( TIME,BY Molly Ball,2021-02-04)
A weird thing
happened right after the Nov. 3 election: nothing.
The nation was
braced for chaos. Liberal groups had vowed to take to the streets, planning
hundreds of protests across the country. Right-wing militias were girding for
battle. In a poll before Election Day, 75% of Americans voiced concern about
violence.
Instead, an
eerie quiet descended. As President Trump refused to concede, the response was
not mass action but crickets. When media organizations called the race for Joe
Biden on Nov. 7, jubilation broke out instead, as people thronged cities across
the U.S. to celebrate the democratic process that resulted in Trump’s ouster.
A second odd
thing happened amid Trump’s attempts to reverse the result: corporate America
turned on him. Hundreds of major business leaders, many of whom had backed
Trump’s candidacy and supported his policies, called on him to concede. To the
President, something felt amiss. “It was all very, very strange,” Trump said on
Dec. 2. “Within days after the election, we witnessed an orchestrated effort to
anoint the winner, even while many key states were still being counted.”
In a way,
Trump was right.
There was a conspiracy unfolding behind
the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance
from CEOs. Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between
left-wing activists and business titans. The pact was formalized in a terse,
little-noticed joint statement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO
published on Election Day. Both sides would come to see it as a sort of
implicit bargain–inspired by the summer’s massive, sometimes destructive
racial-justice protests–in which the forces of labor came together with the
forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.
The handshake
between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan
campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not
to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and
uncorrupted. For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives
scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous
attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President.
Though much of this activity took place on the left, it was separate from the
Biden campaign and crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by
nonpartisan and conservative actors. The scenario the shadow campaigners were
desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous
that no result could be discerned at all, a failure of the central act of
democratic self-governance that has been a hallmark of America since its
founding.
Their work
touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems
and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding.
They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers
and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They
successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against
disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears. They
executed national public-awareness campaigns that helped Americans understand
how the vote count would unfold over days or weeks, preventing Trump’s
conspiracy theories and false claims of victory from getting more traction.
After Election Day, they monitored every pressure point to ensure that Trump
could not overturn the result. “The untold story of the election is the
thousands of people of both parties who accomplished the triumph of American
democracy at its very foundation,” says Norm Eisen, a prominent lawyer and
former Obama Administration official who recruited Republicans and Democrats to
the board of the Voter Protection Program.
For Trump and
his allies were running their own campaign to spoil the election. The President
spent months insisting that mail ballots were a Democratic plot and the
election would be “rigged.” His henchmen at the state level sought to block
their use, while his lawyers brought dozens of spurious suits to make it more
difficult to vote–an intensification of the GOP’s legacy of suppressive
tactics. Before the election, Trump plotted to block a legitimate vote count.
And he spent the months following Nov. 3 trying to steal the election he’d
lost–with lawsuits and conspiracy theories, pressure on state and local
officials, and finally summoning his army of supporters to the Jan. 6 rally
that ended in deadly violence at the Capitol.
The democracy
campaigners watched with alarm. “Every week, we felt like we were in a struggle
to try to pull off this election without the country going through a real
dangerous moment of unraveling,” says former GOP Representative Zach Wamp, a
Trump supporter who helped coordinate a bipartisan election-protection council.
“We can look back and say this thing went pretty well, but it was not at all
clear in September and October that that was going to be the case.”
This is the
inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to
the group’s inner workings, never-before-seen documents and interviews with
dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. It is the story of
an unprecedented, creative and determined campaign whose success also reveals
how close the nation came to disaster. “Every attempt to interfere with the
proper outcome of the election was defeated,” says Ian Bassin, co-founder of
Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan rule-of-law advocacy group. “But it’s
massively important for the country to understand that it didn’t happen
accidentally. The system didn’t work magically. Democracy is not
self-executing.”
That’s why the
participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it
sounds like a paranoid fever dream–a well-funded cabal of powerful people,
ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to
influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control
the flow of information. They were not rigging the election; they were
fortifying it. And they believe the public needs to understand the system’s
fragility in order to ensure that democracy in America endures.
THE ARCHITECT
Sometime in
the fall of 2019, Mike Podhorzer became convinced the election was headed for
disaster–and determined to protect it.
