Transcript - Marc Elias (4/1/26)
Simon Rosenberg:
Hey, welcome everyone. Simon Rosenberg back with another event. This one’s kind of a special event today. I think that in all the daily comments that we have at Hopium, I think the guy whose name comes up the most for… hey, did you see what he said today… is Marc Elias. And Marc is joining us today. Marc, welcome. Thanks for being with us today.
Marc Elias:
It’s great to be here, Simon. People don’t realize that there was life before video podcasts, and Simon and I go back a long time together fighting the wars. So it’s good to be together fighting together in the new media era.
Simon Rosenberg:
So yes, Marc and I go back. My law firm that I’ve used all the way since back more than 30 years ago, Marc, it’s hard to believe, was Marc’s firm for many years. He was he was part of the legal group… so we’ve known each other a long long time.
Marc Elias:
And you used to come brief Senate chiefs of staff, and I would sit there and like listen carefully. I wasn’t a Senate chief of staff but I was often in the room when our mutual friend would have would have you in.
Simon Rosenberg:
Yeah, J.B. Poersch. So, we’ve been at this for a few years, and Marc, you know part of the reason you’re here today is that not only are you the legal warrior… that the Republicans I think have dartboards in their offices and throw dartboards at you in their offices… not only do they attack you all the time in public and fight against you and usually get beat in court, you’ve also built a powerful media platform to help people understand more about this battle for democracy, and so for those who don’t know you and are just meeting you for the first time, talk a little bit about you know what you’ve been doing. I’ll just say this - I mean there’s almost nobody who’s been more important on the front lines of this battle for democracy than Marc and his team and it’s just and it’s been amazing to understand the scale of their contribution in recent years. And so Marc, just bring us up to speed a little bit on what you’ve been doing.
Marc Elias:
Sure. So as you pointed out, I’ve been practicing law for 30 years. And for the last 10 or 15 years, I’ve really focused most of my attention on making sure the rules of voting are fair, and making sure that everyone who is eligible is able to register to vote is able to vote and have their vote counted, and then elections are accurately certified. And this has led me, like many of us, into the lion’s den of Donald Trump, the Big Lie, and election denialism. So at this point, I’ve litigated hundreds of cases against Donald Trump, his allies, the Republican Party, now his Department of Justice, over voting and election rules. We just won a big case in the Eighth Circuit, which is a very conservative court, over an effort to essentially do away with online voter registration, to basically say in order to register a vote, you have to provide a wet signature, you have to show up in person and sign in ink. And so, you know, that’s like the day-to-day work that I do.
I obviously was involved, or for people who don’t know, I was involved in representing President Biden and the Democratic Party in defeating Donald Trump more than 60 times in the post-election in 2020. Donald Trump doesn’t like me. I don’t like him. He knows he called me out by name and taxed me, and I wear that scorn as a badge of honor. But in addition to that, like you, I realize that, you know, winning in court is part of it. But what Donald Trump is doing is he has been able to use his defeats to perpetuate lies. And so I started Democracy Docket, which is a news platform in 2020 to try to spread accurate information about what is happening to democracy, what its stresses and strains are, who’s attacking it and who’s defending it, with a particular focus on what’s happening in court. And that has been another important part of my life. And I’ve been sort of doing both of these things for the last few years.
Simon Rosenberg:
Well, thank you, Marc. It is amazing how often Republicans bring up your name in vain, and you clearly live large in their imagination, and you’ve beaten them so many times. But, in addition, you know, when I pitch my candidates and the electoral work that we do and we lobby on issues, people are like, how do we know that there’s going to be a free and fair election? How do we know that there’s going to be a peaceful transfer of power? These are reasonable questions given what happened in 2020 and 2021. This is not, you know, conspiracy theory stuff. I mean, Donald Trump, and the difference is that Trump is now, as a central ally for him is his own Justice Department, and the FBI, and ODNI even now are involved. And so, you know, when you get asked that question, how do you answer it when people bring it up with you?
Marc Elias:
Yeah, so the first thing I tell folks is that we’re going to have elections, okay? So anyone who says Donald Trump can cancel the elections, that’s not true. Presidents don’t have the power to cancel elections, and so we’re going to have elections. The question is how free and fair they’re going to be, and that is always a continuum. It’s a continuum even in the best of times. There are friction points in the election process, sometimes intentional voter suppression in the election process that make elections less free and fair than they should be. But we’re not in the best of times. And so Donald Trump is going to try to make the voting process harder, particularly for voters he doesn’t want to participate, namely Democrats.
