This article describes the efforts of organizers from both major parties to ensure that election laws were respected, that votes were counted, that processes were not subverted, and that the will of the people was respected.
This paragraph, from the opening section, seems a fair summary of the work:
> 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.
Indeed, the article describes a non-partisan project staffed by organizers from both major political parties:
> “We had rabid Trump supporters who agreed to serve on the council based on the idea that this is honest,” Wamp [the former GOP legislator] 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.”
From reading the article, I really don't understand what it's meant to show in the context of the conversation. The claim was that the election is "admitted to have been unfair", but what I see documented is a lot of people working to ensure fairness. What might I be missing?
In the electoral college, some voters are able to vote with three times the weight of others due to differing populations within districts that have equal college votes. Here is one source I found on Google, but the calculation is easy and there are plenty of other articles that reach similar conclusions: https://theconversation.com/whose-votes-count-the-least-in-t...
If you add in gerrymandering, it's the truth that most of our elections are "rigged" or "unfair" in a very real sense to anyone who believes in majoritarianism.
The electoral college isn't unfair, it is one of the few things ensuring fair treatment of smaller states. You might value the equal value of each vote (which is its own kind of fairness to be sure) more highly, but it is flat out disingenuous to claim that elections aren't fair due to the electoral college. The electoral college is making different fairness trade-offs than you would prefer, but that's not the same as being unfair.