This was not
his usual purview. For nearly a quarter-century, Podhorzer, senior adviser to
the president of the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest union federation, has
marshaled the latest tactics and data to help its favored candidates win
elections. Unassuming and professorial, he isn’t the sort of hair-gelled
“political strategist” who shows up on cable news. Among Democratic insiders,
he’s known as the wizard behind some of the biggest advances in political
technology in recent decades. A group of liberal strategists he brought
together in the early 2000s led to the creation of the Analyst Institute, a
secretive firm that applies scientific methods to political campaigns. He was
also involved in the founding of Catalist, the flagship progressive data
company.
The endless
chatter in Washington about “political strategy,” Podhorzer believes, has
little to do with how change really gets made. “My basic take on politics is
that it’s all pretty obvious if you don’t overthink it or swallow the
prevailing frameworks whole,” he once wrote. “After that, just relentlessly
identify your assumptions and challenge them.” Podhorzer applies that approach
to everything: when he coached his now adult son’s Little League team in the
D.C. suburbs, he trained the boys not to swing at most pitches–a tactic that
infuriated both their and their opponents’ parents, but won the team a series
of championships.
Trump’s election in 2016–credited in part to
his unusual strength among the sort of blue collar white voters who once
dominated the AFL-CIO–prompted Podhorzer to question his assumptions about
voter behavior. He began circulating weekly number-crunching memos to a small
circle of allies and hosting strategy sessions in D.C. But when he began to
worry about the election itself, he didn’t want to seem paranoid. It was only
after months of research that he introduced his concerns in his newsletter in
October 2019. The usual tools of data, analytics and polling would not be
sufficient in a situation where the President himself was trying to disrupt the
election, he wrote. “Most of our planning takes us through Election Day,” he
noted. “But, we are not prepared for the two most likely outcomes”–Trump losing
and refusing to concede, and Trump winning the Electoral College (despite
losing the popular vote) by corrupting the voting process in key states. “We
desperately need to systematically ‘red-team’ this election so that we can
anticipate and plan for the worst we know will be coming our way.”
It turned out
Podhorzer wasn’t the only one thinking in these terms. He began to hear from
others eager to join forces. The Fight Back Table, a coalition of “resistance”
organizations, had begun scenario-planning around the potential for a contested
election, gathering liberal activists at the local and national level into what
they called the Democracy Defense Coalition. Voting-rights and civil rights
organizations were raising alarms. A group of former elected officials was
researching emergency powers they feared Trump might exploit. Protect Democracy
was assembling a bipartisan election-crisis task force. “It turned out that
once you said it out loud, people agreed,” Podhorzer says, “and it started
building momentum.”
He spent
months pondering scenarios and talking to experts. It wasn’t hard to find
liberals who saw Trump as a dangerous dictator, but Podhorzer was careful to
steer clear of hysteria. What he wanted to know was not how American democracy
was dying but how it might be kept alive. The chief difference between the U.S.
and countries that lost their grip on democracy, he concluded, was that America’s
decentralized election system couldn’t be rigged in one fell swoop. That
presented an opportunity to shore it up.
THE
ALLIANCE
On March 3,
Podhorzer drafted a three-page confidential memo titled “Threats to the 2020
Election.” “Trump has made it clear that this will not be a fair election, and
that he will reject anything but his own re-election as ‘fake’ and rigged,” he
wrote. “On Nov. 3, should the media report otherwise, he will use the
right-wing information system to establish his narrative and incite his
supporters to protest.” The memo laid out four categories of challenges:
attacks on voters, attacks on election administration, attacks on Trump’s
political opponents and “efforts to reverse the results of the election.”
Then COVID-19
erupted at the height of the primary-election season. Normal methods of voting
were no longer safe for voters or the mostly elderly volunteers who normally
staff polling places. But political disagreements, intensified by Trump’s
crusade against mail voting, prevented some states from making it easier to
vote absentee and for jurisdictions to count those votes in a timely manner.
Chaos ensued. Ohio shut down in-person voting for its primary, leading to
minuscule turnout. A poll-worker shortage in Milwaukee–where Wisconsin’s
heavily Democratic Black population is concentrated–left just five open polling
places, down from 182. In New York, vote counting took more than a month.
Suddenly, the
potential for a November meltdown was obvious. In his apartment in the D.C.
suburbs, Podhorzer began working from his laptop at his kitchen table, holding
back-to-back Zoom meetings for hours a day with his network of contacts across
the progressive universe: the labor movement; the institutional left, like Planned
Parenthood and Greenpeace; resistance groups like Indivisible and MoveOn;
progressive data geeks and strategists, representatives of donors and
foundations, state-level grassroots organizers, racial-justice activists and
others.
