Here are the steps Republicans will use to stain and subvert the upcoming elections.
Dear Editor,
Will the 2026 Midterm elections be conducted in a “free and fair” manner? Could they be compromised in some fashion? Yes, but how?
Step One: Mr. Trump will declare, without verifiable evidence, that voter fraud will take place during said elections in Blue states. He signs an Executive Order limiting mail-in voting.
Step Two: Legislators in some Red states will promulgate creative laws to allow the “redrawing” of congressional district maps, to “gain” additional U.S. House of Representatives seats.
Step Three: Given unverified voter fraud allegations, the Department of Justice will instruct the FBI to initiate criminal/civil court proceedings against Blue states suspected of perpetrating such fraud.
Step Four: Again, based upon voter fraud allegations, the Department of Homeland Security will deploy ICE agents to large cities in Blue states to monitor, patrol, question, and detain registered voters “deemed suspicious.”
Step Five: Republican members of Congress will be instructed to promulgate new laws and statues designed to prevent full participation by all citizens eligible to vote, by introducing VOTER ID requirements, eliminating mail-in ballots, etc..
Step Six: Both the Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the CIA will declare evidence of foreign government interference with voting machines in Blue states and will impound said machines until a thorough investigation has been conducted. The election results will, therefore, be postponed until further notice.
Mr. Trump has installed loyal sycophants in all of the agencies cited above, who are more than willing to subvert “free and fair” elections taking place especially in Blue states.
WARNING, free and fair Midterm elections may not take place in 2026.
John M. Mishler Harpswell, ME
About the author ~
John M. Mishler was a former Associate Vice Chancellor for Research and Professor of Basic Life Sciences, Medicine, and Pharmacology at the University of Missouri. He currently resides in Harpswell, Maine.
Seven states are moving to restrict armed federal agents from being near polling places after the White House wouldn't rule out ICE presence at voting sites. New Mexico's new law goes beyond existing federal restrictions, allowing voters and election workers to sue.
URBANA - Tomorrow is election day in Illinois. The top order for Republican voters is choosing who to challenge JB Pritzker's bid for a third term as Illinois governor. Meanwhile, across the country some states are worry that armed federal agents or military troops may be deployed at polling places as a tool of intimidation by the Trump administration.
Not sitting on their hands, New Mexico just became the first state to pass a law specifically blocking armed federal personnel from hanging around polling sites. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed Senate Bill 264, which prohibits armed members of the U.S. military or other federal agents from being stationed at polling places, nearby parking areas, or within 50 feet of ballot drop boxes.
And New Mexico isn't acting solo. Lawmakers in California, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia and Washington are all kicking around similar proposals. The common thread? Keeping federal immigration enforcement away from voting sites.
So what sparked all this? Partly it's comments from former Trump adviser Steve Bannon suggesting immigration officers could be posted near polling places. When reporters pressed White House press secretary Karolina Leavitt on whether ICE agents might show up at voting locations, she wouldn't rule it out.
Federal officials have pushed back on those concerns. Leaders from ICE and U.S. Border Patrol told Congress they have zero plans to send officers to polling sites, and a Department of Homeland Security official later said claims about immigration agents being assigned to polls were flat-out wrong.
Still, state lawmakers aren't taking any chances. They want legal protections locked in before future elections roll around.
Here's the thing: federal law already restricts this kind of activity. A post-Civil War statute generally bans the military or armed personnel from stationing themselves at polling places, except in rare cases like responding to an armed threat. Plus, the Constitution puts states in charge of running elections, not the federal government.
New Mexico's law takes it further. Beyond restricting armed federal personnel, it lets voters, election workers and prosecutors file civil lawsuits if they believe intimidation or obstruction happened at a polling location. Courts can slap violators with fines up to $50,000.
The debate also reflects bigger fights between some states and the Trump administration over election policy. The administration has backed proposals to change voting procedures nationwide, including requiring additional documentation to vote in federal elections and potentially limiting mail-in ballots.
At the heart of it all is voter intimidation. Federal law already prohibits anyone from intimidating, threatening or coercing someone to mess with their right to vote.
Election officials say intimidation comes in many forms: aggressively questioning voters about citizenship or eligibility to scare them off, pretending to be an election official, spreading false information about voter requirements, or targeting voters with harassment—especially around language barriers or ID rules.
Actual incidents of voter intimidation are pretty rare, election administrators say. But the mere perception that voters might run into armed personnel at polling sites could keep people from showing up to vote.
Supporters of these new state laws argue clear restrictions protect voters and reinforce states' authority over elections. Critics say federal agencies have already promised not to deploy officers to polling places, making the extra legislation unnecessary.
Related articles to read:
New Mexico Senate Bill 264 polling place restrictions, states banning federal agents at voting sites 2026, voter intimidation laws ICE immigration enforcement, Trump administration election policy state pushback
Voters in most of the state’s counties can cast their vote in the March primary as soon as Feb. 5 at their local election authority. Chicago and suburban Cook County offer early voting beginning between Feb. 12 and March 2, depending on where you live.
by Jenna Schweikert & UIS Public Affairs Reporting
Capitol News Illinois
Capitol News Illinois has launched its revamped 2026 Election Guide to coincide with the opening of early voting throughout much of the state.
The guide has a rundown of key dates, information on how to register and vote early, and a lookup tool to put voters in touch with their local election authority. It also links to our coverage of the various races for statewide office.
