 Welcome to American Issues Take One. I'm Tim Apachele, your host. And today's title for our show is the 2020 Election Deniers Meet the 2022 Midterm Election. Not soon will we hear from the Supreme Court, the Moore versus Harper decision, that will really determine whether or not the governor and the state court and the state constitution has a say in a state's election or whether or not the current legislature in place will have the full authority to do as they please. Then it will be a monumental decision by the Supreme Court and certainly will play very importantly to those candidates which we call election deniers if they're elected and get placed into these positions in government. So I would like to introduce my guest to talk about this topic and a few others. Today we have our special esteemed guest, Chuck Crumpton. Welcome, Chuck. We have my great co-host as always, Jay Fidel, kind of the guy that runs this place and tells people what to do all the time. And last but not least, our continued contributor and valued friend, Cynthia Leeson-Clair. Good morning, everyone. Morning, Tim. Jay, I was just kind of kidding about you telling people what to do all the time. I was just making that up. Damn, and I was going to take it seriously. Well, you should. Chuck, to you on this question, what's going to happen if the election deniers that actually won their primaries? And in some cases, thanks to the Democratic cash machine, what if these election deniers fail to win their election in the general midterm election? What do you think their strategy is or what they'll say or what they'll do? Good question. I think two things to pay attention to that might help us get a sense of what might happen. One, for those who really have solid established connections to the political support that ties directly into Trump, there will at least be a lot of noise. But the real question is, do they have connections that tie into people that can make a difference in challenging election outcomes, whether it's by street violence or by political processes to disrupt election certification? Maybe one of the things that we have not seen much of yet is whether these election deniers who can win primaries with support of Republican funding and backing and Trump backing actually can tie into people who might have leveraged to affect election outcomes or challenges. That's the hope that they know. Usually in every state, if there's a close razor thin election results, there's an automatic kickoff or a process that if those election results were within a certain percentage of one another, there's an automatic recount and recertification. Do you think an election denier somehow candidate could interfere with that process or demand that process to take place if the results are not that close? Well, you can always demand it. And the response will be dictated by the person who's in charge of it or the group who's in charge of it. And if those are other Trump sympathizers, GOP people, you can expect that response to be somewhat sympathetic. But remember, in 2020, we had probably the most reliably managed national and even state and local elections in many, many years. There isn't any reason to believe that that election management has been disrupted or disassembled for these 2022 midterms. So the same reasons and grounds that prevented the challenges from being successful, whether they be in court or in the political arena or the media, may still be in place. For the Democrats, the most important two things to do between now and the 2022 elections are, one, make sure that that election management is as reliably and demonstrably in place as possible. And number two, get out as many voters as they possibly can. Because the larger the vote, the harder it is going to be to effectively challenge the outcomes. And the margins for automatic recounts, in most states, are very, very small, it's like half a percent. Right, it's very thin, yeah, true. OK, thank you, Chuck. Hey, Jay, I remember the day where we had a candidate by the name of Al Gore, who was in a presidential election, and they came down the results with George Bush Jr. And came down to 1,000 or so ballots in Florida. And we had a very loyal, dedicated Republican Secretary of State in Florida at that time in the year 2000. And it was argued that she was trying to sway events back at the time. And as you know, those results actually went, worked its all the way up to the Supreme Court, where the election was decided by the Supreme Court. You ever think we'll find a day where either a presidential election or certainly a key election would be settled by the Supreme Court? It happened then, could happen again. And with this Supreme Court, you know what would happen. I wonder about that Harper case you mentioned, because it could have a huge effect. But the problem is, in the absence of a decision on that case, the absence could have a huge effect too. And remember how slow or fast they can move, it's up to them. And we're 60 days away or less, and they may just not do anything. I have no confidence, whatever, in the Supreme Court to protect us. I'm sorry. There was an article in The Times today. I used to. Yeah. There was an article today in The Times about Ginny Thomas. And it's worse than you thought about her. And she is completely unaccountable and complete with hubris. And so