Several county election officials across battleground states report experiencing unprecedented pressure from Trump-aligned groups ahead of November’s midterm elections. This emerging pattern mirrors tactics used following the 2020 presidential contest, raising concerns among election security experts.
In Maricopa County, Arizona, election director Scott Jarrett confirmed his office received over 300 identical emails last week demanding officials “secure the vote” through additional measures outside standard protocols. “We’ve never seen this volume of coordinated messaging before a midterm,” Jarrett told me during our phone conversation yesterday. “The language closely resembles templates circulated by national groups.”
Similar campaigns have targeted officials in Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. These efforts appear coordinated through networks established after 2020 that remain actively engaged in election administration pressure tactics.
Election security expert Lawrence Norden from the Brennan Center for Justice views these developments with alarm. “What we’re witnessing is the systematic targeting of election infrastructure through harassment and intimidation,” Norden explained. “This represents a dangerous escalation compared to previous midterm cycles.”
The pressure campaigns follow a distinct pattern. Local officials receive mass communications demanding implementation of unnecessary or legally questionable procedures. These demands frequently cite debunked claims from 2020 as justification for extraordinary measures.
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who famously resisted pressure from former President Trump to “find” votes in 2020, expressed concern about the current climate. “Our office has documented a 230% increase in threatening communications to county election boards compared to 2018,” Raffensperger noted in an official statement released Tuesday.
Philadelphia City Commissioner Al Schmidt resigned his position last year after facing death threats. “The individuals applying this pressure aren’t interested in election integrity,” Schmidt told me. “They’re creating pretexts to challenge results they don’t like.”
Department of Homeland Security officials https://www.dhs.gov/election-security have designated election infrastructure as critical since 2017. Their latest threat assessment identifies domestic misinformation as the primary risk to midterm election security.
Documents obtained through public records requests reveal coordinated efforts by several Trump-aligned organizations to recruit poll watchers specifically in Democratic-leaning precincts. Training materials from these groups, reviewed by Epochedge, instruct volunteers to document alleged irregularities using predetermined criteria.
Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson described these tactics as “a continuation of the 2020 playbook, refined and expanded.” Her office recently released guidance to local officials on managing disruptive behavior at polling locations.
The pressure extends beyond official channels. Social media monitoring by the Election Integrity Partnership has identified numerous county-level campaigns targeting specific election officials by name. These campaigns often feature personal information and inflammatory accusations.
“I’ve had strangers show up at my home,” said Jennifer Williams, a county clerk in Michigan who requested her specific county remain unidentified. “My children no longer get off the school bus at our house.”
Legal experts worry these tactics could impact the administration of upcoming elections. “When officials operate under extreme pressure or fear, it affects their ability to perform their duties,” noted Rick Hasen, election law professor at UCLA. “This creates exactly the kind of chaos that serves certain political interests.”
Congressional Democrats have pushed for increased protections for election workers, but legislation has stalled in the Senate. The Justice Department launched an Election Threats Task Force last year, but local officials report mixed results from federal intervention.
Former Republican election official Trey Grayson expressed dismay at his party’s approach. “What troubles me most is seeing fellow Republicans attacking the very systems they once championed as models of integrity,” Grayson said. “This represents a fundamental shift in approach to elections.”
The impact extends beyond political considerations. County election offices report difficulty recruiting poll workers due to safety concerns. A recent survey by the Election Assistance Commission found 45% of local election jurisdictions reporting staffing shortages ahead of November.
The pressure tactics appear concentrated in counties that could determine control of Congress. Analysis of public records requests shows targeted campaigns in just 57 counties across seven states that feature competitive congressional races.
“This isn’t about election integrity,” concluded Norden. “It’s about creating a permission structure to reject results in specific areas by preemptively casting doubt on processes.”
Despite these challenges, officials remain committed to conducting secure elections. “We’ve enhanced physical security, improved cybersecurity measures, and increased transparency,” explained Jarrett. “The irony is these pressure campaigns make us document our processes even more meticulously.”
As November approaches, the resilience of America’s decentralized election system faces its most significant midterm test in recent memory.