The guide launched this week to coincide with early voting opening on Feb. 5 for the March 17 primary in most of the state, outside of Cook County. Early voting kicks off on Feb. 12 in downtown Chicago and either Feb. 18 or March 2 in suburban Cook County, depending on where you live. Early voting for all jurisdictions ends on March 16.
Most early voting takes place at the local election authority’s offices, which for most residents is their county clerk’s office. Some churches, libraries, colleges and universities and other government buildings are also offering early voting. Voters can find local polling locations and hours at the Illinois State Board of Elections website.
Registration is also open at most polling locations through Feb. 17. Grace period registration, available at some polling locations, opens Feb. 18 and closes on Election Day, March 17.
Registration is also open online at ova.elections.il.gov until March 1 and will reopen on March 19.
Registration identification
Any voter who needs to register for the first time or file an address change must present two forms of ID, one of which shows the voter's current address.
Valid forms of identification include work, school, state and military ID, passports and drivers licenses, leases and mortgages, utility bills, vehicle registration, credit and debit cards and insurance cards.
Voters who do not present a valid form of ID if needed can cast a provisional ballot and present ID to the election authority by March 24.
ID requirements vary at polling locations, but election authorities recommend bringing at least one form of identification in case of any questions.
Mail-in ballots
Mail-in ballots will also be sent to voters who’ve requested them beginning Feb. 5. The last day to request a mail-in ballot is March 12.
Election authorities will also accept mail ballots delivered by hand, and some have drop boxes where ballots can be delivered. Voters who requested a mail-in ballot can still vote in person but must surrender the mailed ballot before doing so.
Polls will be open 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Election Day. If voters are in line before the polls close, they are guaranteed a chance to vote.
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
Lower courts ruled downstate Republican representative Bost lacked standing to sue. It’s not clear when the nation’s high court will hear Bost’s case. The court is scheduled to begin hearing oral arguments in October.
by Ben Szalinski
Capitol News Illinois
SPRINGFIELD - The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear an appeal on a lawsuit led by Illinois Republican U.S. Rep. Mike Bost challenging Illinois’ mail-in voting law.
Bost and a pair of Illinois primary delegates for President Donald Trump sued the Illinois State Board of Elections in 2022, arguing that the state’s law allowing mail-in ballots to be counted after Election Day violates the federal law establishing an “Election Day.” Both a lower federal trial court and federal appeals court have ruled Bost lacked standing to sue.
The Supreme Court said its ruling will focus on whether Bost, of Murphysboro, in his role as a political candidate has legal grounds to sue over a state’s election law, rather than if Illinois’ mail-in voting law is legal, because the appeal challenges lower court rulings that Bost did not legal grounds to sue.
Photo: Capitol News Illinois/Peter Hancock
U.S. Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican, speaks to reporters in Milwaukee following an event with Illinois Republicans during the Republican National Convention in July 2024.
A favorable ruling for Bost by the Supreme Court could force lower courts to issue a ruling about Illinois’ law.
“With the American people’s confidence in our elections at a discouraging low point, it’s more important than ever we work to restore their trust,” Bost said in a statement. “I believe a big part of that effort is ensuring all votes are tallied by Election Day, not days or weeks later. I am thankful the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear my appeal of Illinois’ election law.”
Judicial Watch argues costs for campaigns to monitor ballot counting beyond Election Day constitute harm to candidates for public office that must be addressed by the court.
It’s not clear when the nation’s high court will hear Bost’s case. The court is scheduled to begin hearing oral arguments in October.
Under Illinois law, ballots postmarked by Election Day can be counted as late as 14 days after the election as they arrive at local election offices. Bost’s case argues this violates the federal law establishing Election Day by allowing votes to arrive and be counted for two weeks after the polls close.
After the unfavorable lower court rulings, Judicial Watch kept the fight going to the U.S. Supreme Court after appealing in November. The conservative legal group cited conflicting rulings on mail-in voting in other states and said Bost’s case is “an ideal vehicle” for the nation’s high court to decide whether ballots can be counted after Election Day.
The filing cited numerous cases from 2020 challenging election laws and outcomes, some of which Judicial Watch was a part of, in efforts to block the counting of mail-in ballots.
“It is an injustice that the courts would deny a federal candidate the ability to challenge an election provision that could lead to illegal votes being cast and counted for two weeks after Election Day,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement.
Judicial Watch argues costs for campaigns to monitor ballot counting beyond Election Day constitute harm to candidates for public office that must be addressed by the court. But the Illinois State Board of Elections via the attorney general’s office argued Judicial Watch fails to show Bost negatively suffered because of Illinois’ law, and Bost’s case would not be the right case for the court to use to review mail-in voting laws.
Winning elections has not been a problem for Bost.
“Petitioners have never advanced any allegations that Illinois’s ballot receipt deadline might materially impact their likelihood of prevailing in any election,” the board argued.
In a response filing to the board’s request for the court to dismiss the case, Judicial Watch argued the Board of Elections has warned ahead of elections that apparent leads in vote totals can change as late-arriving ballots are counted, meaning election results can change negatively for Bost.
But the State Board of Elections argued Illinois’ mail-in voting law doesn’t directly regulate candidates.
“Illinois’s ballot receipt deadline does not regulate petitioners directly as political candidates; it simply recognizes the reality that ballots cast by mail may be delayed,” the board argued.
