Grinnell College Logo

Contested U.S. Presidential Elections (Fall 2024)

HIS 295, Professor Sarah J. Purcell

Page 2 of 10

Pathways to Contesting an Election: The Courts

Another potential path to contesting the 2024 election is through the judiciary, a concept that has been increasing in prevalence in the 21st century.  There are two major ways that the judiciary could be used to contest the election in 2024: through state courts and through the Supreme Court.  Based on both the elections of 2000 and 2024, both have a strong history of being used to contest an election, and some current signs point to their use in the upcoming election.

To begin with, the state courts are extremely likely to play a role in the election.  That a court case about the election will be brought in a state court somewhere seems likely, but the effect these potential cases could have on the outcome of the election cannot be predicted.  Historically, however, state courts have played a major role in plans to contest an election.  In 2000, for example, the challenges to the Florida vote count which eventually were resolved before the Supreme Court were initially brought up in State courts, and in local Federal courts.  Additionally, in 2020 Donald Trump’s campaign filed a number of lawsuits in more than seven states challenging vote counts in those states. Based on these trends, it would not be unexpected to see more local challenges in the 2024 election.  In fact, many states are gearing up to deal with these challenges.  While the cases Trump brought before the courts in 2020 did not substantially affect the outcome of the election, the cases brought in 2000 caused the issue to go before the Supreme Court to be ultimately decided, meaning that local cases in 2024 could have a huge effect on the outcome of the election.  Also, the 2020 lower court cases may not have changed the electoral results, but they did add to the mistrust of the electoral process that fueled other components of the 2020 election, such as challenges in Congress, and violence on January 6th.

The other component of a judicial challenge to the 2024 election could involve the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court had the final word on the election in 2000, and many consider that a possibility today.  While the court claims to have created zero precedent by deciding Bush v. Gore, the realty is they have set a procedural precedent, leading many Americans to view the court as the natural decider of contested elections.  While this is a departure from previous historical trends, where contested elections were decided in the legislature, it is important to recognize the new trend set up by the 2000 election.  One potential complication to deciding the election in front of the Supreme Court is that the Court is unlikely to want to hear the case, as no decision that the Court makes can satisfy large parts of the country, which could further damage the legitimacy of a court who is already facing a crisis of legitimacy in the public view.

So, while some sort of judicial challenge is likely, it is hard to know what effect court cases could have on the election.  The election of 2000 tells us that cases, both local and before the Supreme Court, can fundamentally alter the outcome of an election, while 2020 tells us how cases in the lower courts (that do not end up having an effect on electoral returns) can contribute to electoral mistrust and other avenues of contestation.  There may not be a silver lining to judicial challenges, but the overall message remains the same: watch what happens in the courts after the 2024 election closely, as it is very possible for it to play a major role in the outcome of the election.

Pathways to Contesting an Election: Congress

The potential outcomes of the 2024 election are a prospect of the utmost importance to many Americans right now.  Many people are feeling as if a contestation of the results is automatic, after what happened in 2020.  Using history as a way of predicting these outcomes, however, is not the answer.  The pressing nature is not a reason to engage in prediction, in fact it probably makes the reasons for avoiding prediction even stronger.  But lessons from the past can still help us to contextualize potential futures.  One of the major ways we can use historical lessons is to take stock of potential options should the election be contested, which is what I will do here.

There are three broad ways of contesting an election, as the past tells us.  To overturn the results, one can attack the electoral count in Congress, in the Courts, or one can attack the voting process itself.  In this post, I will focus on the relevant parts of a Congressional challenge to the electoral count, as seen in previous elections.

One avenue that appears to be a difficult one after the 2020 election is the certification of votes by the Senate itself.  In the 2020 election, Trump placed pressure on Vice President Mike Pence to approve an alternate slate of electors that would elect Trump instead of Biden.  Pence resisted this pressure, reaffirming the pastoral role of the Vice President in the electoral count.  The same pressure is unlikely to exist in 2024, as Kamala Harris will still be the Vice President, making the Vice Presidential avenue of Congressional contestation unlikely, although potentially still possible.  The avenue from 2020 that is likely still on the table is objections to certain state’s electoral slates by individual congresspeople.  In 2020 this failed because most congresspeople did not support rejecting the electoral slates, but this resistance may have changed based on recent rhetoric from many congresspeople.  Still, the amount of support in Congress required to make this avenue successfully challenge an election is worth keeping in mind moving into 2024.

