstra told VOA.

Benson dismissed it as a Republican strategy to create a “false sense of irregularities in the process.”

“In general, we see lawsuits masquerading as a legal strategy when they’re really a PR strategy to get misinformation or sow seeds of doubt about our elections into the narrative,” she told VOA.

She said that there are “more checks and balances in place than ever before” to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the election process.

Both parties have launched election-related lawsuits in various battleground states, which could mean chaos in the November election.

“Any kind of legal challenge happening this close to an election, typically, is lawyers putting a placeholder in case they may not win in a state or may not have an outcome they like, and it gives them the ability to challenge the election after the fact,” said Kim Wyman, senior fellow with the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Elections Project in Washington.

There are other potential disruptions, including efforts to delay election certification by county officials who support Trump.

“We’ve seen some legal maneuvers and some boards of elections that have changed the rules that allow more scrutiny over the canvas period and the certification of the election,” Wyman told VOA.

After Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 loss culminated in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by his supporters, Congress sought to prevent such events from recurring by passing the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act.

Mandatory deadline

The reforms set a new mandatory December 11 deadline for states to submit certified slates of presidential electors, provided expedited court access to resolve challenges and raised the threshold for objecting to election results in Congress.

Battleground states Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and North Carolina have passed legislation to ensure that canvasses, recounts, audits and legal challenges meet the new deadline.

Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have not, leaving their electoral systems vulnerable to partisan lawsuits and political pressures that could force them to miss the certification deadline.

This could leave uncertain the fate of 29 electoral college votes. A presidential candidate needs at least 270 electoral college votes to win.

VOA’s Rivan Dwiastono contributed to this report.
…

Razor-thin margins: Why Wisconsin is crucial in the 2024 presidential race

Wisconsin, a Midwestern U.S. state known for its dairy farms and beer production, has emerged as a crucial battleground in the 2024 presidential election. With a history of extremely close races, Wisconsin’s 10 electoral votes could determine who becomes the next president. The state’s unique mix of urban and rural voters, along with key issues like the economy and abortion rights, make it a microcosm of the nation’s political divide.
…

Republicans, Democrats preempt claims of voter fraud ahead of election

Former U.S. President Donald Trump and many of his supporters claim, without evidence, the 2020 election was stolen and warn that the same could happen in 2024. Democratic and Republican election officials in Michigan dispute those claims and are working to assure Americans that their votes are secure. White House Bureau Chief Patsy Widakuswara brings us this story from Michigan. Videographer: Rivan Dwiastono
…

US bulletin says Iranian hackers targeting political campaigns

…

Not all elections look the same. Here are some of the different ways states run their voting

washington — The U.S. general election on Nov. 5 will decide the country’s direction, but it is far from a nationally administered contest. The 50 states and the District of Columbia run their own elections, and each does things a little differently.

Here’s a look at some notable variations in the 2024 election:

Maine and Nebraska allocate electoral votes by congressional district

To win the presidency outright, a candidate must receive at least 270 of the 538 votes in the Electoral College. In 48 states, the statewide winner gets all of that state’s electoral votes, and that’s also the case in the nation’s capital. 

In Maine and Nebraska, the candidate who receives the most votes in each congressional district wins one electoral vote from that district. The candidate who wins the statewide vote receives another two. 

In 2020, Democrat Joe Biden received three of Maine’s four electoral votes because he won the popular vote in the state and its 1st Congressional District. Republican Donald Trump received one electoral vote from the 2nd Congressional District. Trump won four of Nebraska’s five votes for winning the popular vote in the state as well as its 1st and 3rd Congressional Districts; Biden received one electoral vote for winning the 2nd Congressional District. 

Alaska and Maine use ranked choice voting 

In ranked choice voting, voters rank candidates for an office in order of preference on the ballot. If no candidate is the first choice for more than 50% of voters, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Voters who chose that candidate as their top pick have their votes redistributed to their next choice. This continues, with the candidate with the fewest votes getting eliminated, until someone emerges with a majority of votes. 

Maine uses ranked choice voting in state-level primaries and for federal offices in the general election. That means Maine voters can rank presidential, Senate and House candidates on ballots that include the Democrat and the Republican who advanced out of their respective party primaries, plus third-party and independent candidates who qualify. 