Winning elections has not been a problem for Bost. He has represented the 12th Congressional District in southern Illinois since 2015 and was reelected in 2024 with nearly 75% of the vote. His district did change slightly in redistricting after the 2020 census.
Judicial Watch said it worried “illegal votes could diminish his margin of victory” and make it appear that he is growing more unpopular with his constituents. The organization also argued Bost filed this case to preemptively correct perceived issues with the vote by mail law.
Republicans in Illinois and at the national level embraced mail-in voting in the 2024 election cycle after pushing back against it in recent years. The Illinois Republican Party joined the Republican National Committee’s “bank your vote” initiative, which encouraged reliable Republican voters to vote early or by mail so campaign resources could be focused on turning out people who were on the fence about voting or who were undecided.
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
CHICAGO - On Tuesday, March 25, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the national mail voter registration form to require documentary proof of citizenship, such as a passport, to register to vote.
The order threatens to withhold federal funding from states that count mail ballots received after Election Day, which is permitted under Illinois law. Overall, the executive order attempts to overhaul federal elections by making it harder for Americans to vote through unnecessary procedures verifying citizenship status and voting eligibility. The E.O. also affects uniformed and overseas voters' ability to cast their ballots in an election.
The American Civil Liberties Union immediately condemned the order on Tuesday, saying it would disenfranchise millions of eligible voters and make the process more cumbersome. The ACLU said in a statement, "This directive represents a significant overreach of executive power and poses a direct threat to the fundamental right to vote."
Around the nation, other voting rights advocate groups voiced their disapproval. The League of Women Voters of Illinois and the ACLU of Illinois released the following joint statement:
As organizations who have worked tirelessly to advance and expand access to the ballot across Illinois for many years, we condemn the President’s blatant overreach aimed at changing the progress we have made in our state. Donald Trump would disenfranchise millions of eligible voters – based on the lie that non-citizens are voting in large numbers. This executive order – like so many of Trump’s efforts – is blatantly illegal and attempts to substitute the conspiracy theories of the Trump White House for good policy measures we have adopted in Illinois.
With less than a week before voters across the State of Illinois go to the ballot box in critical important elections, no one should be confused or misled: the President’s order does not impact the ability of people to vote by mail or register on election day in our state for these elections. We encourage everyone who is eligible to participate and vote for candidates who reflect their values in these important local elections.
We encourage any voters with questions to call the non-partisan Election Protection hotline at 866-OUR-VOTE (English), 888-VE-Y-VOTA (Spanish), 888-API-VOTE (Asian languages), or 844-YALLA-US (Arabic).
"President Trump's executive order attempting to require documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration and restrict the acceptance of mail-in ballots received after Election Day, among other measures, is a blatant overreach that threatens to disenfranchise tens of millions of eligible voters," Sophia Lin Lakin, the director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project. "This measure will no doubt disproportionately impact historically-excluded communities, including voters of color, naturalized citizens, people with disabilities, and the elderly, by pushing unnecessary barriers to the fundamental right to vote. We will do everything in our power to stop this unconstitutional attack on the right to vote to ensure that every eligible American can participate in our democracy. We will see President Trump in court."
The Order directs the Attorney General to prohibit states from counting mail ballots received after Election Day in elections for President, U.S. Senate, and U.S. House. States that do not comply with the executive order would be subject to funding cuts by Election Assistance Commission.
The executive order states, after citing examples of election procedures in other countries, that "Free, fair, and honest elections unmarred by fraud, errors, or suspicion are fundamental to maintaining our constitutional Republic. The right of American citizens to have their votes properly counted and tabulated, without illegal dilution, is vital to determining the rightful winner of an election."
Past audits and studies have shown that cases of voter fraud in American elections are rare.
President Trump's order requires states to remove noncitizens from voter rolls. Federal agencies must share data with states, such as immigration and Social Security records, to facilitate states checking voter eligibility. It also insists that states and federal agencies share data to prosecute election crimes, potentially violating individual privacy. The order grants federal agencies, including the head of the Department of Government Efficiency team, access to check state rolls "for consistency with Federal requirements."
Another provision states that when submitting the national mail voter registration form to register or update their information, the only acceptable proof of citizenship are a passport or a REAL ID, military ID, or other valid government ID indicating citizenship. Only about half of Americans have a U.S. passport, and currently, only five states—Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Vermont, and Washington—offer enhanced driver's licenses that show proof of citizenship.
The order also authorizes the Department of Homeland Security and the DOGE Administrator to review each state’s voter registration list for "consistency with Federal requirements." As part of this requirement, the E.O. allows DHS and DOGE to subpoena state records at their discretion.
While civil liberties and voting rights groups mobilize, many legal experts argue that President Trump lacks the authority through the use of an executive order to make such changes, asserting that the order violates existing federal voting statutes.
URBANA - As election season approaches, understanding the voting process in Illinois is crucial for making informed choices. The state takes significant measures to ensure that voting and ballot counting systems are secure, reliable, and transparent.
Election officials in Illinois regularly conduct tests on voting and ballot counting machines, performing “logic and accuracy” tests to confirm that votes for every candidate and issue on the ballot are counted correctly. These tests are standard practice across almost all states, aimed at preserving the integrity of the electoral process.