In April,
Podhorzer began hosting a weekly 2½-hour Zoom. It was structured around a
series of rapid-fire five-minute presentations on everything from which ads
were working to messaging to legal strategy. The invitation-only gatherings
soon attracted hundreds, creating a rare shared base of knowledge for the
fractious progressive movement. “At the risk of talking trash about the left,
there’s not a lot of good information sharing,” says Anat Shenker-Osorio, a
close Podhorzer friend whose poll-tested messaging guidance shaped the group’s
approach. “There’s a lot of not-invented-here syndrome, where people won’t
consider a good idea if they didn’t come up with it.”
The meetings
became the galactic center for a constellation of operatives across the left
who shared overlapping goals but didn’t usually work in concert. The group had
no name, no leaders and no hierarchy, but it kept the disparate actors in sync.
“Pod played a critical behind-the-scenes role in keeping different pieces of
the movement infrastructure in communication and aligned,” says Maurice
Mitchell, national director of the Working Families Party. “You have the
litigation space, the organizing space, the political people just focused on
the W, and their strategies aren’t always aligned. He allowed this ecosystem to
work together.”
Protecting the
election would require an effort of unprecedented scale. As 2020 progressed, it
stretched to Congress, Silicon Valley and the nation’s statehouses. It drew
energy from the summer’s racial-justice protests, many of whose leaders were a
key part of the liberal alliance. And eventually it reached across the aisle,
into the world of Trump-skeptical Republicans appalled by his attacks on
democracy.
SECURING
THE VOTE
The first task
was overhauling America’s balky election infrastructure–in the middle of a
pandemic. For the thousands of local, mostly nonpartisan officials who
administer elections, the most urgent need was money. They needed protective
equipment like masks, gloves and hand sanitizer. They needed to pay for postcards
letting people know they could vote absentee–or, in some states, to mail
ballots to every voter. They needed additional staff and scanners to process
ballots.
In March,
activists appealed to Congress to steer COVID relief money to election
administration. Led by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights,
more than 150 organizations signed a letter to every member of Congress seeking
$2 billion in election funding. It was somewhat successful: the CARES Act,
passed later that month, contained $400 million in grants to state election
administrators. But the next tranche of relief funding didn’t add to that
number. It wasn’t going to be enough.
Private
philanthropy stepped into the breach. An assortment of foundations contributed
tens of millions in election-administration funding. The Chan Zuckerberg
Initiative chipped in $300 million. “It was a failure at the federal level that
2,500 local election officials were forced to apply for philanthropic grants to
fill their needs,” says Amber McReynolds, a former Denver election official who
heads the nonpartisan National Vote at Home Institute.
McReynolds’
two-year-old organization became a clearinghouse for a nation struggling to
adapt. The institute gave secretaries of state from both parties technical
advice on everything from which vendors to use to how to locate drop boxes.
Local officials are the most trusted sources of election information, but few
can afford a press secretary, so the institute distributed communications tool
kits. In a presentation to Podhorzer’s group, McReynolds detailed the
importance of absentee ballots for shortening lines at polling places and
preventing an election crisis.
The
institute’s work helped 37 states and D.C. bolster mail voting. But it wouldn’t
be worth much if people didn’t take advantage. Part of the challenge was
logistical: each state has different rules for when and how ballots should be
requested and returned. The Voter Participation Center, which in a normal year
would have deployed canvassers door-to-door to get out the vote, instead
conducted focus groups in April and May to find out what would get people to
vote by mail. In August and September, it sent ballot applications to 15
million people in key states, 4.6 million of whom returned them. In mailings
and digital ads, the group urged people not to wait for Election Day. “All the
work we have done for 17 years was built for this moment of bringing democracy
to people’s doorsteps,” says Tom Lopach, the center’s CEO.
The effort had
to overcome heightened skepticism in some communities. Many Black voters
preferred to exercise their franchise in person or didn’t trust the mail.
National civil rights groups worked with local organizations to get the word
out that this was the best way to ensure one’s vote was counted. In
Philadelphia, for example, advocates distributed “voting safety kits”
containing masks, hand sanitizer and informational brochures. “We had to get
the message out that this is safe, reliable, and you can trust it,” says Hannah
Fried of All Voting Is Local.
