Bulwark Takes: “Marc Elias Sounds Alarm On Trump’s Election Plan” — Episode Summary
Podcast: Bulwark Takes
Host: Tim Miller (The Bulwark)
Guest: Marc Elias (Democracy Docket, Democratic campaign lawyer)
Air Date: August 18, 2025
Episode Overview
In this urgent episode, The Bulwark’s Tim Miller brings on Marc Elias, a prominent Democratic lawyer and founder of Democracy Docket, to analyze and respond to a recent, controversial statement from Donald Trump regarding mail-in ballots and potential federal takeover of election administration. As Trump signals new efforts to restrict vote-by-mail and asserts sweeping federal (presidential) authority over elections, Elias breaks down the legal, constitutional, and practical dangers for democracy leading into the 2026 midterms. The conversation is candid, concerned, and calls for immediate civic and media engagement.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. Level of Alarm over Trump’s Statement (00:00–02:52)
- Trump's Statement: On Truth Social, Trump claims he’ll “get rid of mail in ballots” and eliminate “highly inaccurate, very expensive and seriously controversial voting machines.” He suggests an executive order to ensure “honesty” in the 2026 elections, declaring states are “merely an agent for the federal government…[and] must do what the federal government, as represented by the President…tells them.”
- Elias’s Alarm Scale: Elias immediately calls Trump’s approach “very alarming” (00:37), emphasizing the attempt to target predominant voting methods, particularly in states where Democrats rely heavily on mailed ballots.
- “Anytime the president…says he is going to shut down the predominant method of voting in a quarter of the states…is something we have to take both literally and seriously.” — Marc Elias (00:37)
2. Three Primary Threats from Trump’s Approach (02:52–06:01)
- (1) Practical Risks: Red State Suppression
- If Republican-led states heed Trump and decertify voting equipment or ban mail-in voting, it would be “catastrophic” for election access, infrastructure, and capacity.
- “Most of these states…don’t have as many places to have poll locations…so doing away with mail in voting…would have a dramatic impact…create all kinds of lines and displacement.” — Elias (02:52)
- (2) Executive Order Danger
- Trump’s claim he can unilaterally override states is unconstitutional and echoes actions tried (and partially defeated) in court previously.
- “He believes that he is the first, second, and final word as to what the law means with respect to elections…that’s not true. It’s unconstitutional. It violates all notions of the rule of law.” — Elias (04:11)
- (3) Federal Overreach: States as Presidential Agents
- The most chilling aspect: Trump asserts the President controls all layers of government, including local/state election administration, which is entirely contrary to the constitution and federalist tradition.
- “He believes that sort of all layers of government level up to him and that he is ultimately in charge…all state and local police power and election authorities…are at his command. And that will be catastrophic.” — Elias (05:08)
3. Constitutional History and Federalism (06:01–08:46)
- Clarification for Listeners: Both Miller and Elias point out, for non-scholars, that Trump’s assertion is simply not constitutional.
- “Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1 says states have authority over the ‘time, places and manner’ of election administration.” — Miller (06:01)
- Deeper Dive: The presidency has no constitutional powers to manage state election protocols, which are reserved to the states “subject only to congressional override.”
- “It doesn’t say anything…about the president. It says states have this power…by design, by history.” — Elias (06:31)
- Federalism and Republican Contradictions: Traditionally, Republicans have championed state/local authority—an irony given current events.
- “Isn’t it the Republican Party that preaches…the virtue of federalism, that [states] have primary responsibility for so many things?” — Elias (07:10)
4. The Reality of Mail-in Voting Across America (08:46–09:22)
- Bipartisan Use: Mail-in ballots are common in red and blue states alike.
- “Washington state and Oregon, as does Utah and Hawaii. You get to states like Arizona… 75% of the people vote by mail…Florida…Georgia… The notion that somehow, you know, this is all a Democratic conspiracy is bonkers.” — Elias (08:46)
5. Trump’s Strategy: Setting Up a Pretext for Discrediting Results (09:22–12:20)
- Preemptive Delegitimization: Trump is “setting up a permission structure” so that, after the election, Republican leaders can claim mailed votes (and thus Democratic wins) are invalid.
- “He will set up a permission structure before election day that you don’t need to count ballots that are cast by mail…they are inherently suspicious…Then when you are in the post election…Trump will use the power of the federal government…the FBI, the military, whatever…to claim there was widespread fraud.” — Elias (10:12)
- Legacy Media’s Role: The press must stop framing these efforts neutrally or as normal reforms.
- “We need the legacy media to stop both-sidesing this…some of the headlines I saw today…Trump Previews Executive Order on Voting…like, but the executive order would be illegal! Like, it would be unconstitutional!” — Elias (12:20)
6. How to Fight Back: Civic and Local Action (13:00–16:41)
- Citizens’ Role: Awareness, attendance at election board meetings, grassroots activism, and volunteering in election administration are critical.
- “We need citizens…to understand this is a potential thing they will face…call their legislator, show up at county election board meetings…don’t see the grassroots energy around this… cede the ground.” — Elias (13:00)
- MAGA Local Election Officials—A Worry for 2026: The “army” of election deniers remains embedded at local levels from efforts in 2020 and 2022; the threat is growing as good officials are pushed out.
- “The election deniers have multiplied in these local election boards…every election cycle…as good people get pushed out and, unfortunately, bad people get pulled in.” — Elias (14:35)
- “Don’t assume that without citizen participation, everything will just be okay.” — Elias (16:40)
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
-
On the Scale of the Threat:
“Anytime the president…says he is going to shut down the predominant method of voting in a quarter of the states…is something we have to take both literally and seriously.”
— Marc Elias (00:37) -
On Constitutional Authority:
“The presidency has no mention in Article 1, Section 4—states have authority over elections, by design, by history.”
— Marc Elias (06:31) -
On the Media’s Shortcomings:
“The headline in the Washington Post is, ‘Trump Previews Executive Order on Voting’…but the executive order would be illegal! Like, it would be unconstitutional!”
— Marc Elias (12:26) -
On Citizen Action:
“Don’t assume that without citizen participation, everything will just be okay.”
— Marc Elias (16:40) -
On Mail-In Ballot Myths:
“The notion that somehow, you know, this is all a Democratic conspiracy is bonkers.”
— Marc Elias (08:46) -
On the Catastrophic Dangers:
“He believes…that all state and local police power and election authorities…are at his command. And that will be catastrophic for the 2026 midterm elections.”
— Marc Elias (05:08)
Important Timestamps/Segments
- 00:37: Elias’s initial reaction (“very alarming”)
- 02:52: Outlining the three key threats
- 05:08: “Catastrophic” implications of Trump’s “unitary” view of power
- 06:01: Constitutional primer on state vs federal election authority
- 08:46: Refuting the myth that mail-in voting is a Democratic-only phenomenon
- 10:12: Mechanics of how Trump might challenge/undermine 2026 election outcomes
- 12:20–12:50: Critique of passive/”both-sides” press coverage
- 13:00: Call to action for citizens and need for grassroots vigilance
- 14:35: The growing presence of “election deniers” at the local administrative level
- 16:40: Final plea for active citizen engagement
Tone
The discussion is frank, sometimes exasperated, and deeply concerned, blended with dark humor (“how did we lose to this guy?”) and a clear call to civic arms. Both speakers maintain a conversational, yet urgent, style—imparting legal and historical analysis in accessible terms.
For listeners who missed it:
This episode serves as a wake-up call—a compact but deep dive into Trump’s latest assault on democratic norms, what it means for the future of U.S. elections, and why citizen vigilance and local action matter now more than ever.