With 2 weeks to go, Trump, not taking chances, turns focus to North Carolina
Photo by CHARLY TRIBALLEAU/AFP via Getty Images
(NORTH CAROLINA) — Donald Trump isn’t taking any chances in battleground North Carolina — making four stops in the state over two days — on Tuesday as well as Monday.
The polls here are tight. But more than that, the former president’s advisers are keenly aware that some of the state’s counties hardest hit by flooding from Hurricane Helene are deeply conservative.
He needs voters to turn out in those counties to win here again.
Looking through the state’s election data, in 2020 Trump won 23 of the 25 counties included in the federal disaster declaration in North Carolina.
While Trump is still making false claims about the administration’s response to the storm, there’s been a notable shift in one area in particular: early voting.
After railing against mail-in voting and early voting for years, he’s now urging people to vote early if they can.
At his rally Monday night, signs urged residents to make a plan to get to the polls.
Both Democrats and Republicans feel optimistic about the strong early voting numbers in this state.
And we saw why as we traveled across the state — long lines stretched outside polling locations with Democrats and Republicans lining up one after another, ready to cast their ballots.
We met voter Roger Mills in Charlotte. He told us he doesn’t love everything Donald Trump says but he is voting for him anyway.
“I don’t like the way the country’s headed right now. I’m one of those that thinks we’re headed in the wrong direction. So, I thought, hey, I liked it in 2016 to 2020 I liked it well, except for the pandemic. So, I said I’d like to get back to that,” Mills said.
He called the former president “abrasive.”
“He talks without thinking sometimes, but I like his policies — his policies, I believe are good for America,” he said, adding, “[Harris] flip-flopped so many times I can’t tell where she stands.”
Angela Larry was at that polling location, too. She was eager to cast her ballot for Vice President Kamala Harris.
“I’m excited! I used to wait for Election Day to be part of the process but I’m part of the process today,” she said after she voted early. As a mother, she told us she supports Harris because of her stance on reproductive rights.
“We have a choice. Our bodies. We are females. We need to make the decisions. I don’t like that someone who doesn’t have a clue — that can’t walk the walk — has something to say what women go through,” she said.
Like many voters we’ve met — Angela Larry is just ready for it all to be over.
“I just want to get it over with. I’m ready for it to be over.”
(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. Supreme Court, faced with sagging public confidence and a deepening perception its decisions are politically-motivated, could soon play a critical role in how some 2024 presidential ballots are cast and counted and, potentially, how contested election results are certified.
“As prepared as anyone can be,” said Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the court’s junior justice, when asked recently about the flood of election-related lawsuits headed toward the high court.
Hundreds of state and federal cases involving disputes over the legitimacy of state voter rolls, access to voting places, and procedures for counting ballots are currently pending. A majority of them were brought by Republicans.
“It is a deluge,” said Wendy Weiser, director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan think tank tracking the unprecedented volume of election-year litigation. “It is a strategy to sow disinformation and chaos in the election system.”
Many of the lawsuits, predicated on “conspiracy theories” and advancing tenuous legal arguments, will ultimately be tossed out on technical grounds, Weiser said. But some may reach the justices with the potential to alter voting procedures in the final weeks of the campaign, depending on how they rule.
In one closely-watched case from Mississippi, the Republican National Committee has asked a conservative federal appeals court panel to prohibit the counting of mail ballots that arrive after Election Day, even if they are postmarked on or before Nov. 5. Roughly 20 states have long standing laws permitting late-arriving ballots, including Nevada, Virginia and Ohio.
“They’re saying federal law says election day means election day, which means that anything that comes afterwards was not on election day,” Weiser said of the GOP effort. “The argument has been raised in many cases across the country, and the courts have been routinely rejecting it. But given the context of the players involved, there’s now not a 0% risk that this could happen.”
In North Carolina, Republicans have sued state election officials seeking to remove 225,000 voters ahead of Election Day, claiming voter registration forms lacked the required identification information. The case is among more than three dozen GOP-led suits attempting to purge alleged ineligible voters, according to Democracy Docket, a left-leaning group tracking the litigation.
“It doesn’t strike me as implausible that you would see a case like that sharply before the Supreme Court in late October,” said University of Chicago law professor Aziz Huq.
While the justices have generally sought to avoid interference in state voter registration policies and election procedures close to an election — a concept known as the Purcell Principle — they have occasionally issued rulings that have resulted in major changes.
In the past few weeks, the court has issued decisions allowing Arizona to require proof of citizenship for state voter registration and rejecting Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein’s bid to appear on the Nevada ballot.
“They’ve never really explained what is the ‘status quo’ and what is ‘last minute,’ and they have been incredibly inconsistent in how they applied [Purcell],” said Caroline Fredrickson, a Georgetown law professor and former president of the American Constitution Society.
Other possible scenarios for Supreme Court involvement in the 2024 election could unfold after Nov. 5, as local and state election officials tabulate ballots and certify results.
“Imagine a state such as Georgia, where you have a state election board that has in the past weeks evinced a certain tendency to invite and foment election related litigation, resisting certification of a slate of presidential electors that the state election board disfavors,” said Huq. “What happens then? Perhaps the Supreme Court would be called in to tell us.”
The Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 (ECRA) mandates that states must certify their results by Dec. 11, but does not spell out what would happen if they do not do so. There could be litigation to resolve the appointment of a state’s electors for president by Dec. 16 when the Electoral College meets to cast votes.
The law explicitly directs disputes over certification to a three-judge panel for resolution with the U.S. Supreme Court getting the final word.
“It’s certainly contemplated as a second layer fail-safe,” said Weiser, “but I’m relatively confident that all the earlier layer fail-safes are going to hold and that we’re not going to be in that scenario.”
The court could also be asked to weigh in on any attempt by members of Congress to disqualify former President Donald Trump from a second term, if he were to win the election, during certification of the electoral vote on Jan. 6, 2025.
In the case Trump v. Anderson last year, the justices unanimously ruled that states could not disqualify a presidential candidate as an “insurrectionist” under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, but it left open a federal process to make that determination.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment says anyone who took an oath “as an officer of the United States to support the Constitution” and who then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or gave “aid or comfort to the enemy” cannot hold office.
Trump’s critics allege he clearly violated Section 3 given his connection to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol and efforts to block certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory.
Under the ECRA, if one-fifth of the members of the House and Senate voted to object to certification of Trump’s electors on the grounds that he is ineligible to hold office, that decision could ultimately be reviewed by the Supreme Court.
“You could imagine a kind of Bush v Gore style, very, very rapid sequence of motions or petitions being filed and making their way through the court system,” said Huq. “I can imagine that happening, although I think it’s unlikely. But I suspect the Supreme Court would make short work of it.”
(WASHNIGTON) — Former Republican Rep. Liz Cheney is firing back at Donald Trump after the former president darkly suggested Cheney be put in the line of fire as he criticized her as a “war hawk.”
“This is how dictators destroy free nations. They threaten those who speak against them with death,” Cheney posted Friday on X. “We cannot entrust our country and our freedom to a petty, vindictive, cruel, unstable man who wants to be a tyrant.”
Trump attacked Cheney at an event with Tucker Carlson in battleground Arizona on Thursday night.
“She’s a radical war hawk,” Trump said of the former Wyoming congresswoman as he went after her and her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney.
“Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, okay?” Trump said. “Let’s see how she feels about it, you know, when the guns are trained on her face.”
Trump continued, “You know, they’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building saying, ‘Oh, gee, well, let’s send a — let’s send 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy.'”
The Harris campaign called Trump saying “nine barrels” a reference to a traditional nine-gun “firing squad.”
Cheney, a Republican but a vocal critic of Trump over his behavior after the 2020 election and on Jan. 6, 2021, has endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election.
While campaigning alongside Harris, Cheney cast Trump as a danger to democracy and the Constitution.
“We see it on a daily basis, somebody who was willing to use violence in order to attempt to seize power, to stay in power, someone who represents unrecoverable catastrophe, frankly, in my view, and we have to do everything possible to ensure that he’s not reelected,” Cheney told ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl on ABC’s “This Week” earlier this fall after publicly backing Harris.
Trump’s remarks against Cheney are the latest in a string of increasingly dark and violent campaign rhetoric.
The former president doubled down on his “enemy from within” language after he previously suggested Democrats are more of a threat to the U.S. than top foreign adversaries such as China and Russia when it comes to the 2024 election.
“We do have an enemy from within,” he told Carlson on Thursday. “We have some very bad people, and those people are also very dangerous. They would like to take down our country. They’d like to have our country be a nice communist country or a fascist in any way they can. And we have to be careful of that.”
Harris campaign senior adviser Ian Sams responded to Trump’s comments during an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Friday, during which he called the former president “all-consumed by his grievances.”
“I mean, think about the contrast between these two candidates,” Sams said. “You have Donald Trump who is talking about sending a prominent Republican to the firing squad, and you have Vice President Harris talking about sending one to her Cabinet. This is the difference in this race.”
Karoline Leavitt, Trump’s spokesperson, claimed on Friday Trump’s words were being taken out of context.
“President Trump was CLEARLY explaining that warmongers like Liz Cheney are very quick to start wars and send other Americans to fight them, rather than go into combat themselves,” Leavitt wrote on X.
ABC News’ Lalee Ibssa, Soorin Kim, Kelsey Walsh and Oren Oppenheim contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — There is roughly a month left to go in the 2024 presidential race, yet Donald Trump has been ramping up his rhetoric to possibly challenge the outcome.
For months, he’s accused Democrats of cheating, threatened to prosecute election workers and falsely claimed noncitizens are being allowed in the country to cast ballots.
Trump’s also now telling his supporters that if he loses in November, it will be the country’s “last election” — the latest dark comment in his increasingly bleak and dystopian campaign rhetoric.
Asked for comment on his remarks, the Trump campaign’s national press secretary Karoline Leavitt told ABC News: “President Trump has always stated we need free and fair elections, or we won’t have a country.”
Here’s a closer look at what Trump has said to supporters on the trail in an apparent effort to sow doubt on the voting process.
