More than a year before the 2022 election, Adam Laxalt is sending an un-American message to Nevada voters. He’s signaling that he’ll use the courts in a bid to curtail voting access, disrupt the vote and circumvent the will of the people.
This comes as we’re learning more details from new books about efforts by Donald Trump, Laxalt’s master, to subvert the Constitution in his bid to retain power. Seemingly the Constitution is simply a waste of paper to the gutter scoundrels leading today’s GOP.
Here’s how the U.S. Senate candidate described his plans during a recent appearance on a right-wing radio show: “With me at the top of the ticket, we’re going to be able to get everybody at the table and come up with a full plan, do our best to try to secure this election, get as many observers as we can, and file lawsuits early, if there are lawsuits we can file to try to tighten up the election.” He went on to say that the junk legal actions he and others filed after Donald Trump’s loss “unfortunately … just came too late.”
Translation: Look for Laxalt and his gang to spew out worthless lawsuits like a confetti cannon before, during and after the election. And expect Team Laxalt to stoop to the attacks we’ve seen in Georgia, Arizona and other GOP-majority states on voter access, drop boxes, mail balloting, etc.
All of this is coming from a former Nevada attorney general who launched claims of fraud in the last election and has never, not once, offered the slightest credible shred of evidence of wrongdoing. If he doesn’t like the outcome of an election, it must be fraud, apparently.
What an affront to the people of Nevada, who in recent years elected state leaders — including honorable Republicans — who have done a remarkable job at making voting vastly more accessible and convenient in our state while continuing to ensure election integrity.
But Laxalt’s pre-emptive attack on our voting system is also an unforgivable insult to the thousands of volunteers, poll workers and election officials who work hard to ensure that our elections are free, accessible and accurate. And it may put them at risk as violent threats against poll workers explode across the country fed by liars like Laxalt.
Mr. Laxalt, you had a chance to prove your accusations of widespread voter fraud when you filed junk lawsuit after junk lawsuit in support of the Big Lie after the 2020 election. You failed and failed to make your case.
And no wonder: If Nevada Democrats were so diabolically clever to steal the election from Donald Trump, how did they not also oust Republican U.S. House member Mark Amodei or prevent several Republicans from being elected to the Legislature and weakening the Democratic majorities in both chambers?
Now, in trying to cast more doubt on the integrity of our voting system, and in smearing the many principled citizens who make it work, Laxalt proves himself unworthy of the office he seeks.
A responsible candidate who supports democracy doesn’t go into an election suggesting that the only legitimate outcome would be a majority of people supporting him and his party.
Laxalt also sets himself up for a puzzler of a question. If he should win the election, is his victory legitimate given his accusations of rampant voter fraud? How would he explain that away?
Here’s the reality: It’s entirely plausible that Nevadans could vote heavily Democratic in 2022, given that they’ve done so in the past several elections. With Democrats currently holding five of our six congressional seats, five of our six statewide positions in government, and majorities in both chambers of the state Legislature, it certainly wouldn’t be a shocker for a Republican Senate candidate to lose.
Laxalt’s actual concern likely doesn’t have anything to do with voting integrity, and everything to do with helping the extremist GOP establish minority party rule by disenfranchising voters.
He’s a weak candidate in Nevada, as shown by his previous results in races for statewide offices. Laxalt was beaten soundly by Gov. Steve Sisolak in 2018 after squeaking out a win in 2014 for Nevada attorney general, when he drew just 46.2% of the vote in the last year in Nevada when Republicans performed strongly at the polls.
He’s never won Clark or Washoe counties.
That’s hardly surprising, given that he has weak ties to the state. Laxalt grew up in Washington, D.C., and worked there before moving to Nevada shortly before he ran for A.G. After losing the governor’s race, he took a job with a D.C.-based law firm, although he reportedly worked out of offices in Reno and Las Vegas.
In seeking to unseat Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, who unlike Laxalt has deep and rich ties to Nevada and who has an innate understanding of the state she serves, he’s relying mostly on his dubious status as Nevada’s version of Rudy Giuliani to appeal to Republican extremist voters. His campaign website does not offer his positions on issues; rather, it’s limited to some biographical information, a few items about his term as AG, and of course a link for donations.
So no wonder he’s already gearing up for another round of false attacks on the voting system. When you have no ideas, you pander to the fringe.
Still, we strongly encourage all big-money extremists to donate heavily to Laxalt’s campaign — it’s flushing your money down the toilet for a candidate who can always find new ways to lose.
Meanwhile, to their credit, election officials are going about their business of preparing for another fair and accessible election.
“Voters should be confident that the efforts that we put into preparing for an election, conducting the election, and then tabulating the votes for the election, are good processes,” Clark County Registrar of Voters Joe Gloria told the Associated Press. “We’re not hiding anything from the general public.”
Now, those are the words of a good and responsible leader. Indeed, those are the words of a champion of democracy.
Laxalt, on the other hand, reveals himself as the polar opposite with his disgraceful threat to curtail voter accessibility and subvert the will of Nevadans with his illegitimate legal attacks on the vote.