is Clarence. And the result is, it feeds the hubris of the court. And it also further undermines any confidence we can have in the court. But going to your larger question, I'm really tossed on what's going to happen here. On the one hand, I want to point out, as the French always say, plus sa chance. They also say, plus la même. And that means there's always change, but the change is always the same. I'd say, since the big lie of, use that term on CNN, by the way, since the big lie of 2020, a lot has happened. Yeah, it's not quite two years, but a lot has happened. We have had so much media. You know how I determined, by the way, how much media we have? It's the turnover in the commercials. I mean, if you went to MSNBC just a couple of months ago, you would never have heard of RINVOC. And RINVOC has displaced so many others. And we now know about SkyRizzy. We now know. And the commercials keep coming. You know, they're in a pipeline and keep shooting at us. So we know a lot is happening in terms of the media. But suffice to say, the media is on this all the time, at least the media I listen to, and Fox is on it all the time, and Newsmax is on it all the time. And seeing Clare Radio, no relationships, Cynthia, is on it all the time. And this has an effect. I can't tell you what it is, but there's one old slogan having to do with the stock market I want to repeat, and that is the fatigue theory. The market goes up until it gets tired of going up, and then it goes down. And it goes down until it gets tired of going down, and then it comes up. And I actually think there's some truth to that. Well, in this case, you know, we've had 18 months or more of the big lie. Don't you think that at least some people in the country would have fatigue over that? And the news and the changes, and all the things that are happening in the world, Ukraine, for example, changes in the world economy, changes in COVID, really remarkable changes. And I think there's a possibility that we are going to get bloody tired of hearing about the big lie. So the deniers may not be the same crowd they were before. And the big lie may not be the same, have the same influence that it had before, but they're still around. And the question is more nuanced. This question before was, do you accept Trump's big lie about what happened in 2020? Well, in November, it's different. Do you accept the big lie as it is extended by Trump endorses around the country? And maybe some people do, but it's not nearly as clear. It's not direct. It's not, you know, it's not exactly the same thing. So I think that some people, you know, who might be big deniers in another context, maybe a presidential election, or if Trump had remained on the airwaves on Twitter and the like, you know, it might be different. But I think right now it may have lost its mojo. And so they may or may not have the same, you know, imperative that they had before. I mean, I- Well, let me go to this, Jay, because, you know, you have several candidates that were elected and, you know, I'm sure it wasn't, they're clinging to the 2020 big lie that the election was stolen from Trump. I'm sure that was part of the endorsement that got them over the edge and to the victory column in the primary elections this year. But how do they try to transport the 2020 big lie into the new lie? The new lie is that the election has been stolen from them personally. Will that happen? Can they make that breach of non-logic to the voters and the legislature and whoever's running the election for that state? And for some people, because, you know, when you think about it, what is the big lie is Trump asking people to be loyal, to listen to whatever he says. So he comes up with a lie, he wants you to respect that and be loyal to him and do what he says. You know, after all, he is the, you know, the head GOP bottle washer. And I think what's interesting is that that doesn't have the same power as if he was running or if he was on the news every day or at least on Sinclair radio and Twitter and whatnot every day. Maybe he used to some extent, but not as much as before. And furthermore, remember this, that the people who were 16 in 2016 are now 2022. I mean, 22 years old, they're different. They've seen more, they've learned more. They're a different generation. You know, they used to say the generations were 20 years long and then they said the generations were 10 years long. I suggest to you that generations are shorter still now and you can have an awakening if you want, even in a year and a half, if you're beset by all this news and commentary and lies and opinion. So it's not as simple as what the Democrats say, you know, go out and vote. It's more than that because they're saying it to everybody and there's no plan there except go out to vote. And I agree with Chuck, the more people vote the better it is, but fact is that going out to vote does not match the GOP strategy. So I think the other side of this coin is the GOP is working hard on a strategy, whether it's in the name of Trump or otherwise. Remember, you know, he has put something in motion that goes beyond him. It isn't only loyalty to Trump, they have a new ethic or non-ethic as the case may be. They, and they're into planning and they have a lot of troops who follow them around. In all those states where they passed this ridiculous