A second possible path to contestation involving Congress is the standard set in 1876.  In 1876 a committee was created to resolve the competition between slates of alternate electors sent in by some states.  This bipartisan committee included members of the Senate, the House, and the Supreme Court (but not in their capacity as justices).  This was considered one of the better compromises that could be put together on short notice and was effective in deciding the election before the inauguration deadline.  It seems possible that some congresspeople would (and did in 2020) favor this solution in the event of a contested election, as state submission of alternate states is a potential concern in the upcoming election, since it has happened before in 1876.  The thing that makes this solution unlikely is that it requires agreement in the legislature, as it is not a procedure that is laid out in any law.  In 1876 it was the solution chosen under the authority of Congress to resolve the electoral dispute, but today the challenge system that was employed in 2020 (dual sponsorship of a resolution to debate a slate of electors) is a procedure written into the Electoral Count Act of 1887, making that the more likely system of resolution in the legislature.

Of course, there is always the possibility that neither candidate gets a majority of the electoral vote, leading to the election being decided in the House of Representatives.  The precedent there is clear, and the procedures to get there relatively strict, restricting this path to a contested election to a very narrow set of circumstances.  Should it happen, however, there would likely be a very political contest, as it is unclear how exactly states will decide their individual votes.   Overall, many of the potential paths to contesting the 2024 election could pass through Congress but it is not a guarantee.

Final Project: Online U.S Contested Presidential Election themed Jeopardy

link to the game: https://jeopardylabs.com/play/us-contested-presidential-elections

 

Sources (grouped by category):

CANDIDATES & OTHER PROMINENT FIGURES

 

CNN Library. “Al Gore Fast Facts.” CNN, March 14, 2019. https://www.cnn.com/2013/09/02/us/al-gore-fast-facts/index.html.

 

The Hermitage. “Military Life | Andrew Jackson’s Hermitage,” n.d. https://thehermitage.com/military-life.

 

Van Deusen, Glyndon G. “University of Rochester Library Bulletin: The Life and Career of William Henry Seward, 1801-1872 | RBSCP.” Rochester.edu, 2018. https://rbscp.lib.rochester.edu/3452.

 

Writer, Staff. “Jackson Launched Controversial First Seminole War in Florida in 1818.” Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 2002. https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/2002/12/12/jackson-launched-controversial-first-seminole-war-in-florida-in-1818/28732419007/.

 

“Jackson Launched Controversial First Seminole War in Florida in 1818.” Sarasota Herald-Tribune, n.d. https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/2002/12/12/jackson-launched-controversial-first-seminole-war-in-florida-in-1818/28732419007/.

 

CONSTITUTION 

Civil Rights Division of the U.S Department of Justice. “The Shelby County Decision,” August 6, 2015. https://www.justice.gov/crt/shelby-county-decision.

 

“Contingent Election of the President and Vice President by Congress: Perspectives and Contemporary Analysis.” Congressional Research Service, October 6, 2020. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R40504/7.

 

National Archives. “Voting Rights Act (1965).” National Archives, February 8, 2022. https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/voting-rights-act.

 

Norton, Tom. “Fact Check: Did Donald Trump Call to Suspend the Constitution?” Newsweek, August 24, 2023. https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-call-suspend-constitution-gop-debate-chris-christie-1822131.

 

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “United States Presidential Election of 1800 | Candidates, Results, & Facts.” In Encyclopædia Britannica, 2019. https://www.britannica.com/event/United-States-presidential-election-of-1800.

 

The Miller Center. “Aaron Burr (1801-1805) | Miller Center.” The University of Virginia, October 4, 2016. https://millercenter.org/president/jefferson/essays/burr-1801-vicepresident.

 

The U.S. Senate. “U.S. Senate: Presidential Succession Act,” n.d. https://www.senate.gov/about/officers-staff/president-pro-tempore/presidential-succession-act.htm.