In Illinois, all voting systems must be certified by the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) or tested by an EAC-accredited Voting System Test Laboratory before use. The state's ballot handling procedures are designed to protect against both intentional and unintentional ballot destruction, ensuring the integrity of both mail-in and in-person voting.
Prior to and following elections, Illinois conducts thorough testing of voting equipment and ballot counting processes, which are open for public observation. Post-election audits, including risk-limiting audits, are also performed to verify that vote counts are accurate, reinforcing public trust in the results.
"Election officials implement ballot processing and tabulation safeguards designed to ensure each ballot cast in the election can be correctly counted," explained Becky Simon, President of the League of Women Voters of Illinois. "These safeguards include chain of custody procedures, auditable logging requirements, and canvass processes. Illinois safeguards mail ballots by verifying signatures, tracking barcodes, and setting clear chains of custody for all ballots."
Amidst these safeguards, voters should remain vigilant against false claims regarding election results. Disinformation can spread quickly, often fueled by individuals seeking to undermine confidence in the democratic process. If you encounter misleading information online, you can report it at reportdisinfo.org. It is essential to respect all votes cast, regardless of the outcome.
Every election, organizations like the League of Women Voters play a pivotal role in equipping voters with essential information. By sponsoring candidate forums and providing resources like IllinoisVoterGuide.org, they help ensure that voters are prepared to make their voices heard.
In the lead-up to elections, it’s common for voters to receive calls and texts from political groups, urging them to support specific candidates or measures. However, it is important to be aware of potential scams that exploit these tactics. Here are some red flags to watch for:
Be cautious if a caller or texter requests personal information, such as your Social Security number. They may falsely claim you can vote early by phone or fix nonexistent errors in your voter registration.
Avoid sharing credit card or financial information over the phone, especially if the caller offers seemingly free gifts in exchange for participation in surveys.
If asked to donate over the phone, verify the legitimacy of the request by asking for a website where you can find more information.
Being informed and vigilant is key to participating in a secure electoral process. As voters in Illinois prepare for the upcoming elections, knowing how to navigate the system and protect oneself against misinformation and scams is more important than ever.
Keywords: Voting in Illinois, Election integrity, Ballot counting process, Voter information, Election disinformation, Protect against election scams
URBANA - Early voting is now open county-wide for the 2024 election in Champaign County. Voters can cast their ballots at any designated early voting locations in the county before Election Day. You can vote at ANY polling place, including your home polling place, regardless of where you live in the county.
Upon arrival, check in with Election Judges, and follow the procedure to cast your ballot. Voters do not need to show ID unless they have updated their voter registration or their signature does not match the records on file.
Before you head over to vote, look up what will be on your ballot and then research the candidates and issues. You are allowed to take a list of candidates you want to vote for into the booth with you. Learn more about researching your ballot and the candidates.
In case of any issues while voting, such as filling in the ballot incorrectly, Election Judges will be available to assist with a replacement ballot. Once your ballot is submitted, it cannot be rescinded.
Early voting is available at the locations and times below.
Brookens Administrative Center Gymnasium
1776 E Washington Street, Urbana, IL 61802:
October 7th – October 11th
October 14th – October 18th
Monday-Friday, 8:30AM – 4:30PM
Monday, October 21st – Monday, November 4th
Monday – Friday: 8:30AM – 4:30PM
Saturday, 9:00AM – 4:00PM
Sunday, 10:00AM – 4:00PM
Additional Early Voting Sites
Open October 21st, 2024 to November 4th, 2024
Days / Hours:
Monday – Friday, 11:00AM – 6:00PM
Saturday, 10:00AM – 4:00PM
Sunday, 1:00PM – 4:00PM
Champaign Public Library
200 W Green Street, Champaign, 61820
Illini Union
1401 W Green Street, Urbana, 61801
Lake of the Woods Pavilion
109 S Lake of the Woods Road, Mahomet, 61853
Leonhard Recreation Center
2307 W Sangamon Drive, Champaign, 61821
Meadowbrook Community Church
1902 S Duncan Road, Champaign, 61821
Parkland College
Building E – 2400 W Bradley Avenue, Champaign, 61821
Prince of Peace Lutheran Church
802 E Douglas, St. Joseph, 61873
Rantoul Youth Center
1306 Country Club Lane, Rantoul, 61866
Savoy Recreation Center
402 W Graham Drive, Savoy 61874
The Church of The Living God
312 E Bradley Avenue, Champaign 61820
Tolono Public Library
111 E Main Street, Tolono 61880
Voting, Early Voting in Champaign County, Election 2024
CHICAGO - Illinois voters have several ways to cast their ballot in the upcoming election, whether by mail, in person or early voting.
The Illinois Policy Institute, a political watchdog, reported 2022's general election produced the second-highest voter turnout in a midterm year in 25 years.
Matt Dietrich, public information officer for the Illinois State Board of Elections, wants voters to observe important deadlines for registering to vote. For unregistered voters, he advised there is still time to change their status.
"Voter registration never closes until the polls close on Election Day," Dietrich pointed out. "You can get registered from now right up through and even on November 5th. The online voter registration stays open until 11:59 pm, October 20th."
Voter inquiries can be answered through an online portal on the board's website, elections.il.gov.
Beginning Oct. 9, unregistered voters wanting in-person voting can do so at any early voting location. Dietrich added they will have to cast their early vote ballot at the time of registration.
