From Federal “Election Observers” to a Third Term

The phrase is “election integrity.” The goal is power.

Trump seems to be on a world tour, courting headlines from Venezuela to Japan. And yes, these global crises and trips matter. But one of the most significant things keeping me up at night isn’t happening abroad. It’s unfolding here, at home, in plain sight.

“Election Integrity” or Intimidation by Design

On October 24, 2025, the Department of Justice announced it would deploy federal election observers to California and New Jersey, two Democratic states with off-year elections, at the request of state Republican parties.

Attorney General Pam Bondi framed it as a push for “transparency and faith in the process.” But transparency isn’t the same as trust, and history teaches that difference matters.

Observers will be sent to Passaic County, New Jersey, and five California counties—Los Angeles, Orange, Kern, Riverside, and Fresno—all diverse, high-turnout areas.

Bondi insists it’s about “faith in elections.” Democrats call it what it looks like: intimidation.

New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin flagged that this is “Highly inappropriate.” California Democratic Chair Rusty Hicks said, “No amount of interference will silence voters.” Governor Gavin Newsom’s office called out what it really is: “A federal intimidation tactic.”

Former Department of Justice attorney David Becker, now executive director of the Center for Election Integrity & Research, warned the plan lacks a legal basis:

“If the administration tried to send monitors without consent from local officials, that could result in chaos.”

The reality is that the optics, potentially armed federal “observers” in majority-Latino and Black precincts, risk creating the fear the Voting Rights Act was written to prevent.

The timing isn’t random. California’s ballot includes a redistricting proposition that could add up to five Democratic congressional seats. That’s the very election the Trump DOJ chose to “monitor.”

And it’s part of a broader pattern:

• Indiana: Trump allies, led by Vice President J.D. Vance, are pressing to redraw maps early to secure GOP seats before 2026.

• North Carolina and Missouri have already passed mid-decade maps locking in Republican advantages.

• Florida followed suit in a special session.

• Virginia Democrats are now counter-moving, calling a special session to redraw their own maps before 2026.

Redistricting isn’t just about lines, it’s about who gets to count. These moves chip away at a democratic norm: representation should follow the people, not the party in power.

Why it matters

Even the appearance of surveillance can suppress votes. When partisan requests trigger federal deployment, oversight becomes a political weapon. I wrote about this pattern back in July, how a fabricated grievance from 2020 (“Stop the Steal”) has now matured into federal policy. What began as posturing became an executive order and a complete playbook: federal observers embedded in local offices, DOJ “audits” of targeted jurisdictions, and quiet attempts to centralize election authority in Washington. The Trump administration isn’t just contesting the past anymore; it’s trying to control the future. It’s a stress test of democracy’s guardrails, designed to see how far they can bend. Together with redistricting, these actions reshape democracy’s machinery, before a single ballot is cast. This isn’t about five counties or one election. It’s about testing boundaries, legally, politically, and psychologically, ahead of 2026 and 2028.

The “Third Term” Trial Balloon

Aboard Air Force One on October 27, Trump, flanked by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance, was asked if he’d rule out running for a third term.

He didn’t. “I’d love to do it,” he said.

The 22nd Amendment couldn’t be more explicit: “No person shall be elected president more than twice.” Yet Trump and his allies have spent months testing that boundary, politically, legally, and commercially.

In April 2025, the official Trump Store began selling “Trump 2028” hats for $50, urging supporters to “make a statement.” Eric Trump modeled one; Elon Musk reposted it with a laughing-emoji flame.

Once an idea is printed on a hat, it stops sounding unconstitutional and starts feeling inevitable.

Meanwhile, Steve Bannon recently told The Economist there’s “a plan” for Trump to stay in power. When asked how, he said, “We’re working on it.” Republicans on the Hill laughed it off. That’s the danger. Dismissal breeds desensitization. Every “joke” or merch drop moves the line another inch toward authoritarian acceptance.

Trump’s comments weren’t improvisation; they were conditioning.

Step 1: test the limit.
Step 2: brand it.
Step 3: mock anyone who objects.

This is how guardrails erode, not by coups, but by repetition. When an autocrat wants to bend a constitution, he doesn’t start with a gun. He begins with a cap. This isn’t about 2028. It’s about acclimating America to a world without limits.

• The 22nd Amendment is absolute on paper, but paper means little if courts and the public treat it as optional.

• The 2028 hats, Bannon’s “plan,” and Trump’s own winks are part of the same rehearsal: seeing whether America will flinch.

• And yes, Trump will rely on the courts, reshaped under his influence, to bless whatever loophole his lawyers devise. All it takes is one favorable ruling to turn a fantasy into precedent.

These aren’t separate stories; they’re blueprints. The DOJ’s “observers,” the redistricting blitz, and the “third-term” talk share one goal: normalize surveillance, trivialize limits, and test obedience. First, make voters doubt their safety at the ballot box. Then, make citizens doubt the permanence of the Constitution itself.

Both weaken participation; both strengthen the hand of power. If that sounds extreme, look at the sequence:

• March 2025: Trump signs the Executive Order on Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections, creating a new Federal Election Integrity Council chaired by the Attorney General, with power to audit and “oversee” state systems. It was framed as safeguarding democracy, but in practice, it centralized authority in Washington and opened the door to federal intervention in local vote counts.

• April 2025: Trump 2028 merchandise normalizes constitutional defiance.

• October 2025: Federal “observers” plan to appear in blue, diverse counties. Trump flirts again with a third term; Bannon promises “a plan.”

Each step measures how far the public and the system will bend before they break. As someone who’s seen this playbook up close, I can tell you: it never starts with tanks. It starts with language–“transparency,” “security,” “faith.” It starts with symbols–a hat, a slogan, a smirk. And it ends with institutions too hollow to fight back.

The struggle for democracy isn’t just at the ballot box; it’s in how we define what’s normal. When surveillance looks like oversight and ambition looks like destiny, democracy becomes a spectator sport. The antidote isn’t despair; it’s exposure. Call it what it is. Refuse to play along. Because authoritarians study reactions. When we stop flinching, they stop advancing.

If this resonates, if you see what’s unfolding and refuse to look away, stay engaged. Share this information. Talk about it. All I ask is this: take Trump at his word. Believe him when he says these things, and watch what they’re doing while he says them. They’re not joking. They’re laying the groundwork, step by step.

Start preparing for 2028 now.

-Olivia