 

JUDICIAL AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCH INVOLVEMENT

 

Bomboy, Scott. “Looking Back: The Electoral Commission of 1877 | Constitution Center.” National Constitution Center – constitutioncenter.org, January 4, 2021. https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/looking-back-the-electoral-commission-of-1877.

 

National Archives. “Electoral College Timeline of Events,” September 12, 2019. https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/key-dates.

 

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Bush v. Gore | Summary, Decision, Significance, & Facts.” In Encyclopædia Britannica, 2019. https://www.britannica.com/event/Bush-v-Gore.

 

“United States Presidential Election of 1800 | Candidates, Results, & Facts.” In Encyclopædia Britannica, 2019. https://www.britannica.com/event/United-States-presidential-election-of-1800.

 

“United States Presidential Election of 1876 | United States Government | Britannica.” In Encyclopædia Britannica, 2019. https://www.britannica.com/event/United-States-presidential-election-of-1876.

 

Wikipedia Contributors. “List of Vice Presidents of the United States Who Ran for President.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, September 26, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vice_presidents_of_the_United_States_who_ran_for_president.

 

CONTROVERSIES, RIOTS, PROTESTS, AND VIOLENCE

 

Smith, A. I. P. (2015). Beyond the Realignment Synthesis: The 1860 Election Reconsidered. In G. Davies & J. E. Zelizer (Eds.), America at the Ballot Box: Elections and Political History (pp. 59–74). University of Pennsylvania Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt16f8d6d.6

 

American Battlefield Trust. “John Brown’s Harpers Ferry Raid.” American Battlefield Trust, March 28, 2017. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/topics/john-browns-harpers-ferry-raid.

Hogan, Margaret. “‘Corrupt Bargain’ .” millercenter.org, October 14, 2020. https://millercenter.org/contested-presidential-elections/corrupt-bargain.

 

Quinn, Melissa, and Graham Kates. “Trump’s 4 Indictments in Detail: A Quick-Look Guide to Charges, Trial Dates and Key Players for Each Case – CBS News.” www.cbsnews.com, August 29, 2023. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-indictments-details-guide-charges-trial-dates-people-case/.

 

Supreme Court of the United States. “SUPREME COURT of the UNITED STATES Syllabus TRUMP v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI to the UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS for the DISTRICT of COLUMBIA CIRCUIT,” 2023. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf.

 

The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. “‘Jefferson Is in Every View Less Dangerous than Burr’: Hamilton on the Election of 1800 | Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History,” n.d. https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/spotlight-primary-source/jefferson-every-view-less-dangerous-burr-hamilton.

 

Writer, Emily Czachor Staff. “What Is the Brooks Brothers Riot? ‘Stop the Count’ Protests Draw Comparison.” Newsweek, November 4, 2020. https://www.newsweek.com/what-brooks-brothers-riot-stop-count-protests-draw-comparisons-november-2000-election-chaos-1544989.

 

ELECTORAL COLLEGE

 

Blackford, Sheila. “Disputed Election of 1876 | Miller Center.” millercenter.org, September 30, 2020. https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/disputed-election-1876.

 

Levy, Michael. “United States Presidential Election of 1860 | United States Government.” In Encyclopædia Britannica, October 30, 2018. https://www.britannica.com/event/United-States-presidential-election-of-1860.

 

Library of Congress. “What Is the Law on Faithless Electors? – Ask a Librarian.” The Library of Congress, January 11, 2023. https://ask.loc.gov/law/faq/331082.

 

National Archives. “1860 Electoral College Results,” November 5, 2019. https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/1860.

 

National Popular Vote. “5 of 46 Presidents Came into Office without Winning the National Popular Vote,” October 6, 2020. https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/5-46-presidents-came-office-without-winning-national-popular-vote.

 

“SUPREME COURT of the UNITED STATES,” 2019. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19-465_i425.pdf#page=4.

 

The National Park Service. “War Declared: States Secede from the Union! – Kennesaw Mountain National Battlefield Park (U.S. National Park Service),” March 9, 2022. https://www.nps.gov/kemo/learn/historyculture/wardeclared.htm.