The presidential ballot will include Trump and Democrat Kamala Harris, plus three other candidates. In the six years since implementing ranked choice voting, the state has used it twice in races for Congress in its 2nd Congressional District. The 2020 presidential race did not advance to ranked choice voting, with the winners of the state and in each congressional district exceeding 52% of the vote. 

Alaska holds open primaries for statewide offices and sends the top four vote-getters, regardless of party, to the general election, where the winner is decided using ranked choice voting. In all legislative and statewide executive offices, Alaskans can rank up to four names that can include multiple candidates from the same party. 

The exception is the presidency, which is eligible for ranked choice voting in Alaska for the first time. This year, there will be eight presidential tickets on the ballot, and Alaskans can rank all candidates if they choose to. The last time the winner of the presidential contest in Alaska failed to surpass 50% of the vote was in 1992, when third-party candidate Ross Perot won almost 20% of the national popular vote. 

But in 2022, both Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola and Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski won their elections after both went to ranked choice voting. 

Another wrinkle this year? In Alaska, where ranked choice voting was implemented by ballot measure in 2020, there’s a voter initiative on the ballot this fall to repeal it. 

In California and Washington, candidates from the same party can face off 

California and Washington hold open primaries in which all candidates run on the same ballot and the two top vote-getters advance to the general election, regardless of party. This year, there are two House races in Washington that include candidates of the same party, one with two Republicans and one with two Democrats. There are four in California: three with only Democrats and one with only Republicans. 

The winning party in those six districts will be reflected in The Associated Press’ online graphic showing the balance of power in the House at poll close, rather than once a winner is declared because the party of the winner is a foregone conclusion. 

Louisiana holds a ‘primary’ on Nov. 5 

Louisiana holds what it refers to as its “open primaries” on the same day the rest of the country holds its general election. In Louisiana, all candidates run on the same open primary ballot. Any candidate who earns more than 50% of the vote in the primary wins the seat outright. 

If no candidate exceeds 50% of the vote, the top two vote-getters advance to a head-to-head runoff, which can end up pitting two Republicans or two Democrats against each other. Louisiana refers to these contests as its “general election.” 

That will change for elections for the U.S. House starting in 2026 when congressional races will have earlier primaries that are open only to registered members of a party. Certain state races will continue to hold open primaries in November, but the change will prevent future members of Congress from waiting until December — a month later than the rest of the country — to know whether they are headed to Washington. 

Nebraska has two competing abortion measures on the ballot, but only one can be enacted 

In Nebraska, any measure that receives approximately 123,000 valid signatures qualifies for the ballot. This year, two measures relating to abortion met this threshold. 

One would enshrine in the Nebraska Constitution the right to have an abortion until fetal viability or later, to protect the health of the pregnant woman. The other would write into the constitution the current 12-week ban, with exceptions for rape, incest and to save the life of the pregnant woman. 

This marks the first time since the 2022 Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade that a state has measures that seek to roll back abortion rights and protect abortion rights on the ballot at the same time. 

It’s possible voters could end up approving both measures. But because they’re competing and therefore cannot both be enshrined in the constitution, the measure with the most “for” votes will be the one adopted, according to the Nebraska secretary of state. 

Georgia holds runoff elections if a candidate doesn’t win a majority of votes 

In primary elections, a handful of states, mostly in the South, go to runoffs if no candidate receives at least 50% of the vote. In races with more than two candidates, runoffs in those states are common. Several states held primary runoffs this year. 

Georgia uses the same rules in general elections. The last three Senate races there went to runoffs because a third-party candidate won enough of the vote to prevent the Republican or Democratic nominee from exceeding 50% of the vote. 

But this year, runoff possibilities may be confined to downballot races such as state legislature. There’s no Senate race there this year, and the U.S. House races have only two candidates on the ballot. 

Texas, Florida and Michigan report a lot of votes before final polls are closed 

This is common in states that span multiple time zones. In most states, polls close at the same time in each time zone. 

The AP will not call the winner of a race before all the polls in a jurisdiction are scheduled to close, even if votes already reported before that time make clear who will win the race. So if there is a statewide race in a state where polls close at 8 p.m. local time, but some of the state is in the Eastern time zone and some of the state is in Central time zone, the earliest the AP can call the winner is 8 p.m. CST/9 p.m. EST. 