Two forms of verifiable identification are needed, one which reflects who you are and the other, your voting residence. If you have recently moved to Illinois from another state, an unexpired out-of-state driver's license is accepted. A piece of government mail sent to your residence, a bank statement, or a pay stub with your voting residence is also sufficient.
Another popular choice among Illinoisans is to vote by mail. There was a "slight uptick of 10%," Dietrich reported, even before the pandemic in 2020. He added 2 million people tried it for the first time and deemed the process as safe, convenient and trackable.
"We and all the local election authorities really pushed voting by mail for safety reasons," Dietrich explained. "In the end, we had one-third of the total votes in 2020, cast by mail, about one-third cast early in person and one-third cast on Election Day in person."
Dietrich said in 2022, voting by mail slightly exceeded the number of voters who were voting early in person. He recommends residents wanting to cast mail-in ballots request their ballot far before the Oct. 31 deadline.
Keywords: Illinois early voting locations, Register to vote in Illinois, Illinois mail-in ballot process
Illinois voter registration deadlines, Voting by mail in Illinois, Illinois State Board of Elections voter portal
SNS - The right to vote is legally protected from intimidation and harassment. Federal law makes it a crime to intimidate, harass, or deceive voters at home or at the polls.
Voter suppression is any attempt to prevent or discourage certain Americans from registering to vote or casting their ballot. It is any act that deliberately restricts or discourages certain groups from voting, undermining electoral fairness. You may not be threatened, coerced, frightened, assaulted, compelled, or discouraged to vote one way or another, or not to vote at all. The right to vote necessarily includes the right to be free from intimidation and harassment.
“A true democracy is where every person has the desire, the right, the knowledge, and the confidence to participate,” said Becky Simon, president of the League of Women Voters of Illinois. “We encourage you to join the League of Women Voters of Illinois in our fight to support everyone’s freedom to vote.”
After the Civil War, African Americans in the former Confederacy were able to exercise their newly won rights to vote; to run for local, state, and federal offices; and to serve on juries. These rights were given and protected by federal laws and the 14th and 15th Amendments. The laws, adopted to curtail white supremacist violence, specifically criminalized the terrorist activities of white supremacist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan and authorized the use of federal troops to protect polling stations and suppress white supremacist violence.
Over time, white supremacists found other ways to control voting in their towns, counties, and states without direct physical violence. Political parties have used five key methods to suppress voting by targeted groups: voter ID laws, gerrymandering, voter purges, felony disenfranchisement, and criminalizing voting through the arbitrary enforcement of oppressive, unfair laws.
Today, experts warn that voter suppression and intimidation trends are moving to the digital spaces, becoming embedded in technology.
"It might include robocalls and social media posts that provide incorrect information about where to vote or promote the false idea that voters' personal information or ballot choices will be shared with the government, the public, or law enforcement," wrote the League of Women Voters of Illinois in a recent statement.
The League of Women Voters of Illinois (LWVI) is fighting voter suppression and intimidation by mailing thousands of Get Out the Vote postcards, deploying nonpartisan poll watchers throughout the state, observing public testing of voting equipment, and actively fighting misinformation and disinformation.
According to the ACLU, "More than 400 anti-voter bills have been introduced in 48 states. These bills erect unnecessary barriers for people to register to vote, vote by mail, or vote in person."
What should you do if you witness voter suppression or intimidation? Document incidents thoroughly using your phone (outside the polling place) or by taking notes. If your voter registration is denied at your polling place, you may ask a poll worker to double-check your registration, and you may still cast a provisional ballot.
The LWVI recommends that you avoid engaging with groups or individuals who are actively trying to intimidation fellow voters and immediately reported to the Illinois State Board of Elections at 217-782-4141 or the Election Protection Hotline:
English: 866-OUR-VOTE (866-687-8683)
Spanish: 888-VE-Y-VOTA (888-839-8682)
Asian Languages: 888-API-VOTE (888-274-8683)
Arabic: 844-YALLA-US (844-925-5287)
Could organizations use artificial intelligence language models such as ChatGPT to induce voters to behave in specific ways?
Sen. Josh Hawley asked OpenAI CEO Sam Altman this question in a May 16, 2023, U.S. Senate hearing on artificial intelligence. Altman replied that he was indeed concerned that some people might use language models to manipulate, persuade and engage in one-on-one interactions with voters.
Altman did not elaborate, but he might have had something like this scenario in mind. Imagine that soon, political technologists develop a machine called Clogger – a political campaign in a black box. Clogger relentlessly pursues just one objective: to maximize the chances that its candidate – the campaign that buys the services of Clogger Inc. – prevails in an election.
While platforms like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube use forms of AI to get users to spend more time on their sites, Clogger’s AI would have a different objective: to change people’s voting behavior.
How Clogger would work
As a political scientist and a legal scholar who study the intersection of technology and democracy, we believe that something like Clogger could use automation to dramatically increase the scale and potentially the effectiveness of behavior manipulation and microtargeting techniques that political campaigns have used since the early 2000s. Just as advertisers use your browsing and social media history to individually target commercial and political ads now, Clogger would pay attention to you – and hundreds of millions of other voters – individually.
It would offer three advances over the current state-of-the-art algorithmic behavior manipulation. First, its language model would generate messages — texts, social media and email, perhaps including images and videos — tailored to you personally. Whereas advertisers strategically place a relatively small number of ads, language models such as ChatGPT can generate countless unique messages for you personally – and millions for others – over the course of a campaign.