And he’s going to do that by making voter registration more difficult, by making in-person voting harder, by trying to ban mail-in voting. But he’ll also attack the post-election results. And like you said, we saw that in 2020. We actually saw instances of it in 2022 when, you know, in Arizona, there was a county, Cochise County, Arizona, that refused to certify the election results after 2022. And, you know, my law firm and I, we [had] to sue them and win and get them certified. We had to sue counties in Pennsylvania to get them certified.
The other reason why we didn’t see this flare up in 2024 is really because Donald Trump won the presidential election. But we did see it in a judicial election in North Carolina, where for month upon months upon months, Republicans attacked the results, not just through the normal recount process, which is fine, not just the normal election contest process, which is fine, but by trying to disenfranchise over 100,000 voters who had followed the rules and done everything they were told to by the state to cast their ballots out after the election. Now, ultimately, as a result of litigation that I was involved in and others and the candidate was involved in, we kept that from happening, but we’re going to see that in 2026. So we all need to be prepared for it. We all need to understand the threats that we’re under, but we can’t lose hope, you know, to use your central thesis… Hopium is important because if we give in to despair, we are doing Donald Trump’s work. If we assign him powers he does not have, the power to do anything he wants, that he’s impervious to any court decision, then we are giving him the power that he wants.
And so we can’t do that. We have to every day stand up and stiffen our spine and say we’re going to fight him. In the court of public opinion, we’re going to show up at those No Kings rallies. We’re going to support Democratic candidates and we’re going to make sure they have the resources they need. We’re also going to make sure that we get out and vote for them. And then, you know, the legal process, we’re going to believe in the idea that we can hold bad actors to account and that that that we we have righteous causes in court, we’ll win.
Simon Rosenberg:
You know, when I get asked this, the thing I say, first of all, is that the first goal is to make this a blowout election so it gets harder.
Marc Elias: Always.
Simon Rosenberg:
And that we can’t lose sight that our work in electing candidates and grassroots is the first big step, but then the second step, the stuff that you focus on most importantly, you know what I call in this election, it’s going to be a whatever it takes election. Mike Johnson has already said it he’s already been on record that they know that the Trump presidency will be basically over if the House flips. And that we have to anticipate and do a better job I think as Democrats not allowing ourselves to be surprised the day after election day, but to anticipate what’s coming and prepare for it. And I think that one of the things that I’ve been encouraged by to be honest is that is we’re now sort of having this conversation publicly. We’re starting to normalize this. We’re trying to take it out of the scary place that it is, and everyone gets scared and he becomes powerful again instead of this weak, ailing, addled deeply unpopular, failed president that he really is, right? The real Trump. And it’s why these kinds of conversations, I think, are so important, because we have to walk our community through, as you pointed out, what’s possible. And then we need strategies to win in that battlefield, not just in the traditional battlefield of politics.
Marc Elias:
Yeah, but I want to start where you started, because the most important thing we need to do is to make sure that Democratic candidates can win. Because I will tell you, it is much easier to defend victories than it is to challenge losses. And importantly, you know, the willingness of Republicans to go along with voter suppression and election subversion is directly related to the size of their defeat, right? I mean, you can imagine on the one hand, you have an election in which there is a three seat margin between the two candidates and an election in which there’s a 30 seat margin between the candidates. If Democrats are up 30 seats, then frankly, a lot of Republicans, including Republicans who lost are among the 30 people who lost, they’re just gonna throw in the towel and go home. Whereas if it’s just three seats, those three members are going to be under a lot of pressure and they’re going to feel like they can engage in tactics to try to overturn the will of the voters. They can justify throwing out lawful ballots. They can justify disenfranchising people who have complied with the law. And so I always start where you do, which is that the first thing is before we worry about challenges with the election, we need to make sure everyone is registered to vote, they have a plan to vote and that they vote. And that if they have the time to support a Democratic campaign, they do so. If partisan politics is not their gig, they are supporting nonprofit organizations that are in the pro-democracy space. If they have a few extra dollars to chip in to support a Democratic campaign, they do that. I start with that.
Now, beyond that, you’re right, we need to be prepared for the court fights. We need to have a smart legal strategy that hopefully we have in the resources and the things in preparation for what could be a very messy election. I think this will be a very messy election. And hopefully we’re doing that. It’s hard because, as you say, there’s now the Department of Justice on the other side. You know, we’ve gone from a world in which my biggest adversary were right wing organizations that maybe had a ton of dark money, but they were relying on, you know, private lawyers. Now my biggest adversary, frankly, is the Department of Justice. You know, the Trump Department of Justice is involved in more than 30 voter suppression efforts in courts around the country. And that is a much bigger adversary to fight against.
