“It settles down into the unconscious,” he says. “I’m teaching a class on emotions this fall, and that’s one of the points—the emotions you feel have to do with how a situation is framed. It’s like the old subliminal advertising thing.”

For Karen Greenberg, director of the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School, threats to democracy from disinformation are vast and real, but voters and election officials have never been more vigilant.

“Look, we know we’re being spun,” says Greenberg, co-editor of Our Nation at Risk: Election Integrity as a National Security Issue. 

“The question is, can we step back for a moment and say, ‘I know I’m being spun. How do I either ignore this and move on to something else, or how do I put this in a category where I know that this is likely disinformation or misinformation and see what I can do to verify it?’”

Here are some tips Greenberg and Davenport shared to help you stay aware of—and minimally influenced by—disinformation this election season.

Be skeptical of new messages about the election—and their messengers.

“Whenever you see new information about the election, really close to the election, you should be suspicious,” says Davenport, who directs Fordham’s Peace and Justice studies program and is a frequent political commentator for publications like Newsweek and America. “If there’s some new news source that you’re just seeing for the first time this fall, and you have questions, google them and find if there are any reports about this source.”

On social networks, he says, keep an eye out for new friend and follow requests from people and groups you don’t know, and “just be conscious that you are being manipulated by algorithms, and their goal is to addict you to hateful content because that’s what sells.”

Greenberg notes that there are laws in place against promoting disinformation related to elections, but they’re hard to enforce without buy-in from private companies. 

Don’t let disinformation lessen your belief in objective facts.

As deepfakes, doctored photos, and AI-generated images flourish, it may feel tempting to dismiss the possibility of objective truth in the media we consume. Davenport cautions against this kind of wholesale skepticism, though.

Disinformation campaigns often try to foster chaos and confusion, Greenberg says, and create the sense that “a country can’t quite hold it together through a transition period.”

“There has to be a counternarrative to ‘we’re doomed, we’re victims,’ she says. “We’re not victims.”  

Be patient at the polls.

No matter how well-trained volunteer poll workers are, it’s going to be hard to prepare them for “any kind of aberrations that come up because of misinformation,” Greenberg says. “Go early … and just be patient.”  

And don’t be deterred, Davenport adds. 

“Don’t be scared away. Even if you see something telling you that the line at your polling place is two hours long.”  

Take advantage of available election resources.

Despite all the worries that election disinformation sparks in experts, Greenberg is heartened by what she says is “an incredible amount of attention” being paid to the issue by voters, law enforcement, and election officials. And she feels confident that voters are, on the whole, savvy enough to have their antennae up. 

To stay informed, she recommends resources like Election Law Blog and Democracy Docket. And Davenport points out that contacting your county clerk’s office—or checking its website—is a good way to get any necessary information about voting.  “We still need to tell people about the threats,” he says, “but then with that, we can say, ‘And here’s how you can find reliable sources on these topics.’”

According to Joseph Landau, the Dean of Fordham University School of Law, empathy plays a huge part in being an effective critical thinker. “Understanding where others are coming from, and acknowledging their problems, are crucial steps to forming our own opinions about an issue, especially if we are trying to be part of the solution to those problems,” Landau says. “This means considering not just the context of words, but the broader context so that we can engage in a dialogue that is both insightful and respectful.”

Landau places a premium on the “respectful” aspect of communication. Helping law students understand the importance of “civil discourse,” with an emphasis on civil, is a top priority for him.

Landau believes that “[e]mbracing that unknown and being open to unexpected opportunities are essential components of a critical mindset.” Those unexpected opportunities might include the chance to learn from sources we’re normally skeptical about.

“We need to ask ourselves if we have fully considered all aspects of an issue, including potential counterexamples and counterarguments. By challenging our assumptions and testing our hypotheses, we cultivate a mindset of discernment that is both rigorous and open-minded,” Landau says.

“It would behoove the administration and the Democratic Party to utilize the VP during these next few months of the campaign,” Christina Greer, an associate professor of political science at Fordham University, said. 

“She is able to articulate the administration’s policies on everything from reproductive rights to loan forgiveness to the existential threat the GOP policies pose on the future of the nation…. She has shown that she connects with a diverse group of voters across varying demographics and in cities in swing states.”

The 2024 presidential election is likely to be the first time since 1892 that an incumbent president is running against another former president. And with early primaries having such an outsized influence, the slate could be a virtual lock before Super Tuesday even rolls around—even though most Americans don’t want a Biden-Trump rematch.

John Davenport, Ph.D., professor of philosophy at Fordham and former director of Peace and Justice Studies, said there are three main problems with the uniquely American presidential primary system that have contributed to this likely matchup: the scheduling of the primaries, the way the delegates are determined, and a lack of uniformity in who can vote in each primary.

‘Glaringly Unfair Tradition’

The Constitution doesn’t say anything about how political parties or their nomination processes should work, because the authors didn’t foresee the power of parties, which now set their own primaries, Davenport said. One result is that just a few states keep holding the earliest primaries.

