8
VOTING
In the 2020 presidential election, the Democratic nominee will enjoy more support among the roughly 250 million eligible voters than will Donald Trump. I would hazard a guess that the number is likely close to 55 percent. Perhaps a bit higher. Among those actually registered, the support levels slip a bit, but the good news is our nominee will enjoy a clear majority of support among the 175 million registered voters.
Big advantage for the Democrat, no matter who it is. Demographic modeling, polling, and voting history patterns tell us all this. Add the new registrants we need to add before Election Day, and our advantage swells.
However, actual election results over many campaigns prove that Republicans are “higher propensity voters,” in the lingo. They get to the polls and vote more consistently than Democrats, without much prodding. We can match them, but it takes a lot of time, work, and money.
In 2016, registered Democrats voted at lower rates than registered Republicans, alarmingly so when you look at younger minority voters. And white voters who did not go to college, a Trump base, saw their percentage of the electorate surge over 2012 levels.
If we have to deal with the same discrepancy in 2020, big advantage Trump.
But the respective advantages balance out, right? I’m afraid not. Without any effort at all, Donald Trump starts with an advantage in terms of support levels materializing into actual votes. Add the fact that there are more conservatives than liberals in traditional battleground states, and that advantage gets even greater.
Trump starts closer to the goal line than we do.
The solution for Democrats? I’ll quote one of the best campaigners in American history: “Organize the whole state, so that every Whig can be brought to the polls . . . divide the county into small districts and appoint in each a sub-committee . . . make a perfect list of voters and ascertain with certainty for whom they will vote . . . and on election day see that every Whig is brought to the polls.”
That campaigner was Abraham Lincoln. The year was 1840, when he was a member of the Illinois legislature. Almost 180 years later, such a “perfect list” is the aspiration of all political campaigns, large and small. By decree of the numbers, we must work harder in 2020 to make certain our lists are as close to perfect as possible. Do everything possible to ensure that we are talking to the right voters about the right things at the right time. This is the only way we can win. Otherwise, all the work, money, inspiration, perspiration, rallies, debates, ads, posts, laughs, and tears will come to naught.
GOTV is the acronym for Get out the Vote, which is the mother of all bottom lines. When I first started in politics, our tactics on this vital front were much less precisely targeted than they are today. We made large assumptions based on larger demographic and geographic assessments about the county, district, or state. There was very little individual data, and what we had was crude, maybe a list of voters we had talked to at some point in the campaign, identified as supporters, and intended to contact a second time near Election Day. So not too long ago, certainly through the 1990s, GOTV consisted of sending mail, telephoning, and knocking on the door of everyone in a high-performing Democratic precinct—a college community, say, or an urban center—and encouraging each and every one of them to vote.
Of course we knew that even the strongest Democratic precinct is, say, 85 percent or even 90 percent loyal, still leaving a chunk of vote for the Republican regardless of who calls them or shows up at the front door. I remember asking about this little problem in the first general election campaign I worked on, for Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa in 1990. If we contact all the registered voters in those strong precincts, aren’t we worried we’ll be turning out supporters of our opponent too?
Yes, came the answer, but it’s the price we pay for making sure we drive as many of your own supporters out to the polls as possible. Think about the inefficiency. Volunteers were out there working hard to get out the vote among supporters who, in many cases, didn’t need the reminder and at the same time encouraging supporters of the opponent to vote. Such were the limitations of the data and technology back in the day. Today we have the computer-based ability to take into account consumer and behavioral data and make detailed person-by-person and house-by-house distinctions to find the needle who may behave electorally different from the haystack.
Now, I understand that with many people concerned about online privacy—unwanted, unwarranted, and unauthorized tracking, and demographic profiling of all kinds—these tactics in a political campaign may sound a little creepy. But it’s going to happen across all aspects of our life. I am a pragmatist, and given the stakes are we going to disarm?
Because they surely won’t.
