US Presidential Election 2020

[Altair]

Took long enough though.

 

[armyvern]

>Bull. Not a single vote%u2019s result is released in a state until every single vote is cast.

FL votes in two time zones.  Eastern part polls closed 19:00 Eastern; panhandle part polls closed 20:00 Eastern.  Early results started coming in after 19:00 and before 20:00.

>There was nobody sitting in Arizona considering voting for Trump who didn%u2019t because Fox has already called the state.

If by "the state" you mean AZ rather than one of the eastern states, you're completely beside the point; not what I wrote about.  Red herring.

>If a person in Alaska chooses not to vote due to results in New York

That argument can be made about every kind of voter suppression (discouragement).  ID too hard to get?  Voter chooses not to apply.  Etc.  The proposal that reported results from polls closing earlier doesn't influence voters in areas with polls closing later is dead right there, especially in US jurisdictions with heavy turnout late in the day and long and/or complicated ballots.  We used to bitch about it in Canada.  West coast US states used to bitch about it, until they became gimmes for the Democratic party.

You are judging the US system based upon a Canadian viewpoint. The two are not comparable. We tick one box.

A voter in California, Texas, Alaska or Arizona is not going to step out of a voting line they are already standing in and go home (seeing their vote "supressed" as you put it), because a winner of the Presidency may seem obvious - even possibly already determined/declared - due  to results happening eastwards. Quite simply, they are casting their vote for far more than "one box" - The Presidency, their various State House and Senate Representatives to Washington, their state officials, their local sheriff etc etc. The result of the Presidency being known doesn't bear any weight on down-ballots they have a say about based upon their State results and timings so does not result in any "suppression" of their vote.

And even at that, even within Canada, BCers still turn out and vote if the Federal result becomes known prior to their polls, not "poles" (they remain open far later than the polling place), closing because they still have a say in "who" gets sent to Ottawa to represent them. If someone steps out of line in their jurisdiction because the president is known, or the Federal ruling party is known, they are choosing to refrain from exercising their right to determine "who" represents them at the Federal level locally, or down-ballot - not because their vote has been supressed. 

All votes count. Suppression happens when intentional things are done to attempt to prevent people from voting such as outright blocking them, robocalls encouraging them to stay home, or putting one drop box out to receive legal votes in a jurisdiction with 1 million plus voters etc. Those things are attempts at suppression.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

(Edit to add: QV, your post is gone, but links are still useful viewing.)

Highly unlikely anything will turn in DJT favour, but sure, all we can do is wait and see...

https://www.vox.com/21554693/trump-supreme-court-steal-election

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trump-election-lawsuits-grant-woods

https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2020/10/20/trumps-absentee-ballot-fraud-claims-not-supported-evidence/5969447002/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/07/rupert-murdoch-owned-us-outlets-turn-on-trump-urging-him-to-concede-with-grace

https://www.chicagotribune.com/election-2020/ct-nw-nyt-fox-news-voter-fraud-claims-20201106-7wh42jsbqjhv5ki276iculm5zm-story.html

https://abc7news.com/trump-sues-suing-lawsuits-election-2020/7658895/

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I have no problem with the Trump administration challenging vote counts in court, the courts will take a good look at the evidence and the process used and make a fairly rational determination. Unlike Canada, in the US you have 50 different systems with 3,000 counties also involved. There is a lot of room for fun and games. Also the history of voting in the US, Canada and UK, was full of various types of fraudulent practices, which is why it's taken so seriously now. I am a fan of photo ID to resolve the majority of it. Considering you have a population of roughly 11 million illegals in the US who should not have a right to vote is a serious issue. Along with the fact that you have to maintain voting records for some 331 million people, that is a lot of things to go wrong. A friend of mine as the executor of his aunt estate, duly noted that somehow she voted while dead, he has filed a complaint with the local administration.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

Keep in mind, most aren’t 100% stating that there’s absolutely zero chance of error; whether purposefully on anyone’s part or unintentionally. They’re stating, going by factual data—much of which is either partially or fully included in links I posted above—that the number of instances where discrepancies of any kind are present are too minute to surpass the volume by which Biden took/has taken the lead.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>We tick one box.

As do they, when voting for president.  Your entire argument presupposes that a voter vulnerable to discouragement cares enough about down-ballot decisions to stay in a line for a long time.  It also presupposes that down-ballot decisions are consequential in the voter's state; in a state which is dominated by one party, why stick around?

Canadian polls tend to exhibit very short waits.  If anything, US voters should be more prone to discouragement that Canadian voters.

