在现代美国历史上，首次出现一位在任总统试图动用国家机器的力量，为其所属政党争取选举胜利。特朗普政府试图削弱邮寄投票的广泛使用；要求各州移交选民名册；威胁要起诉州和地方选举官员；拒绝排除向投票站部署军队或联邦特工的可能性；并大肆宣传以非公民身份投票或登记投票为由、逮捕少数人的戏剧性场面。
For the first time in modern American history, a sitting president is seeking to wield the force of the state to secure an electoral victory for his party. The Trump administration has attempted to undermine the widespread use of mail-in voting; demanded that states hand over voter rolls; threatened to prosecute state and local election officials; refused to rule out the idea of deploying troops or federal agents to polling places; and publicized the dramatic arrests of small numbers of people accused of voting or registering to vote as noncitizens.
这些努力大多收效甚微——要么是因为政府的无能，要么是因为特朗普总统关于选民欺诈的指控缺乏事实证据，要么是因为联邦政府缺乏法律授权，要么是因为法院拒绝配合特朗普的计划。
Many of these efforts have made little headway—either because of the administration’s incompetence, the stubborn lack of factual evidence behind President Trump’s claims of voter fraud, the federal government’s lack of legal authority, or the refusal of courts to go along with Trump’s plans.
但特朗普手头可能还有一个不同的问题。民调显示，在大选日前几周，特朗普的支持率跌至历史最低点；对其表现感到满意的选民比例现已跌入30多个百分点。与此同时，民主党似乎有望重夺众议院控制权，甚至可能夺回参议院控制权，而这在去年看来还遥不可及。民调可能是错的——特朗普时代备受瞩目的民调失误令人难忘。
But Trump may have a different problem on his hands. Polls show Trump’s approval falling to all-time lows in the weeks before Election Day; the percent of voters happy with his performance has now sunk into the 30s. Democrats, meanwhile, appear likely to retake control of the House of Representatives and maybe even the Senate, which last year seemed well out of reach. The polls could be wrong—and high-profile-polling misses of the Trump era are hard to forget.
但如果民调准确，共和党可能将面临乔治·W·布什在2006年中期选举惨败后悔恨地称为的“惨重打击”。与较为微弱的民主党胜利相比，这种惨败可能会使大多数压制投票率的努力变得无关紧要，并使实施任何更激进的舞弊手段变得困难得多。
But if the polling is right, the GOP may be in for what George W. Bush, after a disastrous 2006 midterm, ruefully termed a “thumping.”And a thumping, as opposed to a narrower Democratic victory, could render most efforts to suppress turnout irrelevant, and make it far more difficult to implement any more dramatic effort to rig the results.
令特朗普无比沮丧的是，美国的选举是在州和地方层面组织的，联邦政府几乎不发挥作用。在典型的中期选举年，全美50个州共有近470个国会议席待定。尽管其中真正有竞争力的选战只有少数，但要篡改投票结果，仍需干预多场各自运作、属于不同司法管辖区、适用不同法律的选举。民主党大获全胜的夜晚，会让人难以捏造出一个虚假的众议院多数派，理由正如一支落后太多的运动队，在大比分落后时更难通过作弊逆转取胜。
To Trump’s endless frustration, elections in America are organized at the state and local level, with little role for the federal government. In a typical midterm year, almost 470 congressional seats are up for grabs across 50 different states. Though a small number of those races are actually competitive, tinkering with the outcome of the votes would still require meddling with a number of different elections, all run differently, in different jurisdictions, under different laws. A strong night for the Democratic Party would make conjuring an ersatz House majority hard for the same reason that a losing sports team is less able to cheat its way to a victory in a blowout. (Even on a very strong night for the Democrats, the Senate may still be quite a close call.)