It’s essential to spend the extra time, care, and resources on those voters we believe are more likely to support us but are also more likely to slip away and not vote at all. Smart, tech-savvy targeting is vitally necessary. If we’re interested in winning this year, or any year in the future, it’s how we have to compete. Fact of life.
Everyone’s voting history is accessible to campaigns: when you voted and where, though of course not for whom. Campaigns try to focus on voters who could be at risk of not turning out, which is usually defined as someone who has missed voting in some elections, whether they be state, local, or federal. I’d also focus on all new registrants, who have no voting history.
Ideally, the campaign and its volunteers will have talked to as many individual voters as possible so that in addition to the demographic documentation, we have original, personalized data and information to inform our decisions about how to treat a specific voter. Definitely a supporter? If not, what’s the problem? Definitely going to vote? If not, what’s the problem? Voting early or by mail? I hope it’s clear by now in this little treatise that no information is more accurate and valuable than that gleaned from direct person-to-person contact.
The campaign puts into the blender as much data as possible: each voter’s past voting history, gender, race (when that can be identified), consumer information (income, car type, likely TV viewing habits, internet habits, news consumption), census information, polling, surveys, and any information gathered by personal interaction a volunteer on the campaign may have had—the most important kernel of them all.
And out pop the scores—one for “support,” one for “turnout.” Definitely voting for the Democrat? Your support score is 100. Always wearing a MAGA cap? That earns a 0. Legitimately undecided? You’re a 50.
Regarding turnout, scoring 100 means you’re a lock to vote. The lower that number drops, the better the chance that you will not, push comes to shove, get to the polls, much less vote early.
These numbers are used to determine what further actions are required by the campaign’s volunteers to ensure your specific vote. You score 100 on support and 100 for turnout? Nothing to worry about there, and I hope the campaign leaves you alone. You score 50 and 50? If you don’t hear from at least one volunteer, something is very, very wrong in the ground campaign.
The value of those numbers doesn’t end there. They are also used to build “look alike” audiences (which is also how most consumer companies use platforms like Facebook to advertise and reach potential customers). The software puts together voter cohorts of people with scores close to yours. So even though the campaign volunteers will not have talked to all these voters—in fact, it will have talked with only a sample despite all the best efforts—the models’ support and turnout numbers will predict which way every single voter in America will go on November 3.
Of course the models won’t be 100 percent right, but they were eerily accurate in 2012, with President Obama’s reelection campaign. We did have the advantage of being the incumbent. We had a very good sense of the electorate as it related to Barack Obama. We had a lot of good data about voter opinions over a five-year period. And Mitt Romney was a much more traditional Republican nominee than Trump, so it was easier to model his support and turnout scenarios. And the third-party vote was much smaller than in 2016. In the end, we had some states in which our win margin was within .10 percent of the prediction. Some of our estimates of the early vote breakdown in states like Ohio were off by a scant .01 percent. Eerily accurate.
But it mattered not a whit that we predicted what was likely going to happen. What really mattered was the fact that accurate models and lists for different voter groups meant that the volunteers were using your time efficiently and effectively—again, talking to the right voters about the right things at the right time.
Right about now you’re probably wondering about 2016, when even the Trump campaign’s models predicted a convincing Clinton victory, with less than a 20 percent chance of winning. Its leadership held briefings with the national media on Election Day, explaining before the polls closed why they had lost.
So the models were off, but here’s the surprise: they were not off by much. The killer was that the discrepancies just happened to be (1) on the margins and (2) in the most crucial swing (that is, battleground) states. So (3) pretty much all the mistakes broke against Clinton. Three strikes, and you know what happens next.
Overall, the Clinton and Trump campaigns had made smart, data- and model-informed decisions about whom to target for persuasion and GOTV. It’s likely that Clinton’s models were too confident about the turnout from some younger voters and African American voters, core members of the Obama coalition that she inherited. And they overestimated support levels in rural and exurban areas, losing counties 70 to 30 that they thought would be 60 to 40 or even 50–50. If they had known this at the time, the Clinton campaign could have increased contact with some of those younger and African American voters in the upper Midwest, and with more urgency. They also could have invested in more persuasion work with rural and exurban voter targets.