The AP will still show the results as they arrive from counties with closed polls. 

Some of the biggest states with split poll close times are Florida, Michigan, Texas and Oregon. Tennessee is an exception, as even though the state is in both the Eastern and the Central time zones, all counties coordinate their voting to conclude at the same time. 
…

Native American vote could swing the election — but in which direction?

WASHINGTON — In the final weeks of the 2024 election, Native American organizers are intensifying efforts to increase voter turnout, recognizing the impact of the Native vote, especially in swing states like Arizona and Wisconsin.

Advocacy groups like the Native American Rights Fund continue to address barriers to the ballot box, such as isolation, poor infrastructure and limited internet access, along with restrictions on in-person voter registration and early voting.

New challenges in Arizona

Arizona, home to 22 Native tribes, played a key role in the 2020 Democratic victory.

However, a recent voter registration glitch in the state may affect up to 218,000 voters, more than double previous estimates. The issue stems from an error in the driver’s license database that flagged some individuals as having proved citizenship when they had not.

A recording obtained by The Washington Post revealed concerns among Arizona Democratic leaders about how resolving the error could either disenfranchise voters or spark conspiracy theories. Despite the glitch, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that those affected can still vote in federal and state elections.

Jaynie Parrish, executive director of Arizona Native Vote, said the impact on Native voters remains unclear. She stressed that Native Americans face ongoing challenges when voting, including Arizona’s requirement to show proof of a physical address at the polls.

“We rely on post office boxes,” Parrish said, explaining that early voters can use a driver’s license or tribal I.D. “We just have to keep reminding our community what identification they need for Election Day. Our best defense is offense.”

Voting based on issues, not party

University of New Mexico Professor Gabriel R. Sanchez said Native American voting preferences haven’t been well-studied.

“The assumption that they are overwhelmingly Democrat isn’t backed by data,” Sanchez told VOA.

His polling shows the majority of Native voters lean Democratic but not as strongly as other minority groups like Black and Latino voters. In the 2020 election, 60% of Native Americans supported Joe Biden, but this dropped slightly by 2022.

“Native voters tell us they aren’t really partisan,” Sanchez said. “They evaluate which party better addresses tribal issues each election cycle.”

As an example, in an editorial Monday in the Navajo Times, Francine Bradley-Arthur, a Navajo organizer and co-founder of Freedom House in St. Michaels, Arizona, explains why many Navajos support Donald Trump.

“In Navajo culture, life is sacred, including life in the womb,” she writes. “Trump’s administration upheld pro-life values that resonate deeply with our traditions.”

She recalls that as attorney general of California, Kamala Harris opposed “at least 15 tribal land-into-trust applications,” undermining the tribes’ ability to reclaim lost land.

The Kamala Harris-Tim Walz campaign this week launched an initiative to better engage Native communities through culturally appropriate outreach. Minnesota Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan announced the program Wednesday during an October 2 event hosted by the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community.

“Vice President Harris has been a fierce advocate for tribal sovereignty, working to secure funding for health care, education and economic development that truly empowers our communities. … And let’s not forget her running mate, who I have the privilege of knowing a thing or two about,” Flanagan told reporters during a press call later in the day.

Flanagan, a member of the White Earth Band of Ojibwe, was elected alongside Governor Tim Walz in 2018 and reelected in 2022. Native American voters are mindful that if the Harris-Walz ticket succeeds, she would become the first Native American woman to serve as a state governor.

VP candidates’ debate

On October 1, vice presidential candidates Walz and JD Vance debated key topics like immigration and abortion. Native commentators expressed disappointment on a Facebook discussion hosted by Native News Online, noting the debate overlooked issues crucial to Native voters, such as tribal sovereignty and climate change.

Judith LeBlanc, Caddo Tribe member and director of the Native Organizers Alliance, said she was disappointed Walz didn’t highlight his work with Flanagan.

Aaron Payment, former chair of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, pointed out that Native voters in swing states can help Democrats win.

“Are candidates concerned that if they start talking pro-Indian, then all of a sudden they’re going to be considered radical or … in the back pocket of American Indians?” Payment asked.

