Episode Overview

Podcast: GD POLITICS
Episode Title: How Trump Could Interfere With The 2026 Midterms
Date: February 5, 2026
Host: Galen Druke
Guests: Nathaniel Rakich (Managing Editor, VoteBeat) and Jessica Huseman (Editorial Director, VoteBeat)
Main Theme:
This episode examines the unprecedented steps President Trump and his administration are taking to influence the 2026 midterm elections, focusing on issues around federal intervention in state-run elections, attempts to nationalize voter rolls, efforts to legislate proof of citizenship, and concerns about election integrity. The conversation looks both at what has already occurred and at the broader structural resilience of U.S. elections.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Setting the Stage: The “Bull in the China Shop” (00:34–03:25)

• 2026 context: First national federal election since 2020 with Trump as president.
• Trump is openly expressing desire for Republicans to nationalize election procedures and making moves to influence state-run elections.
• FBI raided a Fulton County elections office, seizing 2020 ballots—a highly unusual step.
• DOJ is requesting full voter rolls (including private info) from states, aiming for a national voter file.
• Host’s warning: “A president who has a record of only accepting election results when he wins is concerned about Republican losses at the midterms.” (02:55, Galen)
• Structural reminder: U.S. elections are decentralized, with over 9,000 local jurisdictions.

2. Trump Administration’s National Voter File Push (04:03–07:51)

• Nathaniel Rakich explains:
  • DOJ is asking for unredacted voter registration lists from all states (including sensitive personal info).
  • Rumored aim: Compile a national voter list to identify and mandate removal of alleged non-citizens.
  • Problem: Databases used to flag non-citizens are often outdated and inaccurate; some flagged citizens have always been legal voters.
  • 14 states have complied, 23 (mostly Democrat-run) are being sued for noncompliance.
  • Department of Homeland Security upgraded the SAVE system to speed up cross-checking names; criticized for errors.
• Potential risks include federal overreach and undermining traditional state control over elections.
• Quote:
  • “...the Department of Justice under Donald Trump has asked virtually every state at this point to hand over the unredacted copies of its voter registration lists. So that includes people’s names, addresses, personal information, often like Social Security numbers...” (04:20, Nathaniel)

3. Problems with a National Voter File (07:51–12:38)

Jessica Huseman & Rakich on Unintended Consequences:

• Disenfranchisement risk: Mistaken removals – e.g., a lifelong Texas voter wrongly flagged as non-citizen (true story from reporting in Texas).
• Voter rolls are “living documents,” constantly updated at county and state levels—snapshots sent to the feds are quickly outdated and incomplete.
• National file can be used not just to purge rolls but to challenge election results—especially worrying in close races.
• Privacy Act of 1974: Lawsuits argue sharing this data with the federal government violates federal privacy protections.
  • Quote: “...the Privacy act makes it so that the person who shared the entity that shared the data is liable for that privacy violation. So states themselves are on the hook, like with money...” (11:44, Jessica)
• Financial liability: States face millions in potential penalties if found in violation.

4. Legislative Maneuvering: The SAVE Act & Federal Election Laws (12:38–17:14)

• The SAVE Act (passed House, unlikely in Senate): Would require national voter ID and proof of citizenship—already illegal for non-citizens to vote in federal races.
• Galen’s context: Other liberal democracies have national voter ID and proof of citizenship laws; so why the pushback in the U.S.?
• Rakich’s response:
  • Congress can set standards, but administration can’t change election law by executive order—Trump’s orders have mostly been struck down by courts.
  • Political (not just legal) debate: Democrats want greater access; Republicans emphasize preventing fraud.
  • Real issue: Claims of mass non-citizen fraud are unfounded; in Georgia, e.g., only nine votes in 8.2 million by non-citizens (outcome unaffected).
• Quote:
  • “If we’re talking about competing ideas of to what extent fraud happens in American elections, one side believes one thing, one side believes another, and the facts show that it...is at a minuscule scale that would not change the results of elections.” (16:05, Galen)

5. The Unique Structure of U.S. Election Administration (17:14–23:33)

• Decentralization as Security:
  • Most peer democracies have a national voter ID; the U.S. doesn’t, and jurisdiction is fragmented down to the county level.
  • There is no universal “who should be here” list or central database of eligible voters or citizens—by law or infrastructure.
  • Voter registration databases are messy, prone to human error, and not interlinked in real time.
• Jessica’s vivid analogy:
  • “...we assume that all of this data is connected and that it can talk to each other and that what is returned to us when it does speak to each other is accurate. Like it is not.” (21:58, Jessica)
  • Comparing TV tropes (CSI, Criminal Minds) vs. messy reality.
• Diffuse system = resilient system: Makes coordinated large-scale fraud or manipulation much harder.

6. Political Trust, Good Faith, and Federalism (23:33–24:58)

• Philosophical divide: Federal vs. State control—typically, conservatives champion states’ rights, but the current push flips that dynamic.
• Good faith concern: The context of Trump’s past efforts to subvert election outcomes makes any nationalization push far more suspicious.
• Additional moves: Besides SAVE Act and executive orders, new bills like the “Mega Act” (Make Elections Great Again) are in circulation, signaling a broader effort to reshape election law.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “A president who has a record of only accepting election results when he wins is concerned about Republican losses at the midterms.” (02:55, Galen)
• Jessica’s TV analogy: “I think that people have this really, this really silly understanding of how useful government data is because they watch shows like Criminal Minds and CSI...” (21:58)
• Nathaniel on the paradox: “...the system is quite robust against fraud because of like all the checks in place on the local level.” (20:49)

Important Timestamps

• 00:34–03:25: Host’s introduction, context for Trump’s actions, metaphor of “bull in the china shop”
• 04:03–07:51: Rakich details DOJ requests for voter rolls & implications
• 07:51–10:21: Huseman details practical and personal-level issues with roll purges
• 10:21–12:38: Discussion of legal and financial consequences under the Privacy Act
• 12:38–17:14: Analysis of SAVE Act, political and legal context, and actual scale of fraud
• 17:14–23:33: Deep dive into decentralized structure, limitations of federal/all-knowing database analogies
• 23:33–24:58: Philosophical and political overtones; additional Republican legislative initiatives

Tone & Style

• Friendly, curious, and rigorous—light humor interleaved with serious analysis.
• Guests share expert, ground-level insights and personal reporting anecdotes.
• Occasional moments of personal camaraderie and pop culture references for clarity and relatability.

Conclusion

This episode offers a thorough and accessible breakdown of the looming threats to U.S. election integrity posed by Trump administration maneuvers aiming to nationalize federal election process, create a national voter file, and restrict voting procedures. At the same time, the guests demystify the sometimes bewildering complexity and resilience of American election administration—ultimately arguing that, however imperfect, its diffuse federalist structure is a major bulwark against political interference.
For listeners, the discussion illuminates why these technical fights matter so much in America’s democratic contest.

For more in-depth discussion (including the Fulton County FBI raid and future risks), visit GDPolitics.com for the full episode.