（即便民主党大获全胜，参议院的控制权可能依然胶着。）反之，微弱的优势会让选举更容易受到推翻选民意愿的努力的影响。特朗普试图推翻2020年总统大选结果，在很大程度上依赖几个摇摆州极其微弱的优势，有时仅靠1万或2万张选票就决定了胜负。在佐治亚州，总统曾著名地施压州务卿布拉德·拉芬斯珀格“找到11780张选票”，以弥补他对乔·拜登的劣势。
Tight margins, by contrast, can make an election more vulnerable to efforts to undo the voters’ will. Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election relied in significant part on tight margins in some swing states, sometimes with only 10,000 or 20,000 votes deciding the winner. In Georgia, the president famously pushed Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes” to make up his deficit against Joe Biden.
正如众议院1月6日调查委员会报告和杰克·史密斯对特朗普的起诉书所述，特朗普及其盟友利用摇摆州的胶着票数，加上邮寄选票计数缓慢，制造对选举结果的怀疑，并为国会共和党议员提供工具，拖延1月6日选举人团正式计票的进程。随之而来的是对国会大厦的袭击。
As described by both the House January 6 committee’s report and Jack Smith’s indictment of Trump, Trump and his allies used close tallies in swing states, together with the slow counting of mail-in ballots, to engineer doubts over election results and provide Republican members of Congress with the tools to delay the formal counting of the electoral vote on January 6. The attack on the Capitol followed.
一月六日的记忆，以及自2020年以来选举否认运动的根深蒂固，引发了人们——既焦虑又兴奋——对2026年可能发生类似针对选举结果的攻击的猜测。如果一旦大部分结果公布，民主党似乎有望仅靠几个席位就赢得众议院多数，那么也许有坚定支持特朗普的盟友在关键位置上，可以在少数几个最接近的选区制造麻烦。例如，一位地方选举专员，就可能拒绝签署民主党候选人微弱胜选的认证；或者司法部可以签发搜查令，扣押选票，从而延迟或推翻计票过程。
The memory of January 6, and the entrenchment of the election-denier movement since 2020, has led to speculation—both anxious and enthused—about the possibility of a comparable attack on election results in 2026. If, once most of the results are in, Democrats seem set to eke out a House majority by just a few seats, perhaps committed Trump allies in positions of power could make trouble in a handful of the closest districts. A local election commissioner, say, could refuse to sign off on a Democrat’s narrow victory, or the Justice Department could execute a warrant to seize ballots and thus delay or upend the counting of votes.
这可能在1月3日造成混乱——众议院首次开会时会发生什么？如果争议席位的数量足以让本应有多数的政党无法选出新的议长并掌控该议院，那该怎么办？虽然这不是夺取众议院控制权的不二法门，但这种操作可能让局面变得非常危险，而且迅速恶化。
This could create chaos on January 3, when the new House gathers for the first time: What happens if the contested seats are enough to deny the should-be-majority party the votes it needs to select a new speaker and take control of the chamber? Although this isn’t a foolproof trick for stealing control of the House, such a play could make things very precarious very quickly.
但民主党获得的更大多数，将使特朗普更难削减这一多数——需要说服更多的书记员、争取更多的搜查令、应对更多的法院裁决，遍布全国各地。“如果众议院多数在任一方向都是20到30席，我认为围绕1月3日试图搞一些名堂的可能性，远低于多数只有两三个席位的情况，”Campaign Legal Center的Jonathan Diaz最近在UCLA法学院召集的一次预election研讨会上评论道。
But the bigger the majority secured by Democrats, the more difficult it would be for Trump to shave that majority down—the more clerks to convince, warrants to secure, and court rulings to dodge, all over the country. “If there is a House majority in either direction that is 20, 30 seats, I think the likelihood of an attempt to engage in some kind of shenanigans around January 3 is way less than if the majority is two or three seats,” Jonathan Diaz of the Campaign Legal Center commented recently on a preelection panel convened at UCLA’s law school.