legislation, anti-democratic legislation, there are GOP people there and they're not just working for Trump. They've gone beyond, beyond insurrection. It's beyond trying to rip the democracy apart. It's another world. And we don't know just exactly how strong they are. I'm not sure that we have all the information we need to know. One thing is though, the Democrats do not have the same kind of plan. You know, Jamie Harrison and the DNC, they're not coming up with anything remarkable. And it's hard to say that the Democrats will be able to match the action, the action, the unethical action taken by the GOP in the, well, since the election of 2020. I think they're busy boys and girls. And I think they are going to have a huge effect on this. Whether you call them deniers or just Trumpers or call them GOP crazies. Well, in the last show, I tried to corral the definition for these wackadoodles. And I called them the mega GOP. Cause I think there's a lot of decent Republicans left in the party. They just don't know what to do about it. But the mega GOP, I think they're the basket of deplorables. I said it before and I'll say it again. Hillary Clinton was correct. Way back in the day to call them that. And I'll stick with it. So yeah, it depends on what the normal, decent GOP are going to do about it. Yeah, it does, but we don't really have a handle on how many are left. Myself, I believe it's somewhere between three and five. But, you know, probably true and sad, but. I mean, it's really, it's like, sorry to refer to Hitler on this. When Hitler did his thing, when he organized his plan, his plan for changing public opinion, doing propaganda, organizing death camps, you know, all of that, it was secret. We now know, you know, 50, 60, 70 years later what he was doing, but at the time he didn't tell anybody. He knew the power of secrecy. And I think the GOP also, you know, because they're sort of right wing fascists, you know, they know the power of secrecy. What they're doing, what their plan is, and in these states to suppress voting, to intimidate voters, to intimidate poll workers, to undermine, you know, poll working institutions, we don't know the extent of it. But I assure you it's out there. Okay, well, that kind of goes to my question to Cynthia in some ways. Cynthia, for those candidates that were firm election deniers, what do they do if they win? Okay, well, there's already two examples of that. Kerry Lake and that master's guy, Lake Masters, they both won their primary and they're claiming fraud, both. Wait, they won and they're still claiming fraud? Let me clarify that. Yeah, they are claiming fraud, that there was fraud in the election. Maybe they think they should have won. Brilliant, you're the winner of an election and you're claiming fraud. Absolute genius. I don't know. All I know is some statistics that are alarming. And one of them is that 27 states have election deniers on the ballot. 60% of all voters have an election denier on their ballot. That is terrifying to me. And a couple more alarming statistics that I have, there are eight states that have already shifted the power of elections over to the partisan legislatures. And I'm gonna name them for us. We've got Montana, Arizona, Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, oh, sorry, Kentucky, not Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia and Florida. And they have just added 10 more bills, 10 more bills, excuse me, let me get it straight. 10 more laws, excuse me, they've just enacted 10 more laws in those states that solidify elections going to the partisan legislatures. The only states where it has not progressed through, because there's 27 states that have actually brought those bills through the House and through the Senate and they've been vetoed by a Democratic governor, Michigan is a good example of that. So we've got these Republican legislatures. So we are way beyond the maggots. And I'm gonna call them maggots, I'm sorry, I like it. And we're way beyond that crowd. We are well into the full-blooded Republicans who decided to hold their nose and look the other way and support a horrible con man, who was an obvious con man, well-established con man so that they could get what they wanted. They put somebody who admitted to assaulting women onto their primary, even though he'd already said it with his own words in the Access Hollywood bus. So this goes so far beyond just the maggots that I think we will be remiss if we just blame it on them, because I think all of the Republicans are needing to share in this now, because they all got voted back on, not just the election deniers, but, and then there's the people that stood up, another good example. All right, well, let me, okay, sorry. Let me interrupt here, because, you know, we may or may not have a Supreme Court decision on Moore versus Harper that either establishes the authority of the governor, the state court or the state constitution to oversee an election result. That's how it is right now, versus the proposals to have the state legislature in place, be it Republican or Democrat, to basically determine the outcome of an election. So we don't have that decision by the Supreme Court, but if it comes down before the midterm election, if it comes down, how does that reorganize the GOP's way of thinking, and specifically the election deniers, if it goes against them