GOP Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina said Sunday that he stands by his vote to certify President Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election. At first blush Scott’s answer might appear comforting, but the way he did it was still concerning.
Asked in an interview on ABC’s “This Week” whether he still believed that vote was the correct one, Scott said: “I will stand by that decision and the next decision to certify the fact that Donald Trump will be the next president of the United States. Nov. 5th, ‘the day of reckoning,’ is coming.” Even as Scott reiterated his belief that Biden’s victory was legitimate — he also instantly pivoted to talking about certifying Trump’s victory in 2024.
Scott’s slippery language about elections should not engender trust from the mainstream press.
Now, it’s not uncommon for a politician to speak about a possible political victory as an inevitable event to project confidence. But Scott’s eagerness to shift the topic to 2024, as well as his ease in talking about the victory of an authoritarian candidate who refers to Jan. 6 insurrectionists as “warriors,” are both notable. It’s also striking that Scott uses theological language implying that Election Day marks a kind of spiritual battle between good and evil. Experts on political violence have pointed out that that’s the exact kind of framing that makes political violence more likely.
In reaffirming his certification vote, Scott risks alienating Trump, who has said he “wouldn’t feel good” about running with someone who admits Biden won the 2020 election. But Scott does avoid the cost of accusations of flip-flopping — the appearance of weakness. He could also view the pivot to talking about a Trump 2024 victory as a way to divert attention back to the current election and signal that he could support Trump’s contesting the 2024 election if he loses again.
That latter signal is consistent with how Scott has answered questions as to whether he’ll accept the 2024 elections; asked on NBC’s News’ “Meet the Press” in May whether he would accept the election results, he said, “At the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump.” A few weeks later on CNN, Scott answered more directly but hedged and repeated the turn to hyping Trump: “Well, certainly. We expect a fair and honest election, and as a result of that expectation, we will certify the election — and certify President Donald Trump as our 47th president.” Here Scott’s seeming affirmation of the electoral process was contingent on conditions that his potential running mate has denied are present in the U.S. election system. And he once again paired his affirming statement with a specific vow that Trump will be the beneficiary of his apparent trust in the system. Scott’s slippery language about elections shouldn’t engender trust from the mainstream media. His outwardly calm affect and his careful choice of words may allow him to appear relatively “moderate” or “stable” next to Trump, but given that he wants to run alongside Trump, that should be all the more reason to worry about him.
Zeeshan Aleem is a writer and editor for MS NOW. 