At the same
time, Democratic lawyers battled a historic tide of pre-election litigation.
The pandemic intensified the parties’ usual tangling in the courts. But the
lawyers noticed something else as well. “The litigation brought by the Trump
campaign, of a piece with the broader campaign to sow doubt about mail voting,
was making novel claims and using theories no court has ever accepted,” says
Wendy Weiser, a voting-rights expert at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU.
“They read more like lawsuits designed to send a message rather than achieve a
legal outcome.”
In the end,
nearly half the electorate cast ballots by mail in 2020, practically a
revolution in how people vote. About a quarter voted early in person. Only a
quarter of voters cast their ballots the traditional way: in person on Election
Day.
THE
DISINFORMATION DEFENSE
Bad actors
spreading false information is nothing new. For decades, campaigns have
grappled with everything from anonymous calls claiming the election has been
rescheduled to fliers spreading nasty smears about candidates’ families. But
Trump’s lies and conspiracy theories, the viral force of social media and the
involvement of foreign meddlers made disinformation a broader, deeper threat to
the 2020 vote.
Laura Quinn, a
veteran progressive operative who co-founded Catalist, began studying this
problem a few years ago. She piloted a nameless, secret project, which she has
never before publicly discussed, that tracked disinformation online and tried
to figure out how to combat it. One component was tracking dangerous lies that
might otherwise spread unnoticed. Researchers then provided information to
campaigners or the media to track down the sources and expose them.
The most
important takeaway from Quinn’s research, however, was that engaging with toxic
content only made it worse. “When you get attacked, the instinct is to push
back, call it out, say, ‘This isn’t true,'” Quinn says. “But the more
engagement something gets, the more the platforms boost it. The algorithm reads
that as, ‘Oh, this is popular; people want more of it.'”
The solution,
she concluded, was to pressure platforms to enforce their rules, both by
removing content or accounts that spread disinformation and by more
aggressively policing it in the first place. “The platforms have policies
against certain types of malign behavior, but they haven’t been enforcing
them,” she says.
Quinn’s
research gave ammunition to advocates pushing social media platforms to take a
harder line. In November 2019, Mark Zuckerberg invited nine civil rights
leaders to dinner at his home, where they warned him about the danger of the
election-related falsehoods that were already spreading unchecked. “It took
pushing, urging, conversations, brainstorming, all of that to get to a place
where we ended up with more rigorous rules and enforcement,” says Vanita Gupta,
president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, who
attended the dinner and also met with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and others.
(Gupta has been nominated for Associate Attorney General by President Biden.)
“It was a struggle, but we got to the point where they understood the problem.
Was it enough? Probably not. Was it later than we wanted? Yes. But it was
really important, given the level of official disinformation, that they had
those rules in place and were tagging things and taking them down.”
SPREADING THE WORD
Beyond
battling bad information, there was a need to explain a rapidly changing
election process. It was crucial for voters to understand that despite what
Trump was saying, mail-in votes weren’t susceptible to fraud and that it would
be normal if some states weren’t finished counting votes on election night.
Dick Gephardt,
the Democratic former House leader turned high-powered lobbyist, spearheaded
one coalition. “We wanted to get a really bipartisan group of former elected
officials, Cabinet secretaries, military leaders and so on, aimed mainly at
messaging to the public but also speaking to local officials–the secretaries of
state, attorneys general, governors who would be in the eye of the storm–to let
them know we wanted to help,” says Gephardt, who worked his contacts in the
private sector to put $20 million behind the effort.
Wamp, the
former GOP Congressman, worked through the nonpartisan reform group Issue One
to rally Republicans. “We thought we should bring some bipartisan element of
unity around what constitutes a free and fair election,” Wamp says. The 22
Democrats and 22 Republicans on the National Council on Election Integrity met
on Zoom at least once a week. They ran ads in six states, made statements, wrote
articles and alerted local officials to potential problems. “We had rabid Trump
supporters who agreed to serve on the council based on the idea that this is
honest,” Wamp says. This is going to be just as important, he told them, to
convince the liberals when Trump wins. “Whichever way it cuts, we’re going to
stick together.”