Trump’s proposal

The candidates did discuss Trump’s plan to open federal land for housing construction. LeBlanc criticized this proposal in a Native News Online editorial, calling it an overreach and warning that it could lead to seizing tribal lands for development.

During the Facebook discussion, Levi Rickert, editor of Native News Online, shifted focus to the Montana Senate debate between Jon Tester and Republican Tim Sheehy.

Sheehy has faced criticism for past racially charged remarks about the Crow Tribe.Tester confronted Sheehy, telling him to apologize for his comments. Sheehy admitted his remarks were insensitive, blaming them on military culture.

Payment noted that Sheehy’s support has increased in Montana, but with Native Americans making up 6.4% of the vote, it could still swing.
…

Do prediction markets have a future in US elections?

…

US warns voters of disinformation deluge

WASHINGTON — American voters are likely about to be swamped by a flood of misinformation and influence campaigns engineered by U.S. adversaries aiming, according to senior U.S. intelligence officials, to sway the results of the upcoming presidential election and cast doubt on the process itself.

The latest assessment from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, issued Monday, comes just 29 days before the November 5 election that will see U.S. voters choose the country’s next president and cast ballots in hundreds of other state and local races. 

“We’ve continued to see actors ramp up their activities as we get closer to Election Day,” said a senior U.S. intelligence official, briefing reporters on the condition of anonymity.

“They recognize that individuals are already voting, and operations can have a greater impact as we get closer to Election Day,” the official said, noting that the election itself may just be a starting point.

“The intelligence community expects foreign influence actors to continue their campaigns by calling into question the validity of the election results after the polls close,” the official added.

A second U.S. intelligence official warned the pace of such influence efforts, especially those targeting specific races or political campaigns, has also picked up.

“We have had more than a threefold increase,” the official said, explaining that the number of private briefings to candidates and campaigns has likewise jumped.

Intelligence agencies also cautioned that U.S. adversaries will likely seize upon the damage done by Hurricane Helene and potential damage from Hurricane Milton as it strengthens off the U.S. coastline to further amplify and manufacture narratives meant to undermine confidence in the election results.

“It does take time for those types of narratives to be formed and put out into the wild, so to speak,” the first intelligence official said. “But we certainly expect foreign countries to take advantage of such situations and promote further divisive rhetoric.”

Monday’s assessment follows a series of earlier public warnings about foreign efforts to meddle in the U.S. election.

U.S. officials said Monday that Russia, Iran and China continue to be responsible for most of the influence efforts targeting U.S. voters.

And, they said, there have been no indications that any of those countries have changed their goals. 

Russia, they said, continues to run influence campaigns aimed at boosting the chances of former U.S. President and Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, while seeking to hurt the campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee.

Iran’s efforts remain focused on helping Harris by hurting Trump, they said, pointing to the ongoing hack-and-leak operation against the Trump campaign, which has been traced to three operatives working for Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Targeting state, local races

U.S. intelligence agencies assess that China has yet to wade into the U.S. presidential campaign, focusing instead on persuading American voters to reject state and local candidates perceived as detrimental to Beijing’s interests, especially those voicing support for Taiwan. 

But the latest public assessment pointed to some changes.

U.S. intelligence officials on Monday warned that Russia and Cuba have joined China, in targeting congressional, state and local races.

“Moscow is leveraging a wide range of influence actors in an effort to influence congressional races, particularly to encourage the U.S. public to oppose pro-Ukraine policies and politicians,” the intelligence official said.

“Havana almost certainly has considered influence efforts targeting some candidates,” the official added. “This is consistent with what they’ve done in past cycles.”

Russia, China and Iran have all rejected previous U.S. accusations of election meddling. Russia, Iran and Cuba have yet to respond to requests from VOA for comment on the latest U.S. findings.

China late Monday again dismissed the U.S. concerns.

“China is not interested in the U.S. congressional election, and we have no intention and will not interfere in it,” Liu Pengyu, the spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, told VOA in an email.

“Some U.S. congressmen stick to their wrong positions on the Taiwan question,” Liu added. “China firmly defends its national sovereignty and territorial integrity, but this does not lead to the conclusion that China has interfered in the congressional elections.”

But the U.S. intelligence assessments align with concerns voiced by some lawmakers and private technology companies.