 

Cartooning the Elections

Humor has always found its way into elections, especially in the context of the most recent presidential elections. Perhaps one of the most effective ways humor has been used consistently over time in elections has been through political cartoons. 

These pieces of political art allow for both humor as well as commentary, important in especially hotly contested presidential elections. Over time, these cartoons have obviously evolved, particularly due to the rise of social media use, but their usage throughout the various elections remains constant. From Lincoln to Trump, cartoons have acted as a means to engage with the public during presidential elections.

In this cartoon, Lincoln and Douglas are literally racing to the White House. Lincoln’s taller figure rivals Douglas’ tiny one, clearly making faster and longer strides to win the presidency much quicker than Douglas. The third figure in this photo is an enslaved person, evident by his use of “Massa Duglis” inside his speech bubble. This enslaved individual signifies the contention in the 1860 election surrounding slavery.

[Lincoln & Douglas in a presidential footrace]. No. 1, 1860


This cartoon includes all of the candidates from the 1860 election, including Stephen Douglas, John C. Breckenridge, John Bell, and Abraham Lincoln. Each candidate has much to say about the results of the election, but Lincoln seemingly flaunts his win as he ‘wins the ball’ as well as the election.​​

“The national game. Three ‘outs’ and one ‘run'”, 1860

In terms of more modern day cartoons, this work from the 2020 election depicts Trump standing near two gravestones, one that says 200,000+ COVID-19 Deaths and the other says Peaceful Transition of Power. 

The gravestones act as a clear reference to President Trump’s claims that President Biden’s win was a fraud as well as the enormous number of people who lost their lives during the pandemic. On top of an already deadly pandemic, President Trump stands near the grave of the newly dead ‘Peaceful Transition of Power’, a keystone of American democracy which was killed during the 2020 election when Trump rejected the results of the election.

In another cartoon, both candidates Trump and Biden look less than ideal in their boxing uniforms, awaiting for one of their arms to be lifted victoriously by annoyed looking Uncle Sam.

The more modern cartoons use less wording, relying more heavily on images to produce their point  rather than speech bubbles. This is made easier through image-centric social media, where wordy things are less likely to be engaged with by audiences. Cartoons and images such as these also easier to be circulated on these different platforms. While these cartoons are in fact different, the fact that they have maintained a popular medium for hundreds of years is testament to their effectiveness in engaging the public in presidential campaigns.






Is Twinning Winning?

Portrait of President-elect Donald Trump, 2016

Andrew Jackson, c1896

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In 2017, President Donald Trump compared himself to Andrew Jackson, citing that many people have told him that they have had similar elections. But what made them so similar that the president felt the need to equate them during his visit to Tennessee? How similar are the two really? 

In the election of 1824, Andrew Jackson had won the popular vote and the most electoral college votes, but still ending up losing the presidency to John Quincy Adams. Jackson had the most electoral votes just not the majority, so the outcome of the election was up to the House of Representatives.This is similar to the way in which Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in 2016, but lost the electoral college vote to Donald Trump, ending with her losing the election because of this. 

But what Trump didn’t realize when he made these comments in 2017 was that he would relate to the1824 election a lot more in 2020, especially when he accused the some votes as being corrupt. In the same vein, Andrew Jackson attributed his loss in the 1824 election to what he described as a “corrupt bargain”. This ‘corrupt bargain’ referred to how Henry Clay voted for John Quincy Adams for president when it was taken to the House of Representatives, and then Clay being appointed Adam’s Secretary of State after he became president . This idea of corruption is similar to what Trump claimed when he lost the 2020 election to Biden. Claims of voter fraud and election corruption became Trump’s mantra for the outcome of the 2020 election, and his platform for the 2024 election. 

During the Jackson’s next presidential election in 1828, he had a come back story for the ages after being successfully elected as president despite his loss four years prior. Now, after calling 2020’s election corrupt, will Trump have a similar comeback story to Jackson in the 2024 election?



Electoral College Reform

The Electoral College was designed to balance the influence of populous states with that of smaller ones in presidential elections, as well as to balance the interests of the Framers between limiting congressional influence in the executive branch without instituting directly elected presidents. However, its relevance and fairness have come under scrutiny, prompting calls for reform. Advocates argue that the system undermines the principle of one-person, one-vote, while opponents contend it protects the interests of smaller states.