The Voting
Rights Lab and IntoAction created state-specific memes and graphics, spread by
email, text, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok, urging that every vote be
counted. Together, they were viewed more than 1 billion times. Protect
Democracy’s election task force issued reports and held media briefings with
high-profile experts across the political spectrum, resulting in widespread
coverage of potential election issues and fact-checking of Trump’s false
claims. The organization’s tracking polls found the message was being heard:
the percentage of the public that didn’t expect to know the winner on election
night gradually rose until by late October, it was over 70%. A majority also
believed that a prolonged count wasn’t a sign of problems. “We knew exactly
what Trump was going to do: he was going to try to use the fact that Democrats
voted by mail and Republicans voted in person to make it look like he was
ahead, claim victory, say the mail-in votes were fraudulent and try to get them
thrown out,” says Protect Democracy’s Bassin. Setting public expectations ahead
of time helped undercut those lies.
The alliance
took a common set of themes from the research Shenker-Osorio presented at
Podhorzer’s Zooms. Studies have shown that when people don’t think their vote
will count or fear casting it will be a hassle, they’re far less likely to
participate. Throughout election season, members of Podhorzer’s group minimized
incidents of voter intimidation and tamped down rising liberal hysteria about Trump’s
expected refusal to concede. They didn’t want to amplify false claims by
engaging them, or put people off voting by suggesting a rigged game. “When you
say, ‘These claims of fraud are spurious,’ what people hear is ‘fraud,'”
Shenker-Osorio says. “What we saw in our pre-election research was that
anything that reaffirmed Trump’s power or cast him as an authoritarian
diminished people’s desire to vote.”
Podhorzer,
meanwhile, was warning everyone he knew that polls were underestimating Trump’s
support. The data he shared with media organizations who would be calling the
election was “tremendously useful” to understand what was happening as the
votes rolled in, according to a member of a major network’s political unit who
spoke with Podhorzer before Election Day. Most analysts had recognized there
would be a “blue shift” in key battlegrounds– the surge of votes breaking
toward Democrats, driven by tallies of mail-in ballots– but they hadn’t
comprehended how much better Trump was likely to do on Election Day. “Being
able to document how big the absentee wave would be and the variance by state
was essential,” the analyst says.
PEOPLE POWER
The racial-justice uprising sparked by
George Floyd’s killing in May was not primarily a political movement. The
organizers who helped lead it wanted to harness its momentum for the election
without allowing it to be co-opted by politicians. Many of those organizers
were part of Podhorzer’s network, from the activists in battleground states who
partnered with the Democracy Defense Coalition to organizations with leading
roles in the Movement for Black Lives.
The best way
to ensure people’s voices were heard, they decided, was to protect their
ability to vote. “We started thinking about a program that would complement the
traditional election-protection area but also didn’t rely on calling the
police,” says Nelini Stamp, the Working Families Party’s national organizing
director. They created a force of “election defenders” who, unlike traditional
poll watchers, were trained in de-escalation techniques. During early voting
and on Election Day, they surrounded lines of voters in urban areas with a “joy
to the polls” effort that turned the act of casting a ballot into a street
party. Black organizers also recruited thousands of poll workers to ensure
polling places would stay open in their communities.
The summer
uprising had shown that people power could have a massive impact. Activists
began preparing to reprise the demonstrations if Trump tried to steal the
election. “Americans plan widespread protests if Trump interferes with
election,” Reuters reported in October, one of many such stories. More than 150
liberal groups, from the Women’s March to the Sierra Club to Color of Change,
from Democrats.com to the Democratic Socialists of America, joined the “Protect
the Results” coalition. The group’s now defunct website had a map listing 400
planned postelection demonstrations, to be activated via text message as soon
as Nov. 4. To stop the coup they feared, the left was ready to flood the
streets.
STRANGE
BEDFELLOWS
About a week
before Election Day, Podhorzer received an unexpected message: the U.S. Chamber
of Commerce wanted to talk.
The AFL-CIO
and the Chamber have a long history of antagonism. Though neither organization
is explicitly partisan, the influential business lobby has poured hundreds of
millions of dollars into Republican campaigns, just as the nation’s unions
funnel hundreds of millions to Democrats. On one side is labor, on the other
management, locked in an eternal struggle for power and resources.
But behind the
scenes, the business community was engaged in its own anxious discussions about
how the election and its aftermath might unfold. The summer’s racial-justice
protests had sent a signal to business owners too: the potential for
economy-disrupting civil disorder. “With tensions running high, there was a lot
of concern about unrest around the election, or a breakdown in our normal way
we handle contentious elections,” says Neil Bradley, the Chamber’s executive
vice president and chief policy officer. These worries had led the Chamber to
release a pre-election statement with the Business Roundtable, a
Washington-based CEOs’ group, as well as associations of manufacturers,
wholesalers and retailers, calling for patience and confidence as votes were
counted.
