Trump is Going to Lose - Then What?

November 6 is When The Real Fight is Likely to Begin. Are Dems Ready?

Trump is going to lose. Election night will come, the networks will declare Harris the winner, and Trump will declare Trump the winner. He will cry “fraud” about any number of swing states—certainly enough so that if he could reverse the vote in two or more of those states, he would win. This scenario is the starting point for what Democrats need to be thinking about and planning for. It’s not enough to win the election; the Democrats have to win the post-election chaos that will likely ensue.

The 2024 election could mark a turning point in American democracy, but not just because of the vote itself. The real challenge may lie in what happens afterward. Several Republican-controlled state legislatures have passed laws that could give them more control over the certification of election results, leading to potential disputes and unrest. Understanding these developments and how Democrats are preparing to counter them is crucial.

For Example:

1. Georgia:

In Georgia, Senate Bill 202, passed in 2021, significantly altered the state’s election oversight. The State Election Board now has the power to remove and replace local election officials, a move that could be exploited to influence the outcome in key counties. This law has been widely criticized as a response to the state flipping blue in 2020 and as a tool to ensure it doesn’t happen again. The concern is that by centralizing election oversight, partisan actors could invalidate or alter the results in crucial areas, leading to a constitutional crisis.

2. Arizona:

Arizona has also made headlines with its legislative changes. The state passed a law transferring certain election-related powers from the Secretary of State to the Attorney General. This shift is particularly controversial because it was enacted while the Secretary of State was a Democrat and the Attorney General a Republican. This law could come into play if there are disputes over the election results, giving a partisan official more control over how those disputes are resolved.

3. Texas:

In Texas, Senate Bill 1 introduced several measures that restrict voting and empower partisan poll watchers. Perhaps most concerning, however, is the law’s provision allowing for state intervention in local election processes. The law has been framed as a way to ensure election integrity, but critics argue that it opens the door to state interference in close races, particularly in Democratic-leaning urban areas. This could lead to the state government overriding local election results if they do not align with the ruling party’s preferences.

A Strong Legal Response from Democrats

Anticipating these and other challenges, the Democratic Party has not been idle. They have assembled a robust legal response team, aiming to protect the integrity of the election process from any attempts to subvert it.

Led by seasoned legal strategist Marc Elias, the Democratic legal apparatus includes over 1,000 lawyers stationed across the country, ready to challenge any unlawful attempts to influence or overturn the election results. Elias, known for his pivotal role in defending the 2020 election results, has become a central figure in this effort. His Democracy Docket has been instrumental in filing lawsuits against new voting laws that are seen as suppressive or unconstitutional.

This legal team is not just reactive but proactive. They have already filed numerous lawsuits against these new laws, challenging their constitutionality and aiming to prevent them from being used in ways that could undermine the election. The team is also prepared to launch rapid-response legal actions immediately following the election, should there be any attempts to block certification or overturn results.

Is It Enough?

The Democratic legal strategy is formidable, but the question remains: is it enough? The legal team is vast, the lawyers are skilled, and the strategy is well-conceived. However, the sheer number of new laws and the fervor with which some Republican legislatures have pursued control over the election process suggest that the battle could be intense and drawn out.

Moreover, the outcome could hinge not just on the strength of the legal arguments but also on the willingness of the courts to intervene. In some cases, this might involve appealing to the very Supreme Court that has been reshaped by Trump and his allies over the past four years.

The Democrats’ legal efforts will also need to be complemented by a robust public relations campaign. Ensuring that the American public understands what is at stake—and mobilizing them to support the integrity of the election—will be crucial. Public opinion can play a significant role in how these disputes are resolved, particularly if the courts are hesitant to act.

In conclusion, while the Democrats have prepared extensively for the potential chaos that could follow a Trump loss, the situation remains precarious. The post-election period will likely test the resilience of American democracy like never before. Winning the election may be the easy part; winning the aftermath could be where the real fight begins.