“The 48 hours after the polls close, especially if we have as close an election as we anticipate, could be equally if not more significant in terms of spreading false information, disinformation and literally undermining the tenets of our democracy,” Mark Warner, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said during a hearing last month.

‘Vigorous activity’ 

Microsoft President Brad Smith, who has warned that the most perilous moments could come in the 48 hours before the U.S. election, separately said the increase in malign cyber efforts by Russia and Iran, especially, is undeniable.

“We’re seeing vigorous activity,” Smith told a cyber conference last month. “We’re seeing the Iranians really target the Republican Party in the Trump campaign,” he said. “We’re seeing the Russians target the Democratic Party and now the Harris campaign.”

And it is unclear what impact the U.S. has made with its attempts to counter the growing number of foreign influence efforts.

Last month, the U.S. Justice Department seized 32 internet domains used by companies linked to Moscow to spread disinformation. At the same time, the department indicted employees of the state-controlled media outlet RT in connection with a plot to launder Russian propaganda through a U.S.-based media company.

U.S. intelligence officials on Monday, however, said such tactics are no longer unique to the Kremlin. 

“Foreign influence actors are getting better at hiding their hand and using Americans to do it,” said one of the U.S. intelligence officials. “Foreign countries calculate that Americans are more likely to believe other Americans compared to content with clear signs of foreign propaganda.”

Arizona Democratic Senator Mark Kelly told CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday that social media is rife with fake personas generated by U.S. adversaries.

“If you’re looking at stuff on Twitter, on TikTok, on Facebook, on Instagram, and it’s political in nature … there is a very reasonable chance — I would put it in the 20 to 30% range — that the content you are seeing, the comments you are seeing, are coming from one of those three countries: Russia, Iran, China,” he said. “It’s not going to stop on November 5.”
…

North Carolina changes election rules to help voters hit by Hurricane Helene 

…

Trump, Harris mark somber anniversary of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are marking the anniversary of the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust as the presidential candidates approach the final weeks of the campaign during a widening conflict in the Middle East.

Political leaders across the spectrum were marking the killing of about 1,200 people, including 46 U.S. citizens, by Hamas-led militants in the October 7 attack last year, and the taking of about 250 hostages. A year later, about 100 people, including several Americans, remain in captivity, as U.S.-led efforts to negotiate a cease-fire and hostage release deal have sputtered out.

Trump visited the New York City gravesite of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who led the Chabad-Lubavitch movement of Orthodox Judaism from 1951 until his death in 1994. Schneerson was the movement’s seventh leader, known as Lubavitcher Rebbe. Trump then will speak before Jewish community leaders at one of his Florida resorts in the Miami suburb of Doral.

Harris and her husband planted a pomegranate tree on the grounds of the vice president’s residence in honor of the those killed a year ago.

Earlier Monday, Harris’ husband, Doug Emhoff, who is Jewish, recited a prayer for peace at an event to commemorate the anniversary hosted by the American Jewish Committee in Washington.

President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden also hosted a somber memorial ceremony at the White House Monday to mark the anniversary of the attack. The Bidens looked on as Rabbi Aaron Alexander of Washington’s Adas Israel Congregation recited the Jewish remembrance prayer for the more than 1,200 people, including dozens of Americans, killed that day, listing the towns, villages and festival site that were the scenes of the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust.

The president then lit a lone memorial candle placed on a small table at the center of the Blue Room, before they observed a moment of silence.

Earlier in the day, Biden spoke with Israeli President Isaac Herzog, the White House said.

The attack sparked a deadly war in Gaza, as Israel moved to root out Hamas’ control over the territory and try to return those taken captive. Israel’s military campaign has killed more than 41,000 Palestinians, including many women and children, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, which does not distinguish between militants and civilians.

Another Iran-backed group, Hezbollah, has fired thousands of rockets at Israeli territory in the same period from Lebanon, and Israel last month expanded a campaign of sabotage and assassination and launched a ground incursion into Lebanon to combat the threat from the group.

In 1997, the U.S. State Department designated both Hezbollah and Hamas as foreign terrorist organizations. Many other countries also label them as terrorist groups, although some apply the designation only to their military wings.
…

For US adversaries, Election Day won’t mean end to efforts to influence Americans

Washington — Soon, the ballots will be cast, the polls will close and a campaign marked by assassination attempts, animosity and anxiety will come to an end. But for U.S. adversaries, the work to meddle with American democracy may be entering its most critical phase.