Illustration: Amber/Pixabay
Second, Clogger would use a technique called reinforcement learning to generate a succession of messages that become increasingly more likely to change your vote. Reinforcement learning is a machine-learning, trial-and-error approach in which the computer takes actions and gets feedback about which work better in order to learn how to accomplish an objective. Machines that can play Go, Chess and many video games better than any human have used reinforcement learning.
Third, over the course of a campaign, Clogger’s messages could evolve in order to take into account your responses to the machine’s prior dispatches and what it has learned about changing others’ minds. Clogger would be able to carry on dynamic “conversations” with you – and millions of other people – over time. Clogger’s messages would be similar to ads that follow you across different websites and social media.
The nature of AI
Three more features – or bugs – are worth noting.
First, the messages that Clogger sends may or may not be political in content. The machine’s only goal is to maximize vote share, and it would likely devise strategies for achieving this goal that no human campaigner would have thought of.
One possibility is sending likely opponent voters information about nonpolitical passions that they have in sports or entertainment to bury the political messaging they receive. Another possibility is sending off-putting messages – for example incontinence advertisements – timed to coincide with opponents’ messaging. And another is manipulating voters’ social media friend groups to give the sense that their social circles support its candidate.
Second, Clogger has no regard for truth. Indeed, it has no way of knowing what is true or false. Language model “hallucinations” are not a problem for this machine because its objective is to change your vote, not to provide accurate information.
If the Republican presidential campaign were to deploy Clogger in 2024, the Democratic campaign would likely be compelled to respond in kind, perhaps with a similar machine. Call it Dogger. If the campaign managers thought that these machines were effective, the presidential contest might well come down to Clogger vs. Dogger, and the winner would be the client of the more effective machine.
Photo: Kp Yamu Jayanath/Pixabay
In the future, politicians who win their seats into office will do so only because they have access to the best artificial intelligence technology.
Political scientists and pundits would have much to say about why one or the other AI prevailed, but likely no one would really know. The president will have been elected not because his or her policy proposals or political ideas persuaded more Americans, but because he or she had the more effective AI. The content that won the day would have come from an AI focused solely on victory, with no political ideas of its own, rather than from candidates or parties.
In this very important sense, a machine would have won the election rather than a person. The election would no longer be democratic, even though all of the ordinary activities of democracy – the speeches, the ads, the messages, the voting and the counting of votes – will have occurred.
The AI-elected president could then go one of two ways. He or she could use the mantle of election to pursue Republican or Democratic party policies. But because the party ideas may have had little to do with why people voted the way that they did – Clogger and Dogger don’t care about policy views – the president’s actions would not necessarily reflect the will of the voters. Voters would have been manipulated by the AI rather than freely choosing their political leaders and policies.
Another path is for the president to pursue the messages, behaviors and policies that the machine predicts will maximize the chances of reelection. On this path, the president would have no particular platform or agenda beyond maintaining power. The president’s actions, guided by Clogger, would be those most likely to manipulate voters rather than serve their genuine interests or even the president’s own ideology.
Avoiding Clogocracy
It would be possible to avoid AI election manipulation if candidates, campaigns and consultants all forswore the use of such political AI. We believe that is unlikely. If politically effective black boxes were developed, the temptation to use them would be almost irresistible. Indeed, political consultants might well see using these tools as required by their professional responsibility to help their candidates win. And once one candidate uses such an effective tool, the opponents could hardly be expected to resist by disarming unilaterally.
Enhanced privacy protection would help. Clogger would depend on access to vast amounts of personal data in order to target individuals, craft messages tailored to persuade or manipulate them, and track and retarget them over the course of a campaign. Every bit of that information that companies or policymakers deny the machine would make it less effective.
Strong data privacy laws could help steer AI away from being manipulative.
Another solution lies with elections commissions. They could try to ban or severely regulate these machines. There’s a fierce debate about whether such “replicant” speech, even if it’s political in nature, can be regulated. The U.S.’s extreme free speech tradition leads many leading academics to say it cannot.
But there is no reason to automatically extend the First Amendment’s protection to the product of these machines. The nation might well choose to give machines rights, but that should be a decision grounded in the challenges of today, not the misplaced assumption that James Madison’s views in 1789 were intended to apply to AI.
European Union regulators are moving in this direction. Policymakers revised the European Parliament’s draft of its Artificial Intelligence Act to designate “AI systems to influence voters in campaigns” as “high risk” and subject to regulatory scrutiny.
One constitutionally safer, if smaller, step, already adopted in part by European internet regulators and in California, is to prohibit bots from passing themselves off as people. For example, regulation might require that campaign messages come with disclaimers when the content they contain is generated by machines rather than humans.
This would be like the advertising disclaimer requirements – “Paid for by the Sam Jones for Congress Committee” – but modified to reflect its AI origin: “This AI-generated ad was paid for by the Sam Jones for Congress Committee.” A stronger version could require: “This AI-generated message is being sent to you by the Sam Jones for Congress Committee because Clogger has predicted that doing so will increase your chances of voting for Sam Jones by 0.0002%.” At the very least, we believe voters deserve to know when it is a bot speaking to them, and they should know why, as well.
The possibility of a system like Clogger shows that the path toward human collective disempowerment may not require some superhuman artificial general intelligence. It might just require overeager campaigners and consultants who have powerful new tools that can effectively push millions of people’s many buttons.