The lesson: we can’t rely just on the models, and we can’t blame the models. We also have to have campaign strategies in place that address all likely scenarios. In 2020, it would be nice if the final models show Trump with a 0 percent chance of winning. That’s not going to be the case. To win, our GOTV operation, utterly dependent on volunteers, will need to start with a deadly accurate sense of which voters the campaign and the volunteers should concentrate on, and then be deadly efficient in carrying out the operation.
Early voting is important. The campaign will work hard to nail down as many of these early votes as possible, thus leaving more resources available for Election Day. Now, I know that some people enjoy the excitement and camaraderie of voting on Election Day. Traveling to your precinct polling location; standing in line with your neighbors and fellow citizens; bringing your children with you into the voting booth; making your choices; turning in your paper ballot or getting a receipt from the machine; getting that important “I voted” merit badge; leaving the school, church, community center, or someone’s garage. That’s right, in San Francisco, where I live now, many official polling stations are in someone’s garage.
It can give you a great overall feeling that you exercised your franchise in and surrounded by your community. If you feel super strongly about that experience, and your life will be poorer for not having done it, by all means enjoy the Election Day ritual.
If you feel less strongly about the experience and live in a state that has no-excuse early voting (meaning you want to vote early or absentee), you can just do it, there doesn’t have to be a reason or need. I implore you to make plans to vote early. Apply for an absentee ballot or plan to vote early in person at an early voting site. Some states, like California, allow you to become a permanent vote-by-mail citizen. Like clockwork, your ballot comes in the mail in the weeks prior to Election Day.
Some states, sadly, require an excuse or reason to vote early by absentee—a health challenge, you will be out of town for work, you have no way of getting to the polls. It’s real retrograde stuff. Check your local rules online.
For the majority of you who can vote early or by mail unrestrictedly, apply common sense. Something unanticipated could come up—a work crisis, transportation issue, family caregiving, or illness. Why risk losing your own vote? For those of you who plan to be active in the campaign on Election Day, you want to be free and clear of anything that could cannibalize your volunteer time. Driving to your local school to vote, waiting in line, filling in your ballot, then driving back to a phone bank or canvass staging area could take an hour. That’s a bunch of GOTV target voters you won’t be talking to. And if thousands of other volunteers also take time away from their volunteer shifts to vote, all of a sudden we are talking about large numbers of voters who may need a reminder, a prod, or a ride but won’t get it. This would be a tragedy.
Please, get your vote against Donald Trump in the bank, safely, securely, and on your own schedule, if you can do so legally. This is important no matter where you live. We need your vote to help Democrats up and down the ticket, and while the presidential race in your state may not be close, your local U.S. House race, state senate race, or state rep race could be decided on the margins.
You should be encouraging everyone in your circle to vote early as well. The same cautionary notes apply for them. In this world, complications abound. So persuade your friends and family and fellow supporters of our nominee to bank their votes. Keep a list so you can check them off and of course ensure that you are signing them up to help with voter turnout efforts in the weeks leading up to and on Election Day.
Maybe these admonitions sound obsessive, but obsessive is what we need to be in 2020.
Our nominee’s campaign will be laser focused on maximizing early vote, both in terms of banking votes early and freeing up as many people as possible for Election Day duties, be it GOTV volunteering, canvassing key target neighborhoods in Philly, or calling into Milwaukee from your home in Oklahoma City.
As I mentioned, the campaigns can track who has voted early in person or mailed in a ballot. The raw numbers—votes in so far—are not that valuable. What is valuable is the makeup of that early voting cohort. In each case, the campaign doesn’t know how these diligent citizens voted, but it does know their respective “support” and “turnout” scores on the 1 to 100 scale, which allow the campaign to estimate what share of the early voters it is probably picking up (that is, if they have high support numbers) and what share it needs to pick up in the rest of the early voting period and on Election Day.
