1/x NEW: We @statesunited spent the last 12 months tracking & researching the dangerous Election Denier movement in statewide races—the very first organization to do so. We just released an update of our Replacing The Refs report👇#SUAction
2/x Here are some findings from the report: The 2022 #MidtermElections were defined by a dangerous trend. Election Deniers ran for governor, attorney general & secretary of state. They campaigned on lies & asked Americans to trust them with the power to oversee our elections.
3/x What is an “Election Denier”? Someone who undermines our free, fair, secure elections and spread lies about the 2020 results, despite them being confirmed over and over again. But never when they win, interestingly 🙄.
4/x Why? Elections are run by the states. Your governor, attorney general & secretary of state, run elections, supervise vote counts, certify results & defend the will of the voters in court. They protect Americans’ freedom to vote—a fundamental right.
5/x American voters have sent a message to Election Deniers & democracy violators loud & clear: they believe in our elections & are tired of relentless lies & conspiracy theories. nytimes.com/2022/11/09/us/…
6/x Let’s get into the numbers. 141 Election Deniers entered races for AG, SoS, & Gov in 2022. While many were defeated in the primaries, 46 advanced to the general election. Only 15 won. That’s a 90% loss rate. statesuniteddemocracy.org/final-rtr
7/x Even though the election denialism movement failed significantly to gain new ground, some Election Deniers did win—and 1/3 of Americans will have an Election Denier overseeing their election administration.
8/x We know that one Election Denier in charge of our votes is one too many. They’re a five-alarm fire for our democracy.
9/x Your state’s Attorney General is tasked with defending the will of the voters, no matter the political outcome—as we look towards ’23 & beyond, SIX states just put an Election Denier in that position.
10/x Your Secretary of State serves as the state’s chief election official. They oversee election administration and certification— THREE states just put an Election Denier in that position.
11/x Lastly, your Governor can set the rules and certify the election results. Right now, SIX states just put an Election Denier in that position.
12/x The 2022 Midterms were about one thing for these Election Deniers: 2024. They want to oversee your vote in the 2024 presidential election. They know that changing the rules & the referees of our democracy, can change the outcome.
13/x Let me say it again, Election Denial is a LOSING strategy. They lost in all the battlegrounds. Of the 15 who won, 10 were incumbents. Election Deniers only gained 5 new seats, across 94 races. In no small part, this victory is due to the great work being done @statesunited.
14/x Why did this movement fail? @statesunited surveyed voters & found out: Election Denialism is unpopular. Swing voters really don’t like it. And, the more voters learned about Election Deniers, the less likely they were to support them. statesuniteddemocracy.org/resources/surv…
15/x Even though most of them have lost, some Election Deniers are refusing to concede their races, filing frivolous lawsuits & contests & seeking control over their state parties. The threats are persisting beyond the ballot box.
16/x In state legislatures, partisan politicians are trying to rewrite the rules of our elections. Since the 2020 election, over 200 bills have been introduced in 33 states that would interfere with nonpartisan election administration. More are on the way. cbsnews.com/news/state-leg…
17/x The threat to our democracy isn’t over; and we’re going to keep our foot on the gas. There is more work to be done. Where Election Deniers continue to be a threat, @statesunited will continue to hold them accountable. #SUAction
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
NEW: Trump’s brief opposing the emergency stay is in, and it’s wrong. All wrong.
I’ll explain why in this thread.
First, as we explain in the amicus brief that we filed on behalf of 10 former GOP law enforcement & other luminaries, Trump can't have possessory interest as to the 100+ classified docs.
I’ve reviewed the Senate proposals & have thoughts. Here’s a thread in my personal capacity. This is a first reaction so please say so if you disagree w/ any of the following.
2/x While the Senate’s conceptual ECA changes are thoughtful, on balance the execution of these changes seems on first read to be lacking. They may create greater uncertainty in the counting process & are vulnerable to manipulation. As the saying goes, the devil's in the details
3/x For example, the Senate bill fails to properly define a “failed” election. The current ECA allows states to extend their presidential elections in case of a “failed” election but does not define that term.
Yes we must take Putin’s nuke threat seriously. But I’m not inclined to lose sleep (yet). Here’s my view as a diplomat who served in EUR—very preliminarily & subject to critique
1. If he tried, his generals wouldn’t let him. Do they want their families & friends wiped out?
2. Bullies gonna bluster. But when confronted with overwhelming force they find a way to back out. It’s telling me that we’ve managed to make it through the nuclear age without a (second) nuclear conflict. In short, the doctrine of mutually assured destruction works.
3. The guy was trained as a KGB agent. He dissimulates. If there is one lesson of the era of Trump it is that pretending to be unstable can be a negotiating advantage! So I take the threat with a grain of salt for that reason as well. Size of grain TBD.
What? “Mnuchin suggests Treasury, SBA should forgo verifying how small business loans were spent“
I have an idea, how about if we don’t do that for all of the loans linked to the president’s and his family’s business partners, cronies & donors? Like... apple.news/AqtOYy4fZQq2eE…
To begin, I have signed the same/similar agreement at WH and State Dept., cleared a book of my own thru pre-pub review (repped by Brad’s partner @MarkSZaidEsq), and myself repped others doing same.
Bolton cut the process short, no question. But (2/4)
But he was being jerked around—also no question.
Ultimately, the decision will turn on whether there really is classified info (which I doubt, but will know more when I see the book)
And on whether Trump is unreasonably abusing review process (which I feel certain of)
3/4