There are several different reform proposals. The most direct way would be to amend the Constitution and replace the Electoral College with a national popular vote. However, amending the Constitution is a very difficult process with a really high threshold. In addition, the polarization of modern America makes it nearly if not impossible that enough of a coalition could form to amend the Constitution. Since its institution, there have been more than seven hundred proposed amendments to modify or abolish the Electoral College. That is the highest number of amendments proposed on any one subject of constitutional reform.

Another possibility would be legislation, at the national or state level, that requires states to allocate their electors in a more proportional manner—getting rid of the current winner-take-all system. Like Maine and Nebraska, the votes of all citizens of a state would count. Or, at least, less votes would be “wasted” than are now.

One of the most promising current reform plans is called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). The NPVIC is an agreement between states to award all of their electoral votes to the candidate who won the national popular vote, regardless of who won in their state. Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have currently joined, but the NPVIC will not go into effect until enough states have joined that would determine the results of the Electoral College—states adding up to 270 electoral votes. This seems the likeliest avenue for reform, but it is not without issues. Because it is a voluntary compact, the NPVIC is not legally binding. States can leave at any time, and they might choose to do so if the national popular vote selects a candidate that they do not want to support with their electors. It is also useless until enough states join that puts it into effect.

The Electoral College and Contested Elections

The Electoral College is a feature of the American political and electoral system, established in the Constitution as a compromise between direct popular voting and congressional selection of the president. Each state is allocated a number of electors equivalent to its representation in Congress, and these electors cast votes to determine the president. The method of choosing electors is left up to the individual states, and, with the exceptions of Maine and Nebraska, each state uses a winner-take-all system, where the winner of the statewide popular vote receives all of the state’s electoral votes. While intended to balance the influence of populous states with less populous ones, the system has led to significant controversies, especially during contested presidential elections, particularly when the Electoral College fails to select a president, and the election is thrown to the House of Representatives.

One of the most notable instances of this occurred in 1824 when none of the candidates received a majority of electoral votes. The election was decided by the House of Representatives, leading to accusations of a “corrupt bargain” between John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay. Similarly, in 1876, Rutherford B. Hayes lost the popular vote to Samuel J. Tilden but won the presidency through the highly disputed electoral count, culminating in a compromise that effectively ended Reconstruction.

The most recent and perhaps the most influential example on modern politics came in the election of 2000. Vice President Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the presidency to Texas Governor George W. Bush after a highly controversial Supreme Court decision ended a recount and effectively awarded Florida’s crucial electoral votes to Bush, raising questions about political bias in the courts, voter disenfranchisement, and the legitimacy of presidential elections under the Electoral College.

In 2016, Donald Trump also secured the presidency despite losing the popular vote to Hillary Clinton. A candidate being elected president despite a majority of voters preferring his or her opponent is always controversial, but the polarizing effect of Donald Trump on the electorate created even more of a sense that his inauguration was an illegitimate reflection of the people’s will. This raised and intensified questions about the relevance and future of the Electoral College. Advocates for reform argue that the system is outdated and disproportionately amplifies the votes of certain states, while supporters contend it protects the interests of smaller states and less populated areas.

Sources

  • CNN, “Bush v. Gore: Too Close to Call,” (2015), https://youtu.be/wufOcpTH0HU?si=HJjcyBN26n9NmTMn
  • Jack N. Rakove, “Presidential Selection: Electoral Fallacies,” Political Science Quarterly 119, no. 1 (2004): 21–37, https://www.jstor.org/stable/20202303.
  • Margaret Hogan, “Corrupt Bargain,” The Miller Center at the University of Virginia, https://millercenter.org/contested-presidential-elections/corrupt-bargain
  • Shiela Blackford, “Disputed Election of 1876,” University of Virginia Miller Center, https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/disputed-election-1876

A Recipe for Disaster

Note: the following is a fictional recipe blog about living through January 6th, 2021, with a very real recipe at the bottom.

 

The first time I made this recipe was January 6th, 2021.

