The Trump acolytes planning to interfere with November’s election

Good morning. With two weeks to go until the US presidential election, the race could hardly be closer. But when you’re next frantically obsessing over the odds, keep in mind: it may not be as simple as who most voters want to see in the Oval Office.

If the attempt to subvert the 2020 election was an anti-democratic horror show, its impact was somewhat mitigated by the fact that Donald Trump seemed to be making it up as he went along. This time around, Republicans are a lot more organised in their efforts to influence the outcome – and as the Maga takeover of the GOP has rolled on over the past four years, election denialism has moved from the fringes to become a central tenet of the party.

That means the wheels are already in motion for alarming interventions before and after polling day. A case in point over the weekend: Elon Musk’s plan for a daily $1m giveaway to a swing state voter who signs a petition in support of the first and second amendments, which legal experts say could amount to an illegal inducement to register to vote.

For today’s newsletter, I spoke to Sam Levine, voting rights reporter for Guardian US, about the nature of the threat – and how worried you should be. Here are the headlines.

Five big stories

In depth: ‘We’re getting to a place where trust in the system is eroded’

The crucial backdrop to Republican attempts to game the system: this is a race that could rest on a few thousand votes in a few key states. If the result comes down to a decimal place in Pennsylvania or Michigan, keeping some voters at home or throwing out a few ballots could make all the difference.

How serious is the risk that the election will be subverted? “If we’re on a 10-point scale, I’d say it’s about a seven,” Sam Levine said. “It’s short of a total meltdown. But there are some very alarming signs.”

The reason it’s a seven and not a 10: “There’s no legal scholar I talk to who doubts that the rightful winner of the election is going to be certified and seated. No court has successfully thrown out an election in the past, and the statutes are very clear.”

On the other hand, the memory of 2000’s hanging chads and the heavily conservative composition of the supreme court – as well as the fact that interventions that never make it to the courts could play a significant role – mean there are good reasons to be concerned. “When you look at all of these things together, they make a very toxic stew,” Sam said.

Here are some of the ingredients.

Trump supporters are taking control of election boards

Since 2020, more than 30 local officials have either refused to certify valid election results or threatened to do so. And while those efforts have ultimately failed so far, they signal a new era of activists seeking control of previously non-partisan bodies. In Georgia, for example, a pro-Trump majority on the state board of elections has attempted to force through dubious new rules including one that would have required the hand counting of results – a procedure that critics say slows down the results, makes them less accurate and creates a false perception of uncertainty – only to see their intervention struck down by a county judge last week.

“Before 2020, the vast majority of Americans had no idea these boards existed,” Sam said. And while they are generally required to certify the results, that is likely to be challenged in November. “These local board meetings are now full of [Trump supporters] who get up and scream at the board members if they disagree with them,” he said.

A study of boards in eight swing states published last month found there were at least 102 election deniers sitting on state and county boards. The most prominent example was again Georgia, where the 3-2 Trump majority on the state board may have been thwarted by a judge but remains in a key role ahead of what is likely to be a nail-biting race.

Republicans are signing up as ‘poll watchers’

Election boards are not the only place where Trump supporters have sought to intervene in the process. There has been a parallel effort to get those who were sceptical of the 2020 result to sign up to be poll watchers – who can challenge voters’ eligibility in some states. (See this excellent New Yorker piece for more on how Trump supporters are being primed to intervene.)

Sam points to the Election Integrity Network, founded by prominent 2020 election denialist Cleta Mitchell, which claims to have recruited tens of thousands of “election integrity patriots” and holds regular coordinating calls. Meanwhile, Republican national committee chair Michael Whatley claims to have recruited almost 200,000 poll watchers, poll workers, and volunteer lawyers.

“That creates a volatile situation,” Sam said. “There have been reports of counties buying panic buttons in case election workers are harassed. But there is no evidence for the claims being made.”

Voters have been removed from electoral rolls or asked to prove their citizenship

In Tennessee, the top election official asked 14,000 registered voters, many in areas with large ethnic minority populations, to prove their citizenship. In Alabama, the state tried to remove 3,200 people from the rolls as non-citizens before admitting that 2,000 of them were eligible. And in Texas, the governor, Greg Abbott, claimed that 6,500 non-citizens had been removed from the rolls – when in fact, almost 6,000 of them had simply failed to respond to letters from the state asking for proof.

These states are so certain to vote Republican in November that the decisions will not directly impact the result. But, said Sam, “it is part of a misinformation effort – it creates the sense that voting by non-citizens is a major problem, and that if it can happen in Texas, it can happen anywhere”.

The non-citizen voting claim also chimes with a debunked conspiracy theory advanced by Elon Musk, among others, that Democrats are quickly making unauthorised immigrants into citizens to tilt key states in their favour. It is also seen as a way to suppress the eligible votes of those who were on the fence about turning up anyway, particularly among immigrant communities.

Republicans are preparing to use the court system to challenge results

Reuters counted 130 lawsuits from Republicans relating to the election process this year. Sam describes some of those cases here, ranging from challenges to absentee ballots to more claims of non-citizen votes. As he notes, such cases “can be a particularly powerful forum for spreading misleading information [because] public officials sometimes won’t speak publicly about pending legal matters”, meaning they go unchallenged. And they could be a preview of what follows after the election has concluded.