on that decision? Well, unfortunately, Chuck, I disagree that we still have all of the same structures in place to keep us safe in 2020. I really think that there's been a lot of changes and these eight states are all battleground states that already have that power. So they don't have to wait for the Supreme Court to allow them to do it, right? It's already been enacted as law in that state. Don't you think there's gonna be some inkling of federal oversight if there's blatant disregard for the vote, tally and outcome, if it's completely being denied by a particular secretary of state? You know, Tim, it would not surprise any of us if the Supreme Court had that and decided it even before election day and said, this is a matter of state's rights. If a state wants to do strange things with voting, it's up to the state. And then what is the use of federal election law then? What federal election law? There's plenty of them. Wow. Are they being breached? They are breached by these states that already have put it in. We've got so many, there's two different kinds of election subversion laws that have been put out there. Some of them are just election restriction laws that make it harder to vote. They close down the polls everywhere but in the Republican districts, those sorts of partisan things. Making it so you can't give anyone water if they've been in line for 10 hours. But there's the ones that are really dangerous, really, really dangerous because there's no way around those and those are the interference laws and they're already on the books. So unless we get another federal law that trumps it, then it doesn't matter what the Supreme Court, whether they wait now or they do it before, those eight states, it's not gonna matter. Now, the other states may not be able to do it, but... Well, I'm thinking of back in the days of reconstruction where there was certainly federal oversight to ensure that elections, well, other than allowing African-Americans to vote, that the results were not gonna be skewed, overtly skewed. Are we back to those days, Cynthia? Back to the days of reconstruction where federal troops had to go in and make sure that the polling places were not being subverted. Well, I think that's a really important thing that you just stated. There's a lot of these election deniers that are saying they're going to call in sheriffs to guard the polls. These are partisan, state-run people, not federal people. And so, yes, I think we are exactly there. So... And everything that we've dealt with, oh boy, we need some serious reconstruction. Ask me anyway. All right. Thank you, Cynthia. Appreciate your thoughts on that point. I still like to stay with the question, Chuck, and that is, for these election deniers, should they win the general election? What's their next move? Couple of things, just to... And I'll get to your question. One, remember that in Bush versus Gore, the Supreme Court, with a clearly conflicted justice as the deciding vote, prevented the election recount, stopped it. Yeah, that's correct. That's what the Secretary of State related to Bush did, to make sure that the recount didn't jeopardize that Florida vote makes the difference. Count. The second thing is, if you look at Morgan B. Harper, that same statutory scheme that they're arguing lets state legislators and legislators control elections independent of any court review or executive review, the next part of that same statute says it's still subject to congressional oversight and revision. So they're not out there just by themselves. And I really appreciate Cynthia pointing out that three branches legal structures to protect fair elections have been seriously eroded since 2020, but the local election setups other than in those eight states may still be our best hope for certifiable fair election results. That's all we got right now. That's why the Democrats really need to make sure that to the extent that can be protected, it's done. All right, so my main question is on the election turnout, note that in Kansas, just before the abortion vote that came in 59, 41 in favor of protecting abortion rights, the increase in voter registration was close to 50%. And we know who that was. And so there's a little bit more uncertainty. I agree with the gloom and doom stuff, but there's more to be seen here than we can have any certainty about it. Do you think if the election deniers when they're midterm election, what's their next move to further Donald Trump's agenda? I think they'll look to- That's a tough question. I know it means you have to get your crystal ball out, but will they be actively participating? As Jay said, the boys and girls are very busy. Will they be actively planning and plotting for the 2024 presidential election? Now that they're in a position of power, be it Secretary of State or otherwise? Yeah, but Cynthia's points are really important one and it measures with Jay's. And that is, hey, if they win and they get power, they will expand on that eight state erosion of fair elections as much as they can. They will plug into not only their local and state frameworks, but international frameworks to do that. So the worst thing about them winning is it offers a potential for expansion of the same kind of erosion of fair election protections that we've already seen. All right. Can I inject- Sure, Cynthia, we've run out of