Simon Rosenberg:
Yeah, it’s stunning that we’re at this point. And Marc, I want to go back to something you mentioned about North Carolina, because I think this is where, you know, we were also… we raised over a million dollars for the North Carolina party in 2024. And then when the legal challenge happened afterwards, we raised a big chunk of money for the North Carolina party that was part of the lawsuit. Can you talk about the effort there to retroactively invalidate votes? Because it seems like of all the things that could happen this year, there, they came very close to pulling that off and I know that in Texas that’s part of… I’m forgetting the county in Texas… you know essentially the Supreme Court made a decision in Texas, the Texas Supreme Court, to potentially invalidate [votes] of people that had legally voted… this seems to be one of the most significant things that we have to be paying attention to and to paraphrase you, in our private conversations you’ve talked about how they’re trying to pick locks. Talk a little bit about this because this seems to me to be something that we really have to sort of start understanding much more aggressively as we head towards the fall elections.
Marc Elias:
Yeah, I think that we have oftentimes those of us in the center or the center left or the left, I think we sometimes caricature the Republicans’ voter suppression efforts as amateurists and anarchists, you know, buffoon-like and, you know, failed. And there are certainly elements of that. There are definitely elements of their efforts that have been ridiculous and stupid and worth mocking. But we also have to recognize they’ve been trying to pick locks, as I call it, that stand in their way against voter suppression. So, for example, one of the locks that they have wanted to pick for some time is how to seize ballots. Donald Trump told the New York Times in January of this year that he wished he had seized the ballots in 2020, but that he didn’t because he wasn’t sure that the government forces that he would have used were sophisticated enough. That’s the word he used, sophisticated. Well, you know what? He has managed to pull something off, right? They got sophisticated enough that they seized ballots in Fulton County. They figured out how to get it through a federal magistrate, how to draft the affidavit of probable cause, logistically how to do it, you know, where to show up, how many trucks they need, you know, how are how are ballots stored? You know, do they need to bring boxes or are they already boxed? Right, they figured out that the local U.S. attorney’s office probably won’t go for it, as they didn’t there. So you need to find a U.S. attorney’s office willing to do it from somewhere in the country. And they found that in Missouri.
So, we should recognize that they are using this time to figure out the logistics of how to undermine free and fair elections. And in North Carolina, it’s a great example. North Carolina, you know, the tell in N.C. was that the Republican candidate only lost by 700, I think 725 votes. And in a normal recount or election contest, if you were down 725 votes, you target, oh, about 726 ballots, right? Or maybe 1,000 or 1,500. But your goal is just to win, right? So you’re trying to make the narrowest claims you can make and still prevail. Instead, they sought to retroactively disenfranchise over 100,000 voters, and they were supported by the National Republican Party, to the tunes, I’m sure, of millions of dollars. And so ask yourself, why was the Republican National Committee and other national Republicans supporting this effort for this judicial seat? And the answer is because they were trying to pick a lock, because if they could figure out how after an election is over, to get courts to adopt legal theories that retroactively throw out ballots from otherwise lawful voters, that is an enormous achievement for them. Something they tried to do in 2020 and couldn’t get done. They’ve tried to do in 2022 and weren’t able. And they tried in 2024.
And as you point out, Simon, they came much closer than people understand. You know, they got the state Supreme Court to agree with them. And it was only because a federal judge at the last minute said no that it didn’t happen. But, you know, they are they are organized and they have resources and they have lawyers, and they have better lawyers now than they’ve ever had before, because the taint and the stain of working for Donald Trump has worn off. And now a lot of law firms want to work for Donald Trump. So this is going to be a dogfight.
Simon Rosenberg:
Well, and I think that one of the things… the way I talk about this is that, you know, the election is obviously trending in our direction, and Trump’s poll numbers have come down even just since the war began. We now have definitive data that he’s dropped another two to three, four points, depending on the poll. We had very good Senate polling this week that I wrote about today, and we now, we are ahead in the most recent polling in Maine and Ohio and Alaska, Talarico is competitive in Texas. Iowa… we’ve been doing really well and should be optimistic about what’s happening in Iowa. They see this, and see that there’s now a legitimate chance they could lose both chambers. And losing the House is bad for Trump because he gets impeached and because there’s investigations. But losing the Senate means they start having problems with confirmations and other things that matter for the ability for them to actually run their government. And so each of these are bad in their own way.