A boring day in frosty January, perfect for trying a new pasta recipe. The certification of electoral votes was set to happen today — my history teacher had made a point of mentioning it — but it was one of those government processes designed to be dull. Important, sure, but not exactly riveting.

Deep in the era of Zoom school, my last class of the day had been canceled, and I only had a few minutes of so-called independent work time left before I was free. On the counter behind me, my computer was filled with black squares; even the teacher had turned her camera off.

I waited until I could feel heat radiating from the large saucepan I’d placed on the stove to add strips of bacon, each one sizzling as soon as it hit the pan. My phone dinged; always wash your hands after handling raw meat.

Hands clean, bacon cooking, now is the time to cut up your tomatoes and garlic. I prefer grape tomatoes, but whatever variety you have lying around works just fine. But my phone dinged again, and again, so I put down the knife.

Trump supporters are rioting at the US Capitol.

And here I thought electoral certification was supposed to be boring. I scrolled back through the news alerts from that morning: Donald Trump giving a speech at the Ellipse, Republicans chanting stop the steal, Proud Boys and Oath Keepers marching to the Capitol to — to what? What could they possibly be doing?

I pondered the question as I chopped the tomatoes into fine pieces. The goal of a riot sparked by the losing candidate over the certification of votes is not merely to challenge the results of an election — it’s to assume that an election is fraudulent and thus to assert violence as the solution.

The Brooks Brothers Riot in 2000, where rioters sought to stop the counting of votes in Florida, is often used in comparison to what unfolded on January 6th. No one had yet been certified as a winner, but that didn’t stop Bush’s supporters from feeling as if they were already victorious. The rioters were determined to stop the recount in Miami-Dade County because they believed Al Gore would steal the presidency away from their candidate. And now, on January 6th, despite overwhelming evidence that the election was legitimate, Trump’s supporters invaded the Capitol hoping to prove that they hadn’t lost — and if they couldn’t prove it, ready to steal the election instead.

Later, it would come out that Roger Stone, who had stoked and managed the Brooks Brothers Riot, had taken a picture with the Oath Keepers just hours before they stormed the capitol. Later, it would come out that January 6th was not as spontaneous as it appeared. Later, just minutes later, the rioters would break through the defenses of the Capitol Police and enter the building.

My Zoom class ended with a sad little ding, I flipped the bacon over in the pan, started a pot of water boiling on the stove, and then I turned on the news.

Nothing but the smell of bacon in the pan seemed real, at first. There were white supremacists at the US Capitol — people were smashing windows and attacking police — a gallows had been constructed outside and the insurrectionists were calling for Mike Pence’s head.

Violence over an election is not a wholly new concept in the US. The election of 1876 in Southern states was marked by violence as a tool for voter suppression, wherein Southern Democrats kept newly enfranchised Black voters from participating or running for office through unfettered violence. The anger over Reconstruction and Republican governments holding power in the South following the Civil War had simmered until it burned.

When the bacon is finished, remove it from the pan with a slotted spoon. Make sure to reserve the leftover fat; the rest of the sauce will be cooked in it. January 6th did not appear out of nowhere. It was cooked in the grease left behind from centuries of white supremacy and fears of election fraud hand-fed by the Republicans backing Donald Trump.

Once your water has come to a boil, add pasta of your choice; I chose penne because it holds the sauce well. Melt two tablespoons of butter in the leftover bacon grease, then add chopped tomatoes and chopped or minced garlic. Measure the amount of garlic you want in this recipe with your heart. I dislike chunks of tomatoes, so I mash the tomatoes in the pan as they cook. Let the tomatoes cook until some of the juice has evaporated, stirring occasionally, for about five minutes.

In those five or so minutes, the situation at the Capitol eroded even further. The rioters broke through the police barricades and forced their way inside. Videos emerged, posted by the insurrectionists who were proud of what they were doing, showing them forcing their way into offices of politicians, Democrat and Republican alike. Videos of them inside the chamber where Mike Pence had been in the process of counting the electoral votes from each state. Footage from news outlets of the crowd outside, swarming with Confederate flags. The news anchors, giving live updates every few seconds, while texts dinged my phone again and again, from friends asking Is this really happening? Are you watching this?