What it really hopes to see is a lot of voters whose “support” number is good, but whose “turnout” number is not so good—first-time voters, young voters, voters who do not regularly vote, voters who have not voted recently. As the campaign creates and executes early vote plans, and monitors its progress, it will focus closely on these people. It is of the highest imperative to get their votes in the bank early because otherwise they may never be deposited at all.
If the campaign isn’t happy with the early numbers and believes it is on a trajectory to fall short in a precinct, county, state—or any combination—it may devote more resources to try to goose up the numbers, especially with the critical probably-for-us-but-may-not-vote targets. The Trump campaign will also be laser focused on the early voters. For political insiders, this campaign within the campaign is fascinating. For you—volunteers, supporters of the Democrats’ nominee—it’s more than that. We have to win it. In some jurisdictions, more than half of all votes will come in early.
So Election Day, mercifully, is here.
We’ve endured it all: polls, debates, social media posts and stats, ads, hourly money solicitations, pundit predictions. We have finally arrived at the day when the only thing that counts will be actual votes cast by actual voters in actual states. In states like Pennsylvania, where only a few of the votes will be cast by mail, everything rides on Election Day execution. In Colorado or Nevada, more than 50 percent of the votes will already be in. So the results in your state may or not be riding solely on Election Day turnout and execution, but as I’ve said quite a few times about issues that may seem important (like the inequities in the electoral college), for now, it doesn’t matter. You volunteers and the staff supporting you still have to break the tape with everything you’ve got. A great first half can be overwhelmed by a lousy second half.
If you doubt what I’m saying, remember Florida in 2016. Looking at the early vote data heading into Election Day and also taking into account whatever wisdom the campaigns were sharing, experts on the subject (there are very few of them) thought that while Florida would always be close, you’d rather be Clinton than Trump. And losing Florida would surely be a backbreaker for Trump.
They were wrong. Why? As everyone who follows politics knows, the fundamental nationwide problem in 2016 was that all the models overestimated Clinton’s share of white voters with no college education and therefore understated Trump’s support in the panhandle of Florida, in Iowa, just about everywhere. Why? Trump ended up having more appeal than polls or electoral history suggested (there were some counties that flipped 40 points between 2012 and 2016), so turnout was also higher than projected in many of those counties and the models were baking in higher Clinton support goals and lower Trump margins than reality would demonstrate.
The error was most blatantly important in Wisconsin. Had the models been accurate there, the Clinton campaign could have taken countermeasures across the board, on the airwaves, and in the trenches. But thanks to the numbers suggesting it was a safe blue—never dreaming it could lose the Badger State—it hardly bothered to campaign at all.
That doesn’t mean they would have won it. The Trump campaign would have responded in kind and GOP turnout could have surged even more—but I’m sure it would have felt better to go all out there.
In Florida, the error played out in one specific way, and it wasn’t with early voting. While the campaign felt good about the state, a feeling affirmed by most observers, it still knew the state would be decided by a percentage point or two. In the weeks leading up to the election, the campaign and the volunteers were pedal to the metal getting voters out early. No, the problem was Election Day itself. It was clear from the early numbers that turnout was going to surge well beyond historical levels, but in all likelihood, the Clinton campaign had enough supporters identified and modeled to win Florida. Their GOTV “universe” was large enough. In fact, their actual vote total in Florida turned out to be higher than Obama’s winning number had been four years earlier against Mitt Romney.
But this still wasn’t high enough, which must have seemed incredibly frustrating to someone who produced the most votes in Florida a Democratic candidate for president had ever received. The strength of the Republican turnout on Election Day shocked the pros. Trump turned out just about everyone he could have.
