Republican strategists are publicly arguing that President Donald Trump made a major misstep with his latest election lawsuit, filed late Thursday in Alaska.

Late Thursday evening, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward — the Justice Department's third-ranking official — filed the suit, which, if approved, would stop certification of the election if anyone other than the incumbent Republican wins.

According to the filing, candidate Daniel J. Sullivan entered the race as a spoiler candidate in a clear effort to cause confusion. If the election is close and it appears Sen. Dan S. Sullivan (R-Alaska) lost support to ballots cast for Daniel J. Sullivan, the White House wants certification paused until it can be determined whether voters were confused.

Legal analysts have mocked the filing as an unlikely “Hail Mary” by the administration, reminiscent of the battles over “hanging chads,” butterfly ballots, and accidental votes for a Libertarian in the 2000 Florida presidential race. Those disputes ultimately culminated in the Supreme Court's Bush v. Gore decision, which halted the Florida recount and effectively decided the presidency more than a month after Election Day.

Trump confirmed his role while speaking to reporters on the tarmac in Florida: “I'm the one that said do it.”

Republicans are now coming forward to describe the litigation as a serious political mistake. Politico reported Saturday that some in the party consider the suit desperate, while others called it downright “moronic.”

Ben Ginsberg, a Republican election lawyer who led George W. Bush's legal team during the 2000 Florida recount and was formerly counsel to his presidential campaigns, commented, “Boy, they are scraping the bottom of the barrel. It feels like a real desperation play to me, because it has got zero basis in the law.”

Gabriel Sterling, a former senior Republican Georgia elections official, agreed. “By talking about stolen elections, by talking about cheating, they're suppressing their own vote and they're encouraging the votes of their opponents. So tactically, I think it's politically moronic,” he said.

Sterling's concern is twofold: if the president keeps suggesting the election is rigged, rank-and-file Republicans have little incentive to show up at the polls, believing the outcome is already fixed against them. At the same time, the rhetoric could energize voters cast ballots against Republicans this cycle.

“I think there is an attempt to lay a foundation to say, ‘If we had won these lawsuits, we would have won the election,’” Sterling added.

How Alaska's courts receive the request — and whether the race stays close enough for the certification pause described in the filing to come into play — remains to be seen.

Some Republican officials, meanwhile, see little to fear from the new election lawsuits. One Georgia Republican who asked not to be named commented, “Bring it on. I think there's zero credible way for any entity, much less the DOJ, to say that the election results in Georgia are suspect.”

Reactions across the party have not been uniform. Politico contacted every Republican statewide election official; four declined to comment, while the remainder did not respond.

Stephen Richer, a Republican and former Arizona election official, believes the reluctance stems from the political risks of challenging Trump. “The survival rate politically of people who oppose Donald Trump on this issue is not great if you're Republican,” he said.