其他手段在投票结果大幅偏向某一方向时，效果也会大打折扣。例如，特朗普前所未有的推动明确党派性的非周期重划选区，可能只能获得几个额外的共和党席位，而非民主党战略家曾经担心的两位数增长。
Other tricks are also less effective when the vote swings heavily in one direction. For example, Trump’s unprecedented push for explicitly partisan off-cycle redistricting may net only a few extra GOP seats rather than the double-digit gains Democratic strategists had once feared.
政治制约同样重要。任何让共和党夺取众议院控制权的计划，都取决于国会共和党人是否愿意齐心协力投票、毫无异议——而当前内部派系林立的众议院共和党党团连这一点都勉强做到。眼下，因特朗普民调数字糟糕而感到恐慌的共和党人，已开始在竞选途中与他划清界限，以力保自己的席位。今夏，共和党政客和亲“让美国再次伟大”（MAGA）的媒体机构，对总统一篇质疑选举公信力的冗长讲话反应冷淡。
Political constraints matter too. Any scheme to steal the House for the GOP would depend on the willingness of congressional Republicans to vote in lockstep, with no defectors—something that the current fractious House Republican caucus can barely manage. Already, though, Republicans spooked by Trump’s bad poll numbers have begun distancing themselves from him on the campaign trail as they fight to hold on to their seats. Over the summer, Republican politicians and MAGA-friendly media outlets responded coolly to a rambling address by the president casting doubt on election integrity.
如果共和党失去众议院，有多少担心自己政治前途的共和党人，会真正倾向于采纳一位日益不得人心的跛脚鸭总统的边缘论调？（特朗普近期对竞选违宪第三任期的可能性显著保持沉默。）鲍勃·鲍尔告诉我，特朗普将难以对抗“明确的失利，加上对明确失利的预期”。鲍尔是资深民主党律师，曾在拜登竞选团队对抗特朗普推翻2020年大选结果的斗争中发挥核心作用，如今他与本·金斯伯格一道专注于两党选举公信力工作，后者是知名选举律师，以往曾代表共和党。
If the GOP loses the House, how many Republicans concerned about their own political careers would be actually inclined to adopt the fringe message of an ever more unpopular lame-duck president? (Trump has been notably quiet recently about the possibility of running for an unconstitutional third term.) Trump will be hard-pressed to fight against “a clear loss, coupled with the expectation of a clear loss,” Bob Bauer told me. Bauer—a longtime Democratic lawyer who played a central role in the Biden campaign’s fight against Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election—now focuses on bipartisan election-integrity work, alongside Ben Ginsberg, an election lawyer known for his past work representing the Republican Party.
鲍尔说，2020年投票结束后需额外数天才能宣布总统大选结果，助长了特朗普的舞弊指控。但现在，广泛的公众不满与共和党惨淡的民调、政客和媒体日益增长的“共和党将表现不佳”预期相吻合。“如果事态发展为民主党表现良好，在这种情况下，他要突然宣称因舞弊被剥夺了大胜，将非常困难，”鲍尔告诉我。
In 2020, Bauer said, the additional days required for the presidential race to be called after the polls closed helped fuel Trump’s claims of fraud. But now, broad public dissatisfaction has aligned with dismal polling for the GOP and a growing anticipation among both politicians and the press that Republicans will do poorly. “It would be very difficult in these circumstances, if things turn out that the Democrats do well, for him to suddenly announce that he was denied his landslide by vote rigging,” Bauer told me.
当然，这种方案行不通，并不意味着特朗普不会尝试。上周，司法部提起了一起奇怪的诉讼，试图预先阻止阿拉斯加认证其参议院选举结果——但仅限于共和党参议员丹·沙利文（Dan Sullivan）落败的情况。法律教授德里克·穆勒（Derek Muller）在对该案的分析中写道：“法律论据是我见过最糟糕的之一。”司法部还继续推进诉讼，试图迫使加利福尼亚州搁置邮寄给联邦政府声称已认定为非公民的选民的邮寄选票。
Just because such a scheme would be implausible does not, of course, mean that Trump won’t try it. Last week, the Justice Department filed a bizarre lawsuit seeking to preemptively block Alaska from certifying the results of its Senate race—but only if Republican Senator Dan Sullivan loses. (“The legal argument is one of the worst ones I’ve ever seen,” wrote the law professor Derek Muller in an analysis of the case.) DOJ also continues to pursue litigation seeking to force California to set aside mail-in ballots to voters whom the federal government claims to have identified as noncitizens.