Of course I was watching it, but I was also cooking. Once some of the tomato juice has evaporated, add three tablespoons of flour. I wasn’t precisely measuring — glued to the footage playing out on my computer screen — and once added, I mixed the flour in to create a thick orange paste.

There were numerous points on January 6th where the resulting violence could’ve been stopped before it ever happened. One reason why January 6th was a flashpoint is because the white Republican rioters didn’t just feel cheated or hopeless — they felt empowered to act. They knew, like the southern Democrats who used violence to stop Black people from voting, that if they could get their candidate in power, he would protect and celebrate them.

Don’t leave the paste to cook too long — don’t, for instance, wait hours until the rioters have mostly been repelled or arrested to finally comment on the violence. After a minute or so, condemn the orange paste to being thinned with milk. Add the milk in one half cup at a time, stirring to ensure it’s fully incorporated.

Once all of the milk has been added, bring the mixture to a boil, then lower the heat and let it simmer until the sauce has thickened enough to coat the back of the spoon, about five more minutes. The first time I made this recipe, I didn’t believe it would thicken, that all the ingredients would coalesce into one dangerously delicious sauce.

I didn’t believe that a source loss would lead to bitter violence, either. Because for all of the trends we’ve seen in American political history surrounding contested presidential elections, trends of voter suppression, electoral chaos, fears over the legitimacy of elections, and white supremacy, not even in the Civil War did Confederate flags attack the US Capitol. As much as January 6th was the product of decades of extreme polarization and trends of doubt repeated in previous elections, it was also unprecedented.

Integral to the continuance of a democracy is that the losing candidate accepts their loss, something Donald Trump and his allies still refuse to do. Every contested presidential election prior to 2020 ended with a peaceful — albeit bitter — transfer of power.

Now that my sauce had thickened, I couldn’t ignore the final integral steps of the recipe. I crumbled the bacon back into the sauce, chopped up a few basil leaves, and gave the whole thing a final stir. I tasted to see if it needed more salt, then switched off the stove. I transferred the cooked, buttery pasta into my new bacon-y creation. Only one noodle missed the edge of the pan.

I sat down at the dining table with my lunch and my computer, seeking solace in the sauce. It was so good, I couldn’t resist a second portion.

Recipe for a Contested Presidential Election

Ingredients:

  • Loss of faith and doubt in the validity of the election
  • Electoral college confusion
  • Balloting issues
  • Voter suppression
  • Governmental interference
  • White supremacy

Directions:

  1. For best results, ensure voters doubt the validity of the election before election day.
    1. If you can’t use home-grown doubt, manufactured by the candidate is fine.
  2. Add confusion over how the electoral system works.
  3. Season with government interference (the courts, Congress, or an electoral commission) to simmer election distrust on medium heat.
  4. Fold in voter suppression using disenfranchisement, confusing ballots, and voter intimidation (if desired)
  5. Bring mixture to a boil by adding white supremacy.
  6. Heat until desired outcome is achieved or chef is stopped.
    1. If seeking a violent result, a peaceful transfer of power may be left out.
    2. If seeking a peaceful result, the loser must admit they lost.
  7. Do not enjoy.

Bacon & Tomato Cream Pasta

Ingredients:

  • ½ to 1 pound of bacon
  • 2 tbsp butter
  • 1 ½ cups tomatoes
  • 3-6 cloves garlic
  • 3 tbsp flour
  • 1 ½ cups milk
  • Chopped basil
  • Salt to taste
  • Penne pasta

Directions:

  1. Start with a large saucepan over medium heat. Cook bacon until crispy. Leave leftover bacon fat in the pan.
  2. While the bacon cooks, chop tomatoes and garlic. Measure the garlic with your heart.
  3. Melt butter in leftover bacon grease.
  4. Add tomatoes and garlic. Cook, stirring occasionally, until some of the juice has evaporated (about 5 minutes).
    1. If you don’t like chunks of tomato, mash tomatoes while they cook.
  5. Add flour. The mixture should turn into a thick orange paste. Cook for one minute, then stir in milk ½ cup at a time. Make sure to fully incorporate paste into milk. The sauce should now be runny.
  6. Bring sauce to a boil, then lower to medium heat, stirring occasionally until the sauce thickens enough to coat the back of the spoon. This should take about five minutes, but you can cook it longer if you want it to be thicker.
  7. Crumble bacon into sauce. Wait to add salt until you’ve added the bacon back into the sauce.
  8. Add as much chopped basil as you want, then serve over penne or pasta of your choice. Enjoy!