Florida in 2016 is a great and painful example of how critical the intensity of your supporters is, how critical GOTV is for any Democratic presidential candidate. In 2020, we have to generate this intensity as early as possible, and we’ve got to maintain it until the last voter walks out of the last booth of the last battleground state. I’ll say it again: we Democrats always leave more votes on the table than the Republicans. Our job in 2020 is to help ensure that we minimize those numbers so that no matter what the turnout, we can win. Of course we don’t know yet what the exact turnout will be in 2020, but we know it will be high. We better assume super high, and plan accordingly.
So what is your personal GOTV strategy? Well, first, make certain that anybody in your circle who has somehow dodged all your pesky efforts to get them to vote early does finally vote on November 3. Don’t take no for an answer. Make sure they know about the 537 votes that lost Florida in 2000. Imagine what it would be like to lose to Trump by the same kind of margin. Triple the pain, at least.
If you live in a state that doesn’t allow early voting just for the sake of convenience, be sure you provoke and prod to make sure everyone has a plan for voting on Election Day, has made arrangements vis-à-vis work, family, everything. Do they know where their polling location is? Yes, because you’ve told them earlier. How they are going to get there? What time? Do they need help with child or elder care? Can they manage a long line (don’t get me started on how outrageous that is) or will they have to leave and go back to work or home? If so, they need a plan to account for that. The folks you are badgering may become annoyed, but they’ll forgive you, don’t worry. They know you’re coming from the right place. And their annoyance will actually help, because it might bring into the conversation questions and complications that need airing. We have to treat every supporter of our nominee as a precious, fragile egg. Everywhere. We want the map to be as blue as possible on election night. Get that egg in the bank!
Volunteers in the campaign’s ongoing GOTV efforts will have a variety of ways to reach out to voters outside of your circle. If you live in a battleground state or choose to travel to one, you are in for a special and unique experience. Canvassing when the stakes are so high is a remarkable experience. You will see people driving their cars to run errands, kids riding their bikes to playgrounds, fans watching basketball at local watering holes—people going about their everyday activities. You are also walking the very streets that will determine who our next president is. You will have in your grasp the very names of those voters who are key to the election in that community, that state, and our country.
Assuming the campaign has done its job well, your list will include only voters still in play for us. They are registered, they have not voted yet, and they are not planning to vote for Donald Trump. The campaign’s data experts believe these people are solid for the Democrat if they vote, but they may not. If enough of them decide to take a pass, we will end up with a repeat of the horrors in Wisconsin and Michigan in 2016—losses that could have been prevented if we had produced just the expected, not even exceptional, turnout in Democratic base areas.
As always with canvassing, a lot of people won’t be home. You’ll be supplied with door hangers from the campaign—like those that pizza restaurants have—reminding the voter to vote, informing them where to vote, and closing with some motivating message. This is good, but more motivational will be your personal note on the door hanger, expressing in your own words how much their vote will mean.
You should put the note in your own words, but here are a few examples left with the door hanger for, let’s say, Veronica in Dane County, Wisconsin, the weekend before the election.
“Veronica, sorry to miss you. Your vote could make the difference in Wisconsin! We need you on Tuesday.”
“Veronica, sorry to miss you. My name is Michelle and I’m supporting [name of our candidate] because my daughter needs health care and Trump may take it away. Please vote on Tuesday for all our kids!”
Or more simply, “We can’t afford 4 more years of Trump. We need you Veronica!”
Whatever moves you, because when Veronica returns home and reads your note, she may be moved as well. Not by the campaign slogans and pictures but by your personal appeal.
When people do answer the door, you will likely hear a variety of responses. The most common may be a slightly exasperated, “I’m voting! I’ve told everyone’s who asked.” The simple reply will suffice: “Thanks for your vote. It’ll all be over Tuesday and we can celebrate both the election being over and Trump’s loss.”
But some may say, “I’m voting but not for your candidate. Both parties are crooked, I’m sending a message by voting for Smith, he seems pretty good, or maybe Robinson, she seems pretty good too.” Smith and Robinson are third-party candidates. We’ve already discussed some ideas for engaging and hopefully converting these “flight-risk” voters, as we sometimes call them.
