For nearly two decades, the Ohio Organizing Collaborative has been one of the most effective voting rights and democracy organizations in the country — so of course the Trump regime decided to target them for political persecution. On June 11, FBI agents raided OOC’s offices with guns drawn, interrogated people for hours without legal counsel, and showed up at the homes of staff and volunteers to intimidate them and even question their underage children.
Prentiss Haney, board member and former co-executive director of OOC, joined Anat and me this week to tell the group’s story and give every organizer watching a guide to what to do if this comes to your door. His core message was “act free to be free,” because the only way to win is in the light: The instinct to lay low and hide behind lawyers may be understandable, but it also lets the regime control the narrative with lies and further intimidate others.
Within 24 hours of the raid, OOC helped launch the Hands Off Ohio campaign. Their courage became contagious; when federal agents came after protesters in Minnesota shortly after, people were already saying we need to be like Ohio — come out swinging first.
Here is Anat’s messaging guidance on the OOC raid. For more on how to talk about protecting our vote in the 2026 midterm elections, see the Hands Off Our Vote guide.
Before Prentiss joined us, Anat and I dug into Tuesday’s primary results, where candidates backed by Zohran Mamdani won big in New York. Brad Lander’s win over incumbent Rep. Dan Goldman is a case study in what actually works: talking to voters instead of donors, and keeping your base mobilized after you win to help actually get your agenda passed. There’s a tendency to flatten Mamdani and his allies’ successes into the idea that they just have a better message or are good at TikTok. But it’s actually about having something real to offer and being willing to fight for it.
We also got into a truly excellent essay, “Turn Out for What?”, which Anat co-wrote with Research Collaborative CEO Derek Johnson. It argues convincingly that “A Democratic victory in 2026 that leaves the operating assumptions of institutional Democratic politics intact may make repudiating authoritarianism even harder than electoral loss would.”