STACKER - As Election Day rapidly approaches, the presidential race between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump is in a dead heat. National polls as of early September show Harris at least 3 percentage points above Trump. As of Sept. 11, Harris leads Trump in three of the seven battleground states, giving Harris the advantage to win the election. Trump must secure a few more to solidify his path to 270 electoral votes.
Three independent and third-party candidates remain in the race, as well: Justice for All candidate Cornel West, polling at less than 1% nationally; Libertarian candidate Chase Oliver, with just over 1% support; and third-time Green Party candidate Jill Stein, who is fending off ballot challenges from the Democratic Party and accusations that her campaign is a vote spoiler, polling at about 1% as of late August.
Third-party candidates have appeared throughout the history of American politics, though most have been unable to challenge the dominance of the two-party system in a meaningful way. Stacker examined data from the Federal Election Commission, Pew Research Center, and other sources to explore the history of third-party candidates in U.S. presidential elections.
In 1892, Populist Party candidate James B. Weaver, fueled by farmers' discontent, captured about 9% of the vote, demonstrating the potential of third-party movements.
Teddy Roosevelt's "Bull Moose" campaign in 1912 saw a former president defect from his party. Having just lost the Republican nomination to incumbent William Howard Taft, Roosevelt led the progressive faction of the party to form a new one and run in the general election. While he ultimately failed to win, he took about 27% of the popular vote and 88 electoral votes with him: the largest share of any third-party presidential campaign in American history. The split in Republican votes helped deliver victory to Democrat Woodrow Wilson.
Since then, many third parties have vied for the presidency. None have exceeded Roosevelt's percentage of votes in 1912.
The mid-20th century saw the emergence of parties rooted in regional and ideological divides. George Wallace's segregationist American Independent Party captured 13.5% of the vote in 1968, while Ross Perot's 1992 Independent run, driven by economic concerns, earned 19%.
More recently, foreign influence has added a new layer to third-party dynamics. Russia has been accused of using election interference tactics to support third-party candidates as a means of weakening major party contenders. Russian operatives during the 2016 election cycle attempted to boost Green Party candidate Jill Stein through social media campaigns and misinformation efforts, aiming to siphon votes from Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, according to reports released by the Senate Intelligence Committee.
During the 2024 election cycle, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. challenged President Joe Biden in the Democratic primary but eventually withdrew from the contest to campaign as an Independent in the general election. Just before Biden himself dropped out of the race on July 21, Kennedy was polling in the double digits in some national polls.
Once Vice President Kamala Harris replaced Biden at the top of the Democratic ticket, Kennedy's support plummeted. By the time he dropped out on Aug. 23 and endorsed former President Donald Trump, Kennedy was polling as low as 5%.
Photo: Quang Vu Ngoc/Pixabay
Before the presidential race reset after Biden dropped out and Harris accepted the Democratic nomination, Trump was up 3.2 percentage points. By July 24, the race between the Democratic and Republican nominees was neck and neck, with Harris and Trump essentially tied and Kennedy at 5.2%, according to national polling averages tabulated by ABC News.
The momentum continued to build for the new Harris ticket while Trump slumped and Kennedy faded. By the last night of the DNC, Harris had risen to 47.2%, Trump was down to 43.6%, and Kennedy—who dropped out the following day—was down to 4.7%.
Third-party candidates face an uphill battle
Most third-party candidates in the last 40 years have been unable to muster more than 5% of the popular vote. In 1992 and 1996, Independent candidate Ross Perot bucked the trend and got 18.9% and 8.4%, respectively.
A billionaire tech entrepreneur, Perot took his fiscally conservative and socially moderate message directly to viewers in extended infomercials he purchased on major TV networks. His straight-talking and pragmatic style, often illustrated with charts, appealed to middle-class voters. After getting nearly 19% of the popular vote in his first run (although with no electoral votes), he met the threshold to qualify for federal funding when he ran again in 1996.
Requirements for appearing on state ballots and meeting the thresholds for participation in nationally televised presidential debates represent massive hurdles for candidates operating outside the dominant two-party system. Strategic voting appeals by major parties and relentless media scrutiny also contribute to an overall dropoff in third-party support.
While third-party bids from the likes of Reform Party candidate Jesse Ventura in 1998 (as Minnesota governor) and Green Party candidate Ralph Nader in 2000 found varying degrees of success, the campaigns struggled to sustain momentum as Election Day approached. In Nader's case, however, his 97,000 votes in Florida were enough for Democrats to blame him for Bush's official victory there. Bush's razor-thin margin in that state was enough to make him president amid a recount halted by the Supreme Court.
Calls to expand beyond the two-party system grow
Despite the lack of support in national polls, many Americans look favorably upon the idea of having more political parties. Over a third want more parties to choose from, per Pew, while voter dissatisfaction with the current political status quo is at a three-decade high.
Some critics argue that the entrenched two-party system stifles competition and voter choice and is rigged in favor of the governing parties, fueling growing calls to reform or even abolish it in favor of a more inclusive, multiparty democracy.
In his 1796 Farewell Address, President George Washington cautioned against the rise of political parties and factionalism that could "become potent engines by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government."
Whether that problem should be addressed by more parties—or fewer—is for voters to decide at the ballot box.
Story editing by Tim Bruns. Additional editing by Nicole Caldwell. Copy editing by Kristen Wegrzyn.