time, but go ahead. But just real quick, I know that most, and this is, I don't know exactly which ones are how many off the top of my head, but I know that most of the election denier candidates that have been saying, oh, 2020 was stolen, was stolen, was stolen, they are wiping their websites clean of that kind of language. They don't want anybody to really think about what they said back then. So I think it's important that we all remember what they said. So they're trying to make themselves out to be not, one of them even said, oh, well, I've learned a few things in this last month and now I don't believe it was stolen. Yeah, that's because they've already been, they won the primary. How convenient. Right, exactly. With an extreme position, and then now they get to try to dampen it down, modify it for the general election. So you know what they call that, Tim? They call that a lie. So I mean, a guy takes one position and then you turn around and bingo, he takes another position. I believe- No, they call it a politician. Well, in this case, it's really intentional. In this case, it's an attempt to deceive people, to defraud them into thinking the candidate has something other than what he or she was. And I'm very troubled by that because that follows this whole thing about pulling the truth and replacing it with lies. Let me give you one thought and I know where- Okay, this is your last thought because we've run out of time. I've been saving it up. Good. Okay, on January 6th of 2021, we had an insurrection. It was unsuccessful. Maybe it was close, but it was ultimately unsuccessful. And now we've had bright spots of out-accountability. We've had bright spots hither and yon about people coming out from the Republican side and seeming to be more fair-minded. But I think what we have, and it really goes to your question, is we have insurrection step two. Insurrection step two is not violent. Insurrection step two is you do what you can and you try to do it within the bounds of the law. So you get those eight states to make systems that will upset the apple card, upset the popular vote. And you do everything you can do within the apparent bounds of the law to change the results in the vote in November, 2022 and November, 2024. It's actually brilliant and it's under the hood. We don't know all of the things that are going on, but we do know that's what they're doing. And so the violence of January 6th has morphed into what do you want to call it, legal violence. Violence that undermines the democracy in every way they can, undermines voting rights and so many other things. And they have a leg up on it. We are now in a long-term model of a much more sophisticated insurrection. All right, Cynthia, your last thoughts. I want to be like what Chuck says, hopeful. I want to think positive that perhaps the women, and you didn't quite mention this part, but perhaps the women will rise up. And we do know that the registration of women has really gone up, up, up. So that job's decision I think might be the thing that tips the scale. So let's hope that the women are more powerful than these maggots and these crazy Republicans that support them. And currently, as a good Christian woman, I'm hoping that God will bless those women that you rise up. Even though all these other people say that they're Christians, I'm gonna finish with a quote. Gandhi once said, I like your Christ. Not so much your Christians. They are nothing like your Christ. That's what he said. And it's not, I think it is really apropos for what's going on with some of our- I think those criticisms have been on the airwaves and more than just Mahatma Gandhi. That's been said many different ways and many different times. Thank you for bringing that quote to the table though. Appreciate it. Chuck, our special guest, you get the final word with your final thoughts. I agree. I think we look to not just the women's vote and the oppressed people of color's vote, but we look to the votes of the millennials and the generations behind them. They're not buying this stuff. Jay is right. So let's see what happens. Hopefully it'll be not just less worse than we think, but better than we think. At the same time, let's not delude ourselves. We're on the wrong end of this issue and there's a fair chance that the country will lose democracy in November, if not immediately then soon enough thereafter. And what people don't understand, what they don't realize is losing democracy is going to affect all of us in every way, in every day. And that's if we could only get that message out there. Well, let's not forget, if we lose our democracy even slightly, it affects the entire world because they look to us for democracy and the shining hill in the city as it pertains to democracy. All right, I would like to thank our special guest, Chuck Crumpton, my special, special co-host, Jay Fidel, and my special contributor and friend, Cynthia Lee Sinclair. I wanna thank everyone for joining us on American Issues Take One. I'm Tim Appatel, your host. Won't you join us next week? And until then, much aloha. Thank you so much for watching Think Tech Hawaii. If you like what we do, please like us and click the subscribe button on YouTube and the follow button on Vimeo. You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and LinkedIn, and donate to us at thinktechhawaii.com. Mahalo.