As the United States prepares for the upcoming November midterm elections, election monitoring has become a focal point of heightened political tension. Traditionally viewed as a low-profile activity focused on ensuring the integrity of voting procedures, poll watching this year is marked by sharply divergent approaches and increased suspicion among observers.

Volunteers from political parties, civic organizations, and government bodies across the country undergo training sessions to serve as election observers, tasked with watching, documenting, and occasionally challenging the electoral process. While many of these trainings remain factual and instructive, a review of various sessions reveals some encouraged participants to anticipate misconduct or fraud, potentially fostering distrust in the election system.

Some Republican-aligned trainings emphasize vigilance against voter fraud and error, portraying poll watchers as a necessary “protective measure.” For example, a guide from the America First Policy Institute, a conservative think tank, framed observers as guardians against election mismanagement. In Michigan, a battleground state where Senate races are closely contested, some Republicans have advocated recruiting retired law enforcement officers as poll watchers to purportedly reduce cheating. A recent livestreamed training there instructed GOP observers to actively monitor for absentee ballot fraud and voter identification compliance, suggesting that elections managed by Democrats have resulted in problematic outcomes that must be corrected.

Conversely, Democratic-aligned groups have focused on training volunteers to serve as defenders against voter intimidation and suppression. In Arizona, organizers held sessions preparing “constitutional observers” to counteract potential interference, including possible deployments of immigration agents and National Guard personnel at polling places. The League of Women Voters and other progressive entities emphasize de-escalation tactics and conflict avoidance, while framing poll watchers as safeguards of voter access amid concerns over restrictive state laws.

The Department of Justice has announced plans to send what it calls a “historic” number of monitors to polling locations nationwide, with an estimated 1,000 volunteers slated for deployment in November. Likewise, the Association of State Democratic Committees aims to train at least 10,000 “democracy protectors” to guard against federal intimidation efforts, particularly targeting immigration agents’ presence at polls.

Election observers operate under rules that vary among over 10,000 jurisdictions, distinct from poll workers who administer voting. In recent weeks, trainings have taken place in a wide range of settings—from rural cafes to suburban offices and virtual platforms—reflecting both local and national mobilization.

However, some experts warn that framing poll watching as a mission to catch wrongdoing, especially in the absence of evidence, risks deepening political polarization and undermining trust in elections. Justin Levitt, law professor at Loyola Marymount University and former DOJ official, noted that repeatedly priming observers to anticipate illegality may lead to misinterpretations of routine or minor issues as fraud.

Reports from recent elections document instances where poll watchers, often influenced by unfounded conspiracy theories alleging widespread noncitizen voting or mail-in ballot fraud, have harassed voters and election officials, sometimes carrying firearms or aggressively filming at polling sites. Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon publicly criticized two Department of Justice monitors for disruptive conduct that included attempting to interview voters and inspect voting machines.

Despite these challenges, most training sessions stress the importance of restraint and non-interference during voting. Election officials and civic leaders express concern that the increasingly adversarial tone could erode public confidence in the democratic process at a time when trust in elections is already fragile. As the midterms approach, the behavior and attitudes of poll watchers are likely to remain a significant factor in the contentious political landscape.