Two-thirds of them — 139 in all — had been voting on Jan. 6, 2021, to dispute the Electoral College count that would seal Donald J. Trump’s defeat just as rioters determined to keep the president in power stormed the chamber. Now one lawmaker after another warned during a conference call that unless Republicans demanded accountability, voters would punish them for inflaming the mob.
“I want to know if we are going to look at how we got here, internally, within our own party and hold people responsible, ” said Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina, according to a recording of the call obtained by The New York Times.
When another member implored the party to unite behind a “clarifying message” that Mr. Trump had truly lost, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the Republican leader, emphatically agreed: “We have to. ”
More than 20 months later, the opposite has happened. The votes to reject the election results have become a badge of honor within the party, in some cases even a requirement for advancement, as doubts about the election have come to define what it means to be a Trump Republican.
The most far-reaching of Mr. Trump’s ploys to overturn his defeat, the objections to the Electoral College results by so many House Republicans did more than any lawsuit, speech or rally to engrave in party orthodoxy the myth of a stolen election. Their actions that day legitimized Mr. Trump’s refusal to concede, gave new life to his claims of conspiracy and fraud and lent institutional weight to doubts about the central ritual of American democracy.
Yet the riot engulfing the Capitol so overshadowed the debate inside that the scrutiny of that day has overlooked how Congress reached that historic vote. A reconstruction by The Times revealed more than simple rubber-stamp loyalty to a larger-than-life leader. Instead, the orchestration of the House objections was a story of shrewd salesmanship and calculated double-talk, set against a backdrop of demographic change across the country that has widened the gulf between the parties.
While most House Republicans had amplified Mr. Trump’s claims about the election in the aftermath of his loss, only the right flank of the caucus continued to loudly echo Mr. Trump’s fraud allegations in the days before Jan. 6, The Times found. More Republican lawmakers appeared to seek a way to placate Mr. Trump and his supporters without formally endorsing his extraordinary allegations. In formal statements justifying their votes, about three-quarters relied on the arguments of a low-profile Louisiana congressman, Representative Mike Johnson, the most important architect of the Electoral College objections.
On the eve of the Jan. 6 votes, he presented colleagues with what he called a “third option. ” He faulted the way some states had changed voting procedures during the pandemic, saying it was unconstitutional, without supporting the outlandish claims of Mr. Trump’s most vocal supporters. His Republican critics called it a Trojan horse that allowed lawmakers to vote with the president while hiding behind a more defensible case.
Even lawmakers who had been among the noisiest “stop the steal” firebrands took refuge in Mr. Johnson’s narrow and lawyerly claims, though his nuanced argument was lost on the mob storming the Capitol, and over time it was the vision of the rioters — that a Democratic conspiracy had defrauded America — that prevailed in many Republican circles.
That has made objecting politically profitable. Republican partisans have rewarded objectors with grass-roots support, paths to higher office and campaign money. Corporate backers have reopened their coffers to lawmakers they once denounced as threats to democracy. And almost all the objectors seeking re-election are now poised to return to Congress next year, when Republicans are expected to hold a majority in the House.
Two-thirds of them — 139 in all — had been voting on Jan. 6, 2021, to dispute the Electoral College count that would seal Donald J. Trump’s defeat
just
as rioters determined to
keep
the president in power stormed the chamber.
Now
one
lawmaker
after another warned during a conference call that unless
Republicans
demanded accountability, voters would punish them for inflaming the mob.
“I want to know if we are going to look at how we
got
here,
internally
, within our
own
party
and hold
people
responsible,
”
said Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina, according to a recording of the call obtained by The New York Times.
When another member implored the
party
to unite behind a “clarifying message” that Mr. Trump had
truly
lost, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the
Republican
leader,
emphatically
agreed
: “We
have to
. ”
More than 20 months later, the opposite has happened. The
votes
to reject the
election
results have become a badge of honor within the
party
, in
some
cases even a requirement for advancement, as doubts about the
election
have
come
to define what it means to be a Trump Republican.
The most far-reaching of Mr. Trump’s ploys to overturn his defeat, the objections to the Electoral College results by
so
many
House
Republicans
did more than any lawsuit, speech or rally to engrave in
party
orthodoxy the myth of a stolen
election
. Their actions that day legitimized Mr. Trump’s refusal to concede, gave new life to his
claims
of conspiracy and fraud and lent institutional weight to doubts about the central ritual of American democracy.
Yet
the riot engulfing the Capitol
so
overshadowed the debate inside that the scrutiny of that day has overlooked how Congress reached that historic
vote
. A reconstruction by The Times revealed more than simple rubber-stamp loyalty to a larger-than-life leader.
Instead
, the orchestration of the
House
objections was a story of shrewd salesmanship and calculated double-talk, set against a backdrop of demographic
change
across the country that has widened the gulf between the parties.
While most
House
Republicans
had amplified Mr. Trump’s
claims
about the
election
in the aftermath of his loss,
only
the right flank of the caucus continued to
loudly
echo Mr. Trump’s fraud allegations in the days
before
Jan. 6, The Times found. More
Republican
lawmakers
appeared to seek a way to placate Mr. Trump and his supporters without
formally
endorsing his extraordinary allegations. In formal statements justifying their
votes
, about three-quarters relied on the arguments of a low-profile Louisiana congressman, Representative Mike Johnson, the most
important
architect of the Electoral College objections.
On the eve of the Jan. 6
votes
, he presented colleagues with what he called a “third option. ” He faulted the way
some
states had
changed
voting procedures during the pandemic, saying it was unconstitutional, without supporting the outlandish
claims
of Mr. Trump’s most vocal supporters. His
Republican
critics called it a Trojan horse that
allowed
lawmakers
to
vote
with the president while hiding behind a more defensible case.
Even
lawmakers
who had been among the noisiest “
stop
the steal” firebrands took refuge in Mr. Johnson’s narrow and
lawyerly
claims
, though his nuanced argument
was lost
on the mob storming the Capitol, and over time it was the vision of the rioters — that a Democratic conspiracy had defrauded America — that prevailed in
many
Republican
circles.
That has made objecting
politically
profitable.
Republican
partisans have rewarded objectors with grass-roots support, paths to higher office and campaign money. Corporate backers have reopened their coffers to
lawmakers
they once denounced as threats to democracy. And almost all the objectors seeking re-election are
now
poised to return to Congress
next
year, when
Republicans
are
expected
to hold a majority in the
House
.