This article is part of U.S. Democracy Day, a nationwide collaborative on Sept. 15, the International Day of Democracy, in which news organizations cover how democracy works and the threats it faces. To learn more, visit usdemocracyday.org.
by Rabbi Leor Sinai
Following the morning of Simchat Torah 5784 / October 7, 2023, when the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas launched a military invasion that included massive assaults on Israeli civilians and military outposts abutting the border of Israel and the Gaza Strip, a massive launch of over 5,000 rockets from Gaza into Israel, kidnapped over 250 Israeli citizens of all ages, and committed sexual violence and a massacre of over 1,200 innocent Israelis and visitors, within one day Jewish communities around the world began experiencing all forms of Jew-hatred including violent anti-Israel rallies across university campuses and communities.
Local government law enforcement and Jewish agencies have tracked an alarming increase in anti-Semitic incidents in the United States, as reported by the Anti-Defamation League’s Center for Antisemitism Research in its February 29, 2024. As a result of this war and dramatic rise of Jew-hatred, the Jewish community now faces existential challenges not seen since prior to the establishment of the modern nation State of Israel.
Preceding the horrific invasion of Israel and ensuing war, is the fraught political context in Israel that began in January 2023 following the establishment of Israel’s 25th Knesset (Governing Parliament). The large-scale protests across Israel in response to the government’s push for a wide-ranging judicial reform, took on an added concern and expansion following the October 7, 2023, invasion and massacre. For example, hostage families calling for a cease fire, the haredi draft exemptions—followed by the decision to draft—reservist families call for new elections, the evacuation of Israel’s north following Hezbollah’s bombardment of northern Israel, and more, all of which has raised many questions for Israelis and Global Jewry, such as the unconditional support of Israel versus supporting political agendas, as well as the existential challenges faced by both Israel and Global Jewry.
Herzl’s pitch sold us on Jewish emancipation when he stated that “…the world will be liberated by our freedom…" (Der Judenstaat, “The Jewish State”), in other words the establishment of a Jewish state would solve the world’s Jewish problem. Today we know his utopian vision of a Jewish homeland did not turn out as he had originally expected. The October 7th massacre and subsequent war proved Herzl wrong.
On October 7th, the dream became a nightmare as darkness spread all over, yet within twenty-four hours of the invasion we saw glimmers of light. Israelis, global Jewry, and our allies, chose to act. Many headed to southern Israel in support of the evacuated families and soldiers, many took part in food and clothing drives, many donated precious resources, many volunteered to help save the agricultural sector, and many of you came to physically bear witness—to be here in Israel during her greatest hour of need.
A friend and I heard about a gathering of hostage families at the Tel Aviv Museum of Art (later to be known as Hostage Square / Kikar HaHatufim) in Tel Aviv. We decided to go to the square on that first Friday evening, Erev Shabbat, to be with the families.
We lit Shabbat candles, sang Shalom Aleichem, and recited Kiddush. What we witnessed at that time was incredible, tearful, joyous and inspiring. And we have been there ever since, not having missed a single Erev Shabbat since October 7th. We pray and sing with both secular and religious Jews, with kippot and without kippot, and with non-Jews, from across Israel and the world, who come because the heart yearns for healing, unity, and hope. For us, Erev Shabbat at Hostage Square has become hallowed land, a Beit HaMiqdash, symbolizing a new covenant among people who choose life.
What was once “Never Again”, is happening again except this time around it is different. Unlike our ancestors who confronted humanity’s worse for 2,000 years, 1948 ushered in a new reality—Israel. The manifestation of the age-old dream to return and be free in our home, l’hiyot am chofshi b’artzeinu, is a game changer and we are holding on for dear life.
Together we will heal what hurts, we will repair our rifts, and we will envision better days ahead for us and for our children everywhere.
If there is anything I have learned throughout this past year of political and social turmoil, and the horrific attack of October 7th, it is not to take our existence in this world for granted, not to take the existence of Israel for granted. Israel’s existence, strength and inspiration informs our collective existence, strength, and inspiration.
My hope is that this wave of Jewish awakening leap frogs us into a movement of preaching, teaching, and role modeling selfless love. If Israel’s weakness in past destructions came because of sinat chinnam, baseless ego driven hatred, then Israel’s strength and unity comes in the form of ahavat chinnam, selfless driven acts of love, kindness and arevut, accountability for one another.
This is the great tikun of our time, the Jewish People’s modern-day revelation: Tikun Yisrael precedes Tikun Olam, healing Israel precedes healing the world. As we draw near to the 9th of Av, Am Yisrael may be an ocean apart though we stand together at the intersection of life. My hope for you, for us all, is that we choose “to be”, we choose life, and by doing so we embody the values of Kol Yisrael Arevim Zeh b’Zeh, all of Israel is responsible one for the other. Together we will heal what hurts, we will repair our rifts, and we will envision better days ahead for us and for our children everywhere.
About the author
Leor Sinai lives with his family in Tel Aviv, Israel. Originally from New York, Sinai and his family moved to Israel in 2011. Sinai is an Influencer whose interests include Education Diplomacy, Leadership Development, and Institutional Advancement. He has traveled around the world, building bridges and strategies for collaboration.
The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group, organization or oursentinel.com. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.
CHICAGO - On Tuesday, March 25, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the national mail voter registration form to require documentary proof of citizenship, such as a passport, to register to vote.