But Bradley
wanted to send a broader, more bipartisan message. He reached out to Podhorzer,
through an intermediary both men declined to name. Agreeing that their unlikely
alliance would be powerful, they began to discuss a joint statement pledging
their organizations’ shared commitment to a fair and peaceful election. They
chose their words carefully and scheduled the statement’s release for maximum
impact. As it was being finalized, Christian leaders signaled their interest in
joining, further broadening its reach.
The statement
was released on Election Day, under the names of Chamber CEO Thomas Donohue,
AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka, and the heads of the National Association of
Evangelicals and the National African American Clergy Network. “It is
imperative that election officials be given the space and time to count every
vote in accordance with applicable laws,” it stated. “We call on the media, the
candidates and the American people to exercise patience with the process and
trust in our system, even if it requires more time than usual.” The groups
added, “Although we may not always agree on desired outcomes up and down the
ballot, we are united in our call for the American democratic process to
proceed without violence, intimidation or any other tactic that makes us weaker
as a nation.”
SHOWING UP, STANDING DOWN
Election night
began with many Democrats despairing. Trump was running ahead of pre-election
polling, winning Florida, Ohio and Texas easily and keeping Michigan, Wisconsin
and Pennsylvania too close to call. But Podhorzer was unperturbed when I spoke
to him that night: the returns were exactly in line with his modeling. He had
been warning for weeks that Trump voters’ turnout was surging. As the numbers
dribbled out, he could tell that as long as all the votes were counted, Trump
would lose.
The liberal
alliance gathered for an 11 p.m. Zoom call. Hundreds joined; many were freaking
out. “It was really important for me and the team in that moment to help ground
people in what we had already known was true,” says Angela Peoples, director
for the Democracy Defense Coalition. Podhorzer presented data to show the group
that victory was in hand.
While he was
talking, Fox News surprised everyone by calling Arizona for Biden. The
public-awareness campaign had worked: TV anchors were bending over backward to
counsel caution and frame the vote count accurately. The question then became
what to do next.
The
conversation that followed was a difficult one, led by the activists charged
with the protest strategy. “We wanted to be mindful of when was the right time
to call for moving masses of people into the street,” Peoples says. As much as
they were eager to mount a show of strength, mobilizing immediately could
backfire and put people at risk. Protests that devolved into violent clashes
would give Trump a pretext to send in federal agents or troops as he had over
the summer. And rather than elevate Trump’s complaints by continuing to fight
him, the alliance wanted to send the message that the people had spoken.
So the word
went out: stand down. Protect the Results announced that it would “not be
activating the entire national mobilization network today, but remains ready to
activate if necessary.” On Twitter, outraged progressives wondered what was
going on. Why wasn’t anyone trying to stop Trump’s coup? Where were all the
protests?
Podhorzer
credits the activists for their restraint. “They had spent so much time getting
ready to hit the streets on Wednesday. But they did it,” he says. “Wednesday
through Friday, there was not a single Antifa vs. Proud Boys incident like
everyone was expecting. And when that didn’t materialize, I don’t think the
Trump campaign had a backup plan.”
Activists
reoriented the Protect the Results protests toward a weekend of celebration.
“Counter their disinfo with our confidence & get ready to celebrate,” read
the messaging guidance Shenker-Osorio presented to the liberal alliance on
Friday, Nov. 6. “Declare and fortify our win. Vibe: confident, forward-looking,
unified–NOT passive, anxious.” The voters, not the candidates, would be the
protagonists of the story.
The planned
day of celebration happened to coincide with the election being called on Nov.
7. Activists dancing in the streets of Philadelphia blasted Beyoncé over an
attempted Trump campaign press conference; the Trumpers’ next confab was
scheduled for Four Seasons Total Landscaping outside the city center, which
activists believe was not a coincidence. “The people of Philadelphia owned the
streets of Philadelphia,” crows the Working Families Party’s Mitchell. “We made
them look ridiculous by contrasting our joyous celebration of democracy with
their clown show.”
The votes had
been counted. Trump had lost. But the battle wasn’t over.