Despite all the attention on efforts to spread disinformation in the months before the Nov. 5 election, the hours and days immediately after voting ends could offer foreign adversaries like Russia, Iran and China or domestic extremist groups the best chance to mess with America’s decision.

That’s when Americans will go online to see the latest results or share their opinions as the votes are tabulated. And that’s when a fuzzy photo or AI-generated video of supposed vote tampering could do its most damage, potentially transforming online outrage into real-world action before authorities have time to investigate the facts.

It’s a threat taken seriously by intelligence analysts, elected officials and tech executives, who say that while there’s already been a steady buildup of disinformation and influence operations, the worst may be yet to come.

“It’s not like at the end of election night, particularly assuming how close this election will be, that this will be over,” said Sen. Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee. “One of my greatest concerns is the level of misinformation, disinformation that may come from our adversaries after the polls close could actually be as significant as anything that happens up to the closing of the polls.”

Analysts are blunter, warning that a particularly effective piece of disinformation could be devastating to public confidence in the election if spread in the hours after the polls close, and if the group behind the campaign knows to target a particularly important swing state or voting bloc.

Possible scenarios include out-of-context footage of election workers repurposed to show supposed fraud, a deepfake video of a presidential candidate admitting to cheating or a robocall directed at non-English speakers warning them not to vote.

When a false or misleading claim circulates weeks before the election, there’s time for local election officials, law enforcement or news organizations to gather the facts, correct any falsehoods and get the word out. But if someone spreads a deceptive video or photo designed to make a big chunk of the electorate distrust the results the day after the election, it can be hard or even impossible for the truth to catch up.

It happened four years ago, when a drumbeat of lies about the 2020 results spurred the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Often, those arrested on accusations of trying to interfere with the transfer of power have cited debunked election fraud narratives that circulated shortly after Election Day.

An especially close election decided in a handful of swing states could heighten that risk even further, making it more likely that a rumor about suitcases of illegal ballots in Georgia, to cite an example from 2020, could have a big impact on perceptions.

President Joe Biden’s victory over Donald Trump in 2020 wasn’t especially close, and no irregularities big enough to affect the result were found — and yet false claims about vote-rigging were still widely believed by many supporters of the Republican, who’s running for president again.

The relatively long run-up to Inauguration Day on Jan. 20 gives those looking to sow doubt about the results ample time to do so, whether they are propaganda agencies in Moscow or extremist groups in the U.S. like the Proud Boys.

Ryan LaSalle, CEO of the cybersecurity firm Nisos, said he won’t feel relief until a new president is sworn in without any serious problems.

“The time to stay most focused is right now through the peaceful transfer of power,” LaSalle said. “That’s when real-life activities could happen, and that’s when they would have the greatest chance of having an impact on that peaceful transfer.”

Another risk, according to officials and tech companies, is that Russia or another adversary would try to hack into a local or state election system — not necessarily to change votes, but as a way of making voters question the security of the system.

“The most perilous time I think will come 48 hours before the election,” Microsoft President Brad Smith told lawmakers on the Senate Intelligence Committee last month. The hearing focused on American tech companies’ efforts to safeguard the election from foreign disinformation and cyberattacks.

Election disinformation first emerged as a potent threat in 2016, when Russia hacked into the campaign of Democrat Hillary Clinton and created networks of fake social media accounts to pump out disinformation.

The threat has only grown as social media has become a leading source of information and news for many voters. Content designed to divide Americans and make them mistrust their own institutions is no longer tied only to election seasons. Intelligence officials say Russia, China and other countries will only expand their use of online disinformation and propaganda going forward, a long-range strategy that looks beyond any one election or candidate.

Despite the challenges, election security officials are quick to reassure Americans that the U.S. election system is impervious to any attack that could alter the outcome of the vote. While influence operations may seek to spread distrust about the results, improvements to the system make it stronger than ever when it comes to efforts to change votes.

“Malicious actors, even if they tried, could not have an impact at scale such that there would be a material effect on the outcome of the election,” Jen Easterly, director of the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, told The Associated Press.
…