And I think that one of the things that I’ve talked about is this issue of imagination. And what I love about when I listen to you talk is that you’re helping me understand where they’re going. Or you’re helping all of us understand and imagining what else they may do, because we’re now running against for the first time, really, and truly, we’re running against a political party that has essentially abandoned rule of law in America, democracy. I mean, this is, you know, no one’s really won an election like this. I mean, 2020, they were sort of halfway there, but now they’re full on. I mean, Trump views himself as a dictator or a tyrant or a king, whatever the word is. And so they’re not operating in the constraints of law any longer. Which means that the issue of wargaming out and being prepared for what it means to be running against a party that is not bound by law any longer will really matter, I think, for us as we get ready to execute the second half of what we need to do to ensure that we win the election and that there’s a peaceful transfer of power.
Marc Elias:
Yeah. I mean, I think that your point about Trump’s lawlessness is so important. Donald Trump last August posted on Truth Social that the states were the agents of the federal government for counting and tabulating ballots. Now, that is both a factual misstatement and a constitutional misstatement. But then he goes on to say that he, as president, represents the federal government. So what he was essentially saying is, the states count and tabulate ballots as my agent, and therefore I can direct them what to do. And too many in the legacy media, frankly, didn’t pay any mind to this. I mean, I did. I know you did. This is why we need a vibrant, independent media. And now is a great time, by the way, if you are not subscribed to Hopium, great time to do it right now. So I hope you do. Simon does a great job and it does important public service. So I hope everyone subscribes and becomes a paying member if they’re able to.
But the fact is that he said this and it went largely unnoticed. In January, it got worse. He said that not only were they his agents, but that he thought that Republicans should take over the voting. That was his phrase, right? This got sort of sanitized as federalized elections. What he said is Republicans should take over the voting. And then he said in 15 places. And he’s listed some of the places and they’re all blue cities. And so, we know what he is up to do. When he says they have to pass the city back, the other thing he is saying, Simon, the other thing he is saying is, but if they don’t, I will impose it by executive order. That’s just lawless. Like everything we’ve just listed there is lawless.
It is lawless for him to think he can control the vote counting. It is lawless for him to say that the Republican Party will take over the voting. And it is lawless for him to say that if the Congress doesn’t pass a law, he will, by unilateral decree, impose it. And I tie it to the reason why I think that, you know, Hopium Chronicles does such important work and why people should subscribe… it is because honestly, I said there are two parts of what I do, right? One is a function of being in court and fighting for these things. The second is trying to raise awareness. And there just aren’t enough… there isn’t enough awareness of this being raised. So I’ll turn it back to you, Simon, and ask, what is it that we can do to maybe entice the legacy media to pay more attention to this as a serious problem?
Simon Rosenberg:
So I have this way of talking about this that and as you know, we’ve been, you and I are encouraging privately for there to be, for us to organize ourselves in a slightly more aggressive manner to sort of work together so that we’re all working, all the pieces of the family are sharing and working together. Because what Trump wants to do is divide and conquer, right? And to keep us apart as opposed to together.
But I think part of the way that I think about this is that we need to start talking about this and normalizing it. And taking it out of the scary realm and taking this work out of the legal realm and bringing it into the political realm. Because a lot of our instinct as Democrats is is we leave it to the lawyers. And the reason we leave things to the lawyers is because we respect rule of law and we respect lawyers. And so leaving it to the lawyers is actually a sign of respect. It’s not politically impractical. The problem is this is in their political domain. Lawyers to them are like garbage men. They don’t care about lawyers. They’re there to clean the dishes and do the dirty work, right? And so we have to bring this into the political domain.
And one of the things that I’ve been encouraging our friends is that I think in June, some combination of Schumer and Jeffries and the leaders of the House and the Senate, along with Ken Martin and a bunch of governors, need to hold a public press conference and start talking to the American people about what’s likely to happen. We’ve learned in other countries that have gone through this kind of democratic backsliding that this sort of prophylactic warning of the public, communicating with the public about what may happen, about the banality, the malevolence, the corruption, the lawlessness is actually essential so that people… this stuff starts becoming normalized and they can see it. I don’t think it’s going to be very hard to convince the American people at this point that Donald Trump is capable of doing extraordinary and ridiculous and lawless things. But it’s also… we have to own it. We have to own that we can’t leave this to the lawyers any longer.