Trump falsely accuses Democrats of cheating
“They cheat. That’s all they want to do is cheat. And when you see this, it’s the only way they’re gonna win,” Trump said at a rally in Wisconsin on Oct. 6. “And we can’t let that happen and we can’t let it happen again. We’re going to have no country.”
Trump’s claims that Democrats cheated in the previous election or are doing so in this race are baseless.
Trump’s allegations of fraud in the 2020 election were debunked by his own administration officials, legal challenges failed in the courts and recounts or audits conducted in narrowly-decided swing states all affirmed President Joe Biden’s victory.
In this same vein, he’s also accused Democrats of staging “coup” when Biden dropped out and Harris succeeded him. Harris received 99% of the delegate votes in the Democratic National Committee’s virtual roll call vote after Biden exited the race.
Top officials in key battleground states have said they are confident in the integrity of this election. Many have testified on Capitol Hill or at conferences on the steps they’ve taken to boost voter confidence and make the process more transparent.
The Pennsylvania Department of State, noting it conducts two audits after every election, told ABC News it was “confident in the integrity of county officials and election administrators across the Commonwealth, despite irresponsible statements that are not based in fact or supported by evidence.”
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger recently reiterated that the state’s elections are “secure.” Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said “every valid vote will count, the election will be secure, the results will be accurate. Just like in 2020.”
Trump threatens to prosecute election workers if elected
In a post on his conservative social media site last month, Trump said if he is back in the White House, he will prosecute anyone he deems was involved in “unscrupulous behavior” in the 2024 election.
“It was a Disgrace to our Nation!” he wrote of the 2020 election. “Therefore, the 2024 Election, where Votes have just started being cast, will be under the closest professional scrutiny and, WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again.”
The prosecutions, he said, would extend to lawyers, donors, political operatives and election officials.
Election officials and experts told ABC News that Trump’s comments were “dangerous” given the heightened threat environment for election administrators and poll workers.
Trump falsely claims illegal immigrants are voting en masse
“Our elections are bad,” Trump said during the ABC News presidential debate on Sept. 10. “And a lot of these illegal immigrants coming in, they’re trying to get them to vote. They can’t even speak English. They don’t even know what country they’re in practically. And these people are trying to get them to vote. And that’s why they’re allowing them to come into our country.”
Noncitizen voting in federal elections is already illegal, and recorded instances of undocumented immigrants casting ballots are incredibly rare, according to officials and studies.
The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, has recorded about two-dozen instances where noncitizens were penalized for voting between 2003 and 2023. Over that period of time, the foundation found just 1,500 proven instances of overall voter fraud despite billions of votes being cast.
The Brennan Center, following the 2016 general election, also found noncitizen voting to be virtually nonexistent. The center reported that election officials who oversaw the tabulation of 23.5 million votes across 42 jurisdictions referred only an estimated 30 incidents of suspected noncitizen voting for further investigation or prosecution — or 0.0001%.
Trump’s mixed messaging on mail-in ballots
Trump’s messaging on mail-in voting has been incredibly mixed. At times, he’s encouraged his supporters to vote by that method and in any other way possible — and voted himself by mail in 2020. Other times, however, he’s pushed a narrative that mail-in ballots are “corrupt” or not as secure.
“The elections are so screwed up. We have to get back in and we have to change it all,” Trump falsely said during a rally in Pennsylvania this past summer. “We want to go to paper ballots. We want to go to same-day voting. We want to go to citizenship papers. And we want to go to voter ID. It’s very simple. We want to get rid of mail-in voting.”
There are a number of safeguards in place to protect the voting process, including mail-in voting, according to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. The agency has set out to combat misinformation about elections on its website.
Trump’s also targeted the U.S. Postal Service, claiming the agency may not be prepared for the election — which prompted significant pushback from Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who flatly said such comments are “wrong.”
More recently, Trump amplified false claims that a significant percentage of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania (considered a key state for both campaigns) were “fraudulent.” Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro pushed back that mail ballots hadn’t been sent out yet when Trump made that claim and that the state conducts two audits after each election to ensure results are legitimate.
Trump still won’t accept he lost 2020 election
Trump continues to claim that the 2020 was stolen from him. His running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, and House Speaker Mike Johnson, the top Republican on Capitol Hill, have also recently declined to say Trump lost that election.
“We won, we won, we did win,” Trump falsely told rallygoers in Michigan on Oct. 3. “It was a rigged election.”
President Biden recently stressed he believed the election would be “free and fair” but voiced worry it would not be “peaceful.” The concern, he said, came from Trump and Vance’s recent comments.
“They haven’t even accepted the outcome of the last election. So, I am concerned about what they’re going to do,” Biden said on Oct. 4.
At times, Trump and members of his campaign have said he will accept the 2024 results so long as it is a free and fair election.
“If it’s a fair and legal and good election, absolutely,” he said during the CNN presidential debate, declining to outrightly say he would accept the outcome.
That didn’t stop him, however, from challenging the 2020 election results despite no evidence of widespread fraud or wrongdoing.
ABC News’ Soorin Kim, Lalee Ibssa and Kelsey Walsh contributed to this report.