THE
FIVE STEPS TO VICTORY
In Podhorzer’s
presentations, winning the vote was only the first step to winning the
election. After that came winning the count, winning the certification, winning
the Electoral College and winning the transition–steps that are normally
formalities but that he knew Trump would see as opportunities for disruption.
Nowhere would that be more evident than in Michigan, where Trump’s pressure on
local Republicans came perilously close to working–and where liberal and
conservative pro-democracy forces joined to counter it.
It was around
10 p.m. on election night in Detroit when a flurry of texts lit up the phone of
Art Reyes III. A busload of Republican election observers had arrived at the
TCF Center, where votes were being tallied. They were crowding the
vote-counting tables, refusing to wear masks, heckling the mostly Black
workers. Reyes, a Flint native who leads We the People Michigan, was expecting
this. For months, conservative groups had been sowing suspicion about urban
vote fraud. “The language was, ‘They’re going to steal the election; there will
be fraud in Detroit,’ long before any vote was cast,” Reyes says.
He made his
way to the arena and sent word to his network. Within 45 minutes, dozens of
reinforcements had arrived. As they entered the arena to provide a
counterweight to the GOP observers inside, Reyes took down their cell-phone
numbers and added them to a massive text chain. Racial-justice activists from
Detroit Will Breathe worked alongside suburban women from Fems for Dems and
local elected officials. Reyes left at 3 a.m., handing the text chain over to a
disability activist.
As they mapped
out the steps in the election-certification process, activists settled on a
strategy of foregrounding the people’s right to decide, demanding their voices
be heard and calling attention to the racial implications of disenfranchising
Black Detroiters. They flooded the Wayne County canvassing board’s Nov. 17
certification meeting with on-message testimony; despite a Trump tweet, the
Republican board members certified Detroit’s votes.
Election
boards were one pressure point; another was GOP-controlled legislatures, who
Trump believed could declare the election void and appoint their own electors.
And so the President invited the GOP leaders of the Michigan legislature, House
Speaker Lee Chatfield and Senate majority leader Mike Shirkey, to Washington on
Nov. 20.
It was a
perilous moment. If Chatfield and Shirkey agreed to do Trump’s bidding,
Republicans in other states might be similarly bullied. “I was concerned things
were going to get weird,” says Jeff Timmer, a former Michigan GOP executive
director turned anti-Trump activist. Norm Eisen describes it as “the scariest
moment” of the entire election.
The democracy
defenders launched a full-court press. Protect Democracy’s local contacts
researched the lawmakers’ personal and political motives. Issue One ran
television ads in Lansing. The Chamber’s Bradley kept close tabs on the
process. Wamp, the former Republican Congressman, called his former colleague
Mike Rogers, who wrote an op-ed for the Detroit newspapers urging officials to
honor the will of the voters. Three former Michigan governors–Republicans John
Engler and Rick Snyder and Democrat Jennifer Granholm–jointly called for
Michigan’s electoral votes to be cast free of pressure from the White House.
Engler, a former head of the Business Roundtable, made phone calls to
influential donors and fellow GOP elder statesmen who could press the lawmakers
privately.
The
pro-democracy forces were up against a Trumpified Michigan GOP controlled by
allies of Ronna McDaniel, the Republican National Committee chair, and Betsy
DeVos, the former Education Secretary and a member of a billionaire family of
GOP donors. On a call with his team on Nov. 18, Bassin vented that his side’s
pressure was no match for what Trump could offer. “Of course he’s going to try
to offer them something,” Bassin recalls thinking. “Head of the Space Force!
Ambassador to wherever! We can’t compete with that by offering carrots. We need
a stick.”
If Trump were
to offer something in exchange for a personal favor, that would likely
constitute bribery, Bassin reasoned. He phoned Richard Primus, a law professor
at the University of Michigan, to see if Primus agreed and would make the
argument publicly. Primus said he thought the meeting itself was inappropriate,
and got to work on an op-ed for Politico warning that the state attorney
general–a Democrat–would have no choice but to investigate. When the piece
posted on Nov. 19, the attorney general’s communications director tweeted it.
Protect Democracy soon got word that the lawmakers planned to bring lawyers to
the meeting with Trump the next day.
Reyes’
activists scanned flight schedules and flocked to the airports on both ends of
Shirkey’s journey to D.C., to underscore that the lawmakers were being
scrutinized. After the meeting, the pair announced they’d pressed the President
to deliver COVID relief for their constituents and informed him they saw no role
in the election process. Then they went for a drink at the Trump hotel on
Pennsylvania Avenue. A street artist projected their images onto the outside of
the building along with the words THE WORLD IS WATCHING.