Davenport called it a “glaringly unfair tradition” that four states have cornered the market.

“Early primaries bring huge profits to businesses in early states and give them more influence. Iowa rescheduled its chaotic caucus to just a week after New Year’s Day in 2024, and New Hampshire’s Republican primary election was eight days later, followed soon by Nevada and South Carolina.” 

While outcomes in Iowa and New Hampshire are not always decisive, their small populations, combined with South Carolina’s, have enjoyed enormously disproportionate influence that can eliminate candidates who might have remained viable if the first primaries were held in more populous states, he said.

“Thus they can cut nine out of 10 American voters out of the process, especially when early frontrunners gain big leads,” he said, adding that “no other advanced democratic nation” allows this.

Lack of State Uniformity

Inconsistency in how delegates are awarded also affects who ultimately wins the party nominations.

Because the Republican primaries in Iowa and New Hampshire operate somewhat proportionally, Nikki Haley won 17 delegates to Trump’s 33 by garnering about 40% of the combined vote in those two states. But in South Carolina’s Republican primary this month, the majority winner in each district will take all of its delegates—meaning that Haley could get 38 to 40% of the votes but gain zero delegates out of the state’s 50-delegate total, That would make it much harder for her to raise funds for the races in Michigan and on Super Tuesday in early March. Davenport said. In still other Republican primaries, a candidate finishing first gets all or most of the state’s delegates.

By contrast, in Democratic primaries in all states, each candidate gets a number of delegates that is loosely proportional to their percentage of the popular vote. 

Who Gets to Vote?

Equally inconsistent is whether a state’s primaries are open to independent voters or just those in the party holding the primary.

New Hampshire’s Republican primary was open, and many independents voted, boosting Haley’s numbers. Nevada, which this year held both a Republican primary and caucus, closed those races to independents. 

What’s the Solution?

“Congress has the authority to change the primary election calendar, rotating the chance to hold early primaries among five or six regions of the U.S., so that every state gets a fair opportunity over five or six presidential election cycles to hold high-impact primaries,” said Davenport.

Federal law could also solve the delegate problem by mandating that political parties use one method to award convention delegates in all state primaries. And by mandating open primaries in all states, federal law could help moderate candidates continue longer in tight races, he said.

“These are just a few examples of sensible and non-partisan reforms,” said Davenport.

John Davenport has taught in undergraduate and graduate programs at Fordham since 1998. He is the author of several articles and books, including 2023’s The Democracy Amendments, which attempts to synthesize two decades of creative ideas to fix the federal system into a comprehensive program.

While Anthony J. Ferrante, FCRH ‘01, GSAS ‘04, Global Head of Cybersecurity at FTI Consulting, said there’s “no doubt that our election systems are at risk,” most of the panelists, including Ferrante, expressed more concern with misinformation fostered on social media than the physical voting systems. 

Anne Nueberger, Director of Cybersecurity at the National Security Agency, and lead investigator of election fraud, said that outside of a few incidents, the overall integrity of elections remains sound, but how outside adversaries work to influence elections in the social media space continues to concern her. 

“Three things have happened in the social media ecology that have made it more effective. First the rise of cryptocurrency. You can purchase infrastructure pretty anonymously, ” she said. 

“Second, encryption … And third, you can actually pretty easily buy influence packages. You can just Google it online.” 

Ferrante noted that the very platforms being used to spread important information emanating from the conference, like Twitter and Facebook, are being weaponized. He said that when he worked for the White House in 2016, the administration studied the voting process, from voter registration at the DMV through election night, and finding no disruption, concluded that the system is very sound. That was not for lack of trying though. He cited an incident of election meddling in Illinois that revealed a widespread national effort on the part of Russian to interfere with the system. 

“We realized that for adversaries to actually take steps to manipulate the vote and change the outcome of an election, it would be really hard to do without being noticed, without alerting authorities, and send out massive signals that everyone would know about,” he said. 

Not surprisingly, Chris Wlaschin, vice president, Election and Systems & Software, concurred. He said that the fact that states control the election process for their respective districts creates a diverse ecosystem, from paper ballots to touch screens, that creates the system’s greatest strength. However, he did say that more could be done in terms of educating state election officials. 

“Much more can be done in the election infrastructure, but it’s not just about buying new equipment,” he said. “It’s about invoking better awareness, hiring security companies like the ones who are here today [at the conference].”  

Ferrante said that many state election officials don’t have the technical or financial resources to pay for such expertise, something  Brad Tusk, CEO of Tusk Ventures, chalked up to politics. He said money is wasted on politicians’ pet projects rather than shoring up the system.

“Spending lots and lots of resources to protect a totally broken system is fine, but I don’t think we’re accomplishing as much as we think we are because in the first place we don’t have a functioning democracy, we don’t have a functioning Congress,” he said. 

“Sure, it would be great to protect us from Russia, Iran and everyone else, but … I think we need the focus not just be on security but a lot more on access and a lot more on turnout.”