这些案件草率、拖延，几乎注定会失败。但它们确实有助于特朗普及其盟友构建一个叙事：法院阻挠了特朗普为确保公平选举所做的努力。同样，如果一名亲特朗普的叛逆地方选举官员试图阻挠民主党候选人的胜利，无论他或她编造什么理由，都可能为极右翼的选举舞弊谣言提供燃料，即使这种努力——极有可能——最终会失败。
These cases are sloppy, tardy, and almost certainly doomed. But they do have the advantage of helping Trump and his allies build a narrative about the courts blocking Trump’s efforts to ensure a fair election. Likewise, if a Trump-aligned rogue local election official tried to block a Democratic candidate’s victory, whatever he or she concocted as reasoning could provide fuel for election-fraud rumors on the far right, even if the effort—as it likely would—ultimately failed.
在一场大胜选举中，一些竞选仍会胶着。与政治版图更典型的年份相比，这些胶着的竞选可能只是发生在不同的州或选区——主要是更偏共和党的地区。全国各地深红地区的众议院席位可能新近成为争夺目标。在参议院，得克萨斯州和阿拉斯加的竞选脱颖而出，成为潜在的爆发点。“参议院任何胶着的竞选都将遭到极其激烈的争夺，”鲍尔告诉我。
In a wave election, some races will still be close. They may just be in different states or districts—mostly, more Republican ones—than in a year with more typical political geography. House seats in deep-red areas across the country may be newly up for grabs. In the Senate, races in Texas and Alaska stand out as potential flash points. “Any close race in the Senate is going to be hotly, hotly contested,” Bauer told me.
他指出了民主党人阿尔·弗兰肯（Al Franken）和共和党人诺姆·科尔曼（Norm Coleman）在2008年明尼苏达州参议院选举中的惨烈争斗，那场争斗耗时数月才解决，最终法院维持了弗兰肯以312票的优势获胜。
He pointed to the bitter fight between the Democrat Al Franken and the Republican Norm Coleman over the 2008 Senate election in Minnesota, which took months to resolve and ended with the courts upholding Franken’s 312-vote victory.
在中期选举前的最后几周，选举专家们显得明显比围绕特朗普可能颠覆投票的一些焦虑言论所暗示的要平静。接受《纽约时报》采访的八位专家（包括鲍尔）对可能出现的动荡表示担忧，但总体上相信官员们已准备好保护选举的公正性。非营利出版物《投票节拍》同样调查了31位选举管理权威人士，发现该群体虽然警惕，但对中期选举将顺利进行“谨慎乐观”。
In the final weeks before the midterms, election experts have seemed notably calmer than some of the the anxious rhetoric around Trump’s potential subversion of the vote might suggest. Eight experts interviewed by The New York Times (including Bauer) voiced worries about possible upheaval but overall confidence that officials are prepared to protect the integrity of the elections. The nonprofit publication Votebeat likewise surveyed 31 authorities on election administration and found the group to be wary but “cautiously optimistic” that the midterms will go smoothly.
如果选举在没有严重干扰的情况下通过，民主党的大幅获胜优势可能是部分原因。但可能需要如此大的优势才能避免混乱，这一事实本身就令人警醒。在一个健康的民主国家，反对党不应必须以巨大数量获胜才能确保胜利，选民也应该能够相信，即使选举结果接近，选举也将是自由和公正的。
If the elections pass without serious disruption, a hefty margin of victory for the Democratic Party could be partly why. But the fact that such a margin may be needed to avoid chaos is itself sobering. In a healthy democracy, the opposition party should not have to win by enormous numbers to ensure victory, and voters should be able to trust that even a close election will be free and fair.