Heads, I win; tails, you cheated

“Heads, I win; tails, you cheated,” is the New York Times’ summation of Donald Trump’s rhetorical strategy for his past three elections. It’s a sentiment that comes directly out of the mouth of the former President himself, such as when he said “[he would] totally accept the results of [the] great and historic presidential election – if [he] win[s]” in reference to the 2016 election. It’s a sentiment that he has continued to push into the current election, but much earlier, and much harder. 

The 2024 Election marks the 200 year anniversary of the 1824 election, and, despite there having been 40 more Presidents since John Quincy Adams was inaugurated as the 6th U.S. President, some things still haven’t changed. 

Most significant is the cries of election fraud. Allegations of “stolen” elections that are now spewed by Donald Trump on his Truthsocial and X account, were once the words of Andrew Jackson, all those years ago, alleging that his loss in the Election of 1824 was due to a “Corrupt Bargain”. 

At the time, to become President, the candidate would need to win the majority of the 261 votes making 131 the number to hit. The final race for office would be close between Henry Clay, William Crawford, John Quincy Adams, and Andrew Jackson. Jackson would earn 99 electoral votes and 152,901 popular votes, which was more electoral or popular votes earned by any of the other candidates. However, as was the process for selecting a President at the time, Jackson was still shy of the majority needed to assume the Presidency. As a result, the election would be sent to the House of Representatives to be solved between the top three candidates, kicking Clay out of the race. It is there that Adams won by one vote. 

It didn’t take long before Jackson would spread conspiracies of a “Corrupt Bargain”, a behind-the-scenes deal between Adams and Clay that caused one of the House votes to switch. Jackson felt that he had not lost, rather, his seat had been stolen from him. 

What Jackson and his supporters would coin “The Corrupt Bargain” about the election of 2024, Trump has coined his loss to President Joe Biden in the 2020 election as the “Big Lie”

This campaign cycle, we see Trump include this rhetoric of a stolen election much earlier than he had in his other campaigns. This could speak to his attempts to replicate the effective campaign Jackson ran, in which he utilized conspiracies of this corrupt bargain, and the public’s fury, to win the 2028 election. As early as May 17, 2023, Trump claimed that “they are playing election interference in 2024”, even tweeting images like this to his official social media. 

Similar to Jackson’s arguments that Clay weaponized Congress to overturn votes for Jackson into votes for Adams, Trump too accused President Biden of sending the Justice Department after him; claiming that the variety of court cases against Trump were interference in the 2024 election. 

However, while Jackson and Trump similarly spread conspiracies of “stolen elections” as a result of corruption and manipulation amongst the political elite, there are a few key differences between the two. One being that Jackson not only won the most electoral votes and popular votes of all candidates, but Trump in the 2020 election won neither, and in the 2016 election did not win the popular vote. 

The 2020 presidential election was not close. Biden beat former President Trump by over 7 million votes, and secured an Electoral College victory of 302-236. Jackson lost by one vote in the House. 

However, despite these staggering differences between the elections of the two former Presidents, one similarity remains; the use of media and allegations of corruption to rally support. Jackson, too, utilized the newspapers to his advantage to spread his allegations, create gossip, and stir anger. The American people want their votes to matter, they want to know that democracy works. Jackson and Trump understand this, they understand that if they can instill fear of fraud, corruption, and deception, they can stir distrust in the President and support for themselves.

It’s a strategy that worked for Jackson when he was elected to the Oval Office in the Election of 1828, and it’s a strategy that Trump hopes will yield similar results for him this election.

« Older posts Newer posts »
css.php
The views and opinions expressed on individual web pages are strictly those of their authors and are not official statements of Grinnell College. Copyright Statement.