If you’ve been active in the campaign, you’ve almost certainly had these conversations. But now you find yourself in your own urgent crisis: at this late hour, a voter in a key battleground state is saying they are definitely voting, but not for your candidate. As I’ve explained, this is exactly how Trump gets his “win number” down, by having just enough #NeverTrump voters go the third-party route.
If you feel as passionately about electing a new president as I hope you do, you may feel this is one of the most important conversations of your life. As always, you’ll be understanding, not critical, much less dismissive. You may find a connection on an issue; you may even share his distaste for the two-party system.
But on the eve of the election, it’s important that you try to get these voters to focus on this fact: if just a few voters in the state choose a third party, it could flip the election to Trump. Be specific and make it personal. Do they really want eight years of Trump instead of four? If not, the only vote to ensure he is a disgraced one-term loser is for the Democratic nominee.
Or you could hear at the door that your target voter is simply not going to vote. It won’t matter who wins, so what’s the point? Crisis, again. An issue may be your way in. See if you can casually talk your way to one the voter deeply cares about, say, public transportation, and make the case that our nominee, unlike the incumbent, will press for more funding and support new public transportation projects and rebuilding those that are decaying. Or maybe the issue is Social Security—probably a top concern for older voters. You can state unequivocally that because Trump cut taxes so deeply for the top 1 percent, in his second term he is going to have to join the Republicans in Congress who have long wanted to slash Social Security. The Democratic candidate will try to roll back the tax cuts for the rich and protect Social Security.
Maybe the best way forward in this case is the simple, unthreatening reminder that our candidate doesn’t have to be the second coming of Lincoln or Roosevelt. We hope the Democrat will make some great stuff happen, but we know he or she will stop some really terrible stuff from happening. We can’t expect all of our voters to cast their ballots with stars in their eyes, wearing our candidate’s swag, sermonizing and singing praises to all who will listen.
Holding your nose and voting counts as much in the final tally as casting your vote with unbridled enthusiasm. Figure out how to get this reluctant voter to cast a reluctant vote. Your conversation on the porch is probably the campaign’s best opportunity with this voter. If you don’t succeed in this exchange, it’s highly likely that this potential vote will go down the drain. Not to put any pressure on you or anything.
Or you may hear, “I don’t think I’ll have time. I’ll try but with school and work, I can’t afford to wait in line. It’s always so long.”
Long lines—that’s a common refrain with our disgraceful system, but you can’t snap your fingers and fix it. This seems to be the last arena in America where we are not trying to optimize efficiency. Why don’t we use data and modeling to determine how many people will be voting at certain polling locations, so we know how much equipment will be needed to minimize the line, and when the busiest times will be so you can surge enough poll workers to meet the demand?
It is such an insanely simple problem to solve, but I believe we know the answer. Long lines mean some voters will have to leave without voting, which is exactly what many Republicans want to see in certain minority and working-class neighborhoods, where people get paid by the hour, not in salary or stock options. Republicans will never work to correct the flaws, and they fight every effort by Democrats to right this wrong. But there’s no excuse for the confusion in jurisdictions in which Democrats run the elections. The lines happen in plenty of places where we call the shots.
Embrace data, optimize for a great user experience with short lines. There are many problems we wrestle with that have hard or nonexistent solutions. This is not one of them. Every Democratic mayor and Governor should be on top of this, demanding and driving their teams to run tighter election days.
End of diatribe. Back to our busy voter who doesn’t have the time for long lines. You might be able to help solve this problem. Perhaps if she had a ride to the polls from her workplace, then another one back to her community college. Presto! An hour of sitting in the subway cut out of her busy day.