That left one
last step: the state canvassing board, made up of two Democrats and two
Republicans. One Republican, a Trumper employed by the DeVos family’s political
nonprofit, was not expected to vote for certification. The other Republican on
the board was a little-known lawyer named Aaron Van Langevelde. He sent no
signals about what he planned to do, leaving everyone on edge.
When the
meeting began, Reyes’s activists flooded the livestream and filled Twitter with
their hashtag, #alleyesonmi. A board accustomed to attendance in the single digits
suddenly faced an audience of thousands. In hours of testimony, the activists
emphasized their message of respecting voters’ wishes and affirming democracy
rather than scolding the officials. Van Langevelde quickly signaled he would
follow precedent. The vote was 3-0 to certify; the other Republican abstained.
After that,
the dominoes fell. Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and the rest of the states certified
their electors. Republican officials in Arizona and Georgia stood up to Trump’s
bullying. And the Electoral College voted on schedule on Dec. 14.
HOW CLOSE WE
CAME
There was one
last milestone on Podhorzer’s mind: Jan. 6. On the day Congress would meet to
tally the electoral count, Trump summoned his supporters to D.C. for a rally.
Much to their
surprise, the thousands who answered his call were met by virtually no
counterdemonstrators. To preserve safety and ensure they couldn’t be blamed for
any mayhem, the activist left was “strenuously discouraging counter activity,”
Podhorzer texted me the morning of Jan. 6, with a crossed-fingers emoji.
Trump
addressed the crowd that afternoon, peddling the lie that lawmakers or Vice
President Mike Pence could reject states’ electoral votes. He told them to go
to the Capitol and “fight like hell.” Then he returned to the White House as
they sacked the building. As lawmakers fled for their lives and his own
supporters were shot and trampled, Trump praised the rioters as “very special.”
It was his
final attack on democracy, and once again, it failed. By standing down, the
democracy campaigners outfoxed their foes. “We won by the skin of our teeth,
honestly, and that’s an important point for folks to sit with,” says the
Democracy Defense Coalition’s Peoples. “There’s an impulse for some to say
voters decided and democracy won. But it’s a mistake to think that this
election cycle was a show of strength for democracy. It shows how vulnerable
democracy is.”
The members of
the alliance to protect the election have gone their separate ways. The
Democracy Defense Coalition has been disbanded, though the Fight Back Table
lives on. Protect Democracy and the good-government advocates have turned their
attention to pressing reforms in Congress. Left-wing activists are pressuring
the newly empowered Democrats to remember the voters who put them there, while
civil rights groups are on guard against further attacks on voting. Business
leaders denounced the Jan. 6 attack, and some say they will no longer donate to
lawmakers who refused to certify Biden’s victory. Podhorzer and his allies are
still holding their Zoom strategy sessions, gauging voters’ views and
developing new messages. And Trump is in Florida, facing his second
impeachment, deprived of the Twitter and Facebook accounts he used to push the
nation to its breaking point.
As I was
reporting this article in November and December, I heard different claims about
who should get the credit for thwarting Trump’s plot. Liberals argued the role
of bottom-up people power shouldn’t be overlooked, particularly the
contributions of people of color and local grassroots activists. Others
stressed the heroism of GOP officials like Van Langevelde and Georgia secretary
of state Brad Raffensperger, who stood up to Trump at considerable cost. The
truth is that neither likely could have succeeded without the other. “It’s
astounding how close we came, how fragile all this really is,” says Timmer, the
former Michigan GOP executive director. “It’s like when Wile E. Coyote runs off
the cliff–if you don’t look down, you don’t fall. Our democracy only survives
if we all believe and don’t look down.”
Democracy won
in the end. The will of the people prevailed. But it’s crazy, in retrospect,
that this is what it took to put on an election in the United States of
America.
–With
reporting by LESLIE DICKSTEIN, MARIAH ESPADA and SIMMONE SHAH
Correction
appended, Feb. 5: The original version of this story misstated the name of Norm
Eisen’s organization. It is the Voter Protection Program, not the Voter
Protection Project. The original version of this story also misstated Jeff
Timmer’s former position with the Michigan Republican Party. He was the
executive director, not the chairman.
This appears in the February 15, 2021 issue of TIME.