And this is why, Marc, frankly, I’ve had you on today and why this is the fourth episode in a series I’m doing around defending democracy. And because my community was demanding that I helped them understand all of this. They didn’t want to be scared, they wanted to know what we could do, right, how do we mitigate the damage as opposed to being shaken and worried by it? And so I am just in my own work, the way I’ve described this, Marc, is sort of the new battlefield of 2026. And like any other battlefield, you have to study it and understand it, and then build a plan to win in it. And that’s part of what you’ve been doing now for many many years so effectively. We need to do it together and not have this be something that we view as something that happens after the election by lawyers. This has to be part of our political understanding of how to win in a changing battlefield against a venal and autocratic party that we’re running against in 2026.
Marc Elias:
Yeah. Look, and the other thing is that the more that you disconnect elections, voters, activism, education, the more you disconnect that from the legal process, the worse results you’re going to get in all areas. I mean, I can achieve a legal victory. I mean, like I mentioned, I just achieved a legal victory in the Eighth Circuit, striking down a Arkansas law that basically prohibited online voter registration. But if it’s just a case in a book, and nobody in Arkansas knows it, then we actually haven’t achieved anything for voters, right? It’s important that voters know that this has happened, that they now can use these tools by our clients, Get Loud Arkansas and Vote.org, that they can use these tools, right? So like just at a practical level, the legal victories themselves alone without awareness and without engagement by civic organizations and campaigns… is not useful.
But the other thing is also true. Which is that the legal system can help sometimes galvanize for campaigns, things that are otherwise hard for people to put in concrete. Think about the challenges. Think about what we saw in Minnesota. I mean, Minnesota was a good example of where you had side by side tremendous civic courage, tremendous civic activism. And you had lawsuits that were going on that were both responsive to the needs of the people who were protesting, right? They were solving their real problems, but they were also serving as a way to amplify the messages, right, that people on the ground were experiencing. And so at its best, litigation is a tool to both change facts and the law for people and for them to take advantage of it. But it also can become a part of a larger organizing effort to show that there are people fighting for them and that when we fight, we can win.
Simon Rosenberg:
I want to just put an exclamation point on something… I’ll give you an example of this, Marc, which was Bush v. Gore in 2000. I was deeply involved in the political effort behind defending our government, our work in Bush v. Gore in Florida, and I was going on Fox News almost every day during that fight defending what we were doing. Even once went up against, you know, right after James Baker. I was in the mix of all this and what happened in that case for those… it’s a trauma for our party, but we won every legal fight up until the Supreme Court.
But where the Republicans won [was] public opinion, and I’m still convinced that this was one of the reasons why the Supreme Court felt that they had a window to sort of make an outrageous decision, was that their central fight was that hand counting was more accurate than machine counting. And so what they did was that they undermined people’s understanding of the actual electoral process in a way that where we did not litigate that in the public. We were litigating it in the court. And I was warning the campaign by going on television that we were not winning the actual, the legal fights. We were not winning the public opinion fights around this and that we needed to up our game in fighting the ridiculous arguments that they were making that were being done for their own voters and not for the courts. And I’m still convinced to this day, all these years later, 26 years later, that one of the reasons the Supreme Court felt they had the license to go for this outrageous decision was that they knew from polling that they had won some of the major arguments with the public about what had happened.
And so to your point, we have to bring this into the political domain and not have it only live in the legal domain. These are all connected - it’s about how we win in this new battlefield and and I think that, you know, the advice and counsel you’re giving us, as always Marc is is spot on and I’m just grateful that you’re gearing up… the disparate parts of our family as much as possible I think are working together in order to maximize our success. I know that you and I have been involved in some conversations about that and hopefully we can make sure that we have the strongest team on the playing field possible for us as we head into what’s going to be an important election where they’re going to be spending incredible amounts of money against us, but where we have real opportunity to do something historically meaningful in kicking MAGA out of the House and Senate in November.
Marc Elias:
And so the thing I would echo in that is, first of all, it’s ironic because I wrote something literally today for Democracy Docket that began by saying that as a young lawyer, I was told, don’t talk to the media, let your briefs do your talking. And I said this was terrible advice then. And it’s dangerous today. It’s dangerous today for exactly the reasons you just said. You’re spot on about Bush vs. Gore. And you’re spot on in that, you know, judges are people. They read the newspaper. They live in communities. They take in the information that is around them. And if the information around them is that, you know, that vote by mail is dangerous and it’s subject to be, you know, fraud and all of that, you’re mistaken if you don’t think that that matters. And the flip side is also true. If what they’re hearing is that this is disenfranchising their neighbor, that the kid who coaches their soccer team won’t be able to vote, that it is unnecessarily burdening the students that their kids go to school with, whatever, like that matters too. So I totally agree with that.