On Election Day, the national campaign, perhaps as well as your local Democratic Party and/or some progressive organizations, will have ride-to-the-polls programs in place. If so, they will have been explained to you before you hit the doors. Providing rides is a critical GOTV activity on Election Day. In this instance of the voter worried that the long lines would bust her tight schedule for the day, take personal charge. Be creative. You can get this new friend to the polls. The more time and interest you invest in her—not her vote, her—the more motivated she becomes.
Some people simply can’t get to the polls, period, on their own accord. They want to vote for our nominee, perhaps even enthusiastically so. They’ll be home on Election Day, but because of health, age, or family obligations where they can’t leave home easily, they just can’t get to the polls and they didn’t vote early. This can be one of the most urgent, occasionally panic-inducing exchanges you’ll have. Here is a voter who needs no convincing. Easy, guaranteed vote. But the deposit may not happen. It will happen only because the ride-to-the-polls operation is running smoothly. Robot cars are not the answer, yet. We need enough human beings behind enough steering wheels.
I urge you to consider being one of the drivers. It’s easy to sign up through our nominee’s website. I’ve driven a few times through the years, and there are few experiences as satisfying as picking up someone who, otherwise, wouldn’t have been able to exercise his sacred right to vote. Driver and passenger generally have a great conversation. Both of you sincerely appreciate the other’s contribution to our democracy. You know and see the direct impact of your work as clearly as with any other activity in an election—depositing a new friend at the polls who is going to vote for your candidate. You watch him walk inside the library, you watch him exit and return to your car, a vote in the bank.
Campaigns also may utilize ride-sharing services like Uber or Lyft, ordering rides to the polls with a press of a button. Or these companies may partner with nonprofits committed to voter participation, providing rides at no expense to campaigns. But the personal experience, for both the volunteer driver and the voter, is far more effective and meaningful than the third-party option.
If you come across a voter on your canvassing shift who will need a ride, and you live in the neighborhood, why not take matters into your own hands and offer then and there to come back and do the honors yourself? Wouldn’t that be downright awesome? No good reason to wait for the campaign apparatus, dependable though it is. After this voter has shared with you his or her barrier to voting, you will be the friendly and helpful face coming back to make sure they can participate fully in their democracy and in choosing their next commander in chief. Maybe this will be in-person early voting, maybe on Election Day. Doesn’t matter. Exchange mobile phone info and establish the best time, then text a reminder the morning of.
Create your own ride-to-the-polls caravan. Drive multiple voters to the polls. Just be sure to space them out timewise and factor in traffic. You can’t run late with any of them. Letting those dominoes start falling the wrong way would be a disaster.
Whatever you do for our candidate’s cause in the general election and whenever you do it, I urge you to include GOTV activities as part of your mix. This is where the rubber meets the road. As we’ve seen many times, the whole point of all the other activities is to ensure that we match our higher “support” levels with actual turnout. We need you in the field to make sure we reach every human being possible. GOTV will also be some of the most rewarding and tangible work you do. It is as real as it gets. You are encouraging, enabling, and securing actual votes. Not tweets, posts, polls, or punditry. The real thing.
And remember that one of our two major political parties, almost universally so, acts as if its representatives have taken a sworn oath to make it harder for young voters and voters of color to vote. And we have a president who on close to a daily basis cries about voter fraud that is nonexistent, has suggested that legitimate mail-in and provisional votes should not be counted, and almost certainly through his campaign will sponsor voter-suppression and “confusion” advertising. Suddenly there will be ads targeted at low-propensity Democratic voters stating wrong polling locations and times, as well as notices stating you need to bring your birth certificate and Social Security card to vote. All lies, all despicable, and all sure to happen.
And Lord knows what he’ll do on Twitter heading up to Election Day. It will certainly not be to encourage participation by anyone who does not look like him.
All that bad faith should be motivation enough to help people exercise their franchise in the service of electing a president we can be proud of.
GOTV takes dead aim at the GOP’s most consistent campaign strategy—to rig the system so voters who may oppose them have to work really hard to vote.
On November 3, let’s make them pay for their attack on our Democracy.