Whereas in 2020, Republican party lawyers had refused to join Trump’s attempts to overturn the election, the party looks very different in 2024. The Republican national committee’s election litigation team is now headed by Christina Bobb, a prominent 2020 election denier who is facing criminal charges over her attempts to subvert the result.

One nightmare scenario is a situation like 2000, when the supreme court effectively decided the winner of the election. “On the one hand, in 2020, the supreme court refused to go near a case asking them to invalidate the results,” Sam said. “That is reassuring – I don’t think they’re going to go chasing fringe legal theories despite their ideological leanings.”

But even then, it is possible some rightwing justices with form for this sort of thing could issue opinions that might fan the flames of any tensions, Sam said. And the court could have to decide on a more technical, narrow issue with massive ramifications. In that scenario, the outcome is harder to predict – and there will be big questions about the justices’ objectivity given the court’s recent turn to the right.

Even if these efforts fail, they fan the flames of denialism

As we’ve seen, many of the manoeuvres outlined above have been struck down by the courts. But even these failures can be a success – because they may be understood by those who denied the 2020 result as further proof that the system is rigged against them. And even as they undertake their own work to subvert the result, Trump and many of his supporters are claiming it is the Harris campaign that is trying to “steal” the election.

To his point that he expects the rightful winner to be seated, Sam adds this caveat: “Even if that happens, the damage done by stoking this chaos is very, very significant. We’re getting to a place where trust in the system is eroded, and many people may not accept the result.” If so, the intensity of the misinformation this time around may make January 6 look like a dry run.

What else we’ve been reading

• Yes, the above picture of Daisy May Cooper is magnificent. But Rhik Samadder’s spooky interview for Saturday magazine – about her riotous new book detailing her obsession with the paranormal, and, er, the time she tried to have sex with a ghost – gives it a run for its money. Features a decent anecdote about Martin Kemp mistaking the spirit of a 16th-century maid for an extra. Archie

• A symbol of environmental destruction and excess, megayachts are a status symbol for billionaires. For New York Magazine, Charlotte Cowles asked a former stewardess what it’s really like serving the ultra-wealthy on their private floating resorts. Nimo

• Today’s Guardian leader advises Rachel Reeves to abandon the infamous fiscal rules, and offers an alternative approach: publish an overview of the government’s balance sheet and show how ministerial decisions have affected national income instead. Archie

• Ashifa Kassam takes a look at how Gisèle Pelicot, a survivor at the centre of a horrifying mass rape trial that has rocked France, has propelled conversations around sexual violence in countries around the world. Nimo

• Keira Knightley, David Walliams, Meghan Markle, and Keith Richards have something in common that they really shouldn’t: they’re all celebrity children’s authors. Ella Creamer and Lucy Knight hear from their less famous rivals, who are unsurprisingly sick of it. Archie

Sport

Cycling | After the news of Olympic cycling great Sir Chris Hoy’s terminal cancer diagnosis, the Guardian’s cycling columnist William Fotheringham writes that Hoy’s response is typical of “a grounded individual who always seemed to come to a stoical, humble accommodation with the things that life dealt him, good and bad; he is a man of frankly outlandish determination”.

Football | Leaked WhatsApp messages from the former Newcastle United minority co-owner Amanda Staveley suggest that Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s crown prince, was heavily involved in the takeover of the club, it has been reported. The messages also spotlighted the extent of the UK government’s involvement.

Football | Curtis Jones’s 51st minute winner was enough to secure a 2-1 victory for Liverpool over Chelsea and return Arne Slot’s side to the top of the Premier League. Earlier on Sunday, Manchester City took a dramatic 2-1 win over bottom side Wolves thanks to John Stones’s injury time header.

The front pages

Top story in the Guardian print edition today is “Labour wants NHS ‘passports’ for all patients despite privacy fears”. “Reeves is warned changes to IHT will backfire” says the Daily Telegraph – that’s inheritance tax, btw. The Times leads with “Rayner sets up ‘council housing revolution’”, while the Daily Mail covers a “‘Tsunami’ of asbestos deaths in schools”. The Metro says there is an “online con epidemic” with “9 million of us scammed”. The i has “UK air defences unable to cope with missile attack, former ministers warn”. “84% of disabled pensioners will lose winter payment” – the Express says that’s the result of a poll. “Charles: you are the best of us” – the Daily Mirror marks the 25th anniversary of its Pride of Britain awards with a message from the king. The Financial Times leads with “Faltering confidence hinders global recovery despite buoyant economies”.

Today in Focus

Cartoon of the day | Edith Pritchett

Sign up for Inside Saturday to see more of Edith Pritchett’s cartoons, the best Saturday magazine content and an exclusive look behind the scenes

The Upside

A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad

The Guardian’s new section, The Filter, has a singular mission: to provide readers with help in cutting through the fake reviews, dodgy deals and AI slop that makes up so much of consumer journalism on the web. The latest has experts recommending the fair price for 14 everyday essentials, from wine, to cheddar to running shoes. And if you’re paying more than £4 for a cleaning spray you’re being ripped off.

As for the wine, Pierre Mansour, director of wine at the Wine Society, says: “My advice is to spend between £8 and £15, the higher the better. The sweet spot is £12. Compared with a £7 bottle, a £12 bottle gets you four times as much value – a better return on your investment in terms of the wine’s taste, quality and balance.”

Bored at work?

And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow.

• Quick crossword

• Cryptic crossword

• Wordiply