But I’d also want to end by saying to the audience that that we all have a role in this. The fact is, Simon, when you say there’s a chance to do something historically significant, in decades from now, people are going to look back on this era. And I promise you, if you’re watching this video, your children and your grandchildren are going to ask you, you know, 10 years from now, 20 years from now, 30 years from now, when this is all in the history books, they’re going to ask you in 2026, what was it like and what did you do? And they’re not going to be asking you about the prices of gas or the prices of eggs or for that matter, even about the war going on in the Middle East. What they’re going to want to know is when democracy was at stake, when you knew that there was an authoritarian in the White House, what did you do? And you may be inclined to tell them how you felt and how terrible it was. And I’m telling you, they’re going to correct you and say, I didn’t ask you how you felt. I asked you what you did.
And so all of us have the opportunity right now to do something historic, not to feel something historic, not to witness something historic, but to do something historic. And that doesn’t matter whether you are Simon, who has this huge following, or you’re just the person watching this video thinking, what can I do? Well, there are a number of things you can do. Number one, you can support a Democratic campaign. You could volunteer your time. If you don’t want to do that, you can become a poll worker. If you can’t do that, you could chip in a few dollars. If you can’t afford it, I totally get it. You can write postcards. You can join a community like Simon has built and add your voice to a chorus of people and maybe convince someone else that they should have the courage to do something. You can speak out. You can speak out by going to rallies, but you can also speak out every day to your bridge club, to the group you get lunch with, at the dinner table, at the diner, right? You can speak out in your own town square. Simon’s got a really big town square. You may have a smaller town square, but it may just be a handful of people who follow you on social media or people who, like I said, you grab coffee with once a week at the local coffee shop. But everybody’s got to do their part right now for democracy because I promise you it’s not enough to follow this news.
It is not enough to lament what’s happening. You have a moral obligation to do something. So you can start, as I mentioned before, by joining the Hopium community, but that’s just the first step and you ought to do a lot more. And one of the reasons why I am a subscriber to Hopium is because Simon gives all of us, including someone like me who may think I have a lot of ideas… he gives me ideas all the time of ways I can engage to be part of the solution.
Simon Rosenberg:
Well, Marc, thank you. And, back at you, brother. I mean, for what you’ve built is not only a firm that is winning victory after victory after victory, but building Democracy Docket, which has really become this kind of vital daily news source for all of us who are fighting to defend our democracy. So this has been a great conversation. I’ve probably gone a little over time. I’m definitely going to have you back. And what people should be aware… I’ll just close with this thought because I loved what you said at the end and the need to be in the game and to fight… is that we have to remember that all of us are going through this for the first time, right, none of us are expert at what’s happening here. I mean Americans have been blissfully, you know not having to fight autocracy, and we’ve had to develop new muscles and new capacities and new understandings.
And we’re not always moving as quickly as everybody wants us to, so that’s been a challenge but I think in this issue around us being ready for Trump and his shenanigans, I’m more optimistic today than I was even six weeks ago about there becoming a greater understanding in Washington about the need for us to come together and build something very powerful where we’re all working together. And I hope that I will continue, and Marc is involved in this as well, so that Marc’s not just out there all by himself, but he’s working inside of a party and a family and leaders that are fighting these battles together to make us more effective, not just legally, but politically. And that’s a new thing. And so, I think that I’m optimistic about these conversations that are happening here. And Marc, I’m just really grateful for all the work that you’ve done and for this amazing set of institutions you’ve built. And let’s lock arms and stay connected and keep fighting together. And I’d love to have you back. If there’s any reason you want to come back, there’s stuff you want to share with people, just let me know.
Marc Elias: I’ll take you up on that because I’d love to come back.
Simon Rosenberg:
Okay. Listen, thanks, everybody. Thanks, Marc. And Democracy Docket, Elias Law Firm, you know, they have literally Marc Elias dartboards at the RNC and in the Trump White House and all over the Republican Party. He lives in their minds large every day. It was great to have him here. I know that he’s been requested by many of you. I don’t know that any person has ever been more requested to come to Hopium than Marc in the last few months. And so I’m glad he was able to make it.
And everybody, listen, just take Marc’s advice, right? We have to keep working hard. We have a country to save and an election to win this November. And we just have to put our heads down and do all that we can to bring it about. Thanks all.