Can we examine whether the presidential box matters more than the others?

Voter Turnout in US Presidential and Midterm Elections.

Absent any more compelling explanations, it looks like the presidential box matters.  Common sense suggests there is no unusual phenomenon involving a base of always-voters and entirely complementary tiers of midterm-only voters and presidential-year-only voters; people who vote midterms would surely also vote presidential years.

[Add: we could look at vote totals for different races.  I haven't the patience to pull a lot of numbers and add them, so I used Decision Desk HQ and looked at AZ because it is western, it was close, and there was a senate seat up for grabs.  3293430 votes cast for president, 3264042 votes cast for senate.  The difference is 29388.  While there may be plenty of explanations, and it would be better to compare numbers for more offices across more states, it tentatively suggests there are people who can't be bothered to vote for every office and issue on a ballot.  Or, for the tin-hatters, that fraudsters are lazy.]

I conclude that there is a subset of voters who are really only motivated to vote when the presidential choice is on the ballot, and that a person disinterested in turning out for lesser decisions is not going to wait in line if he believes events in earlier time zones have rendered the wait futile.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>the number of instances where discrepancies of any kind are present are too minute to surpass the volume by which Biden took/has taken the lead

No, but they can poison the hell out the next four years if people don't see some rectification.

 

[OceanBonfire]

This is too funny:

Trump team confuses many with press conference at ‘Four Seasons’ landscaping business

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/america-votes/trump-team-confuses-many-with-press-conference-at-four-seasons-landscaping-business-1.5179926

https://twitter.com/FSPhiladelphia/status/1325102014964109312

https://twitter.com/pattonoswalt/status/1325132671140327427

 

[BeyondTheNow]

>the number of instances where discrepancies of any kind are present are too minute to surpass the volume by which Biden took/has taken the lead

No, but they can poison the hell out the next four years if people don't see some rectification.

That’s nothing new though. The same issues are raised every election. Their people complain about the Electoral College (as many Cdns do, et al) incessantly every election. Their people complain about any number of issues with ballot clarity every election. Their people complain about dead people voting every election, some element of voter fraud gets brought up every election...it goes on and on and on...

But everyone tolerates it as long as it’s working for them. (Trump openly criticized the Electoral College/voting system until it worked in his favour, but that’s hardly surprising.) Anyway, my point is that I don’t see this election year being any different. Everyone knows it needs reform, but no one wants to put in the effort—R & D alike. This isn’t the first contentious election and its not looking like it’ll be the last. Perhaps this one will be the straw that...but one can only hope.

Ref: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-once-called-the-electoral-college-a-disaster-for-democracy-now-he-says-its-far-better-for-the-usa/2019/03/20/dc038b76-4af7-11e9-93d0-64dbcf38ba41_story.html

 

[The Bread Guy]

... in the US you have 50 different systems with 3,000 counties also involved. There is a lot of room for fun and games ...

And THAT's what my guess will lead to a ton of wrestling between now and inauguration.

Like any significant change to voting systems, you hit the nail on the head right here:

... everyone tolerates it as long as it’s working for them ...

 

[MilEME09]

And THAT's what my guess will lead to a ton of wrestling between now and inauguration.

Like any significant change to voting systems, you hit the nail on the head right here:

You never know,  one day someone may be willing to change the system even if it means they will loose for the good of the country.

 

[armyvern]

>We tick one box.

As do they, when voting for president.  Your entire argument presupposes that a voter vulnerable to discouragement cares enough about down-ballot decisions to stay in a line for a long time.  It also presupposes that down-ballot decisions are consequential in the voter's state; in a state which is dominated by one party, why stick around?

Your entire argument presupposes that they ARE NOT interested in their down-Ballot choices. 

The very fact they are standing in line to vote bears that as erroneous. The longer the line they stand in, the more determined they are IMO.

Either way, that is not suppression. 1 ballot drop box for a million + voters - by design - IS an attempt at voter suppression.

You also forget the opposite if all they cared about was who would be POTUS - there may also be those who step out of line, choosing to "suppress their own vote" because "my guy already won. May as well pack 'er up and head home". That s till does not qualify as voter suppression.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Your entire argument presupposes that they ARE NOT interested in their down-Ballot choices. 

My argument only presupposes that some people are not interested, and I've cited information which tends to support that hypothesis.  I did not and do not claim that everyone is necessarily discouraged.

I've already ceded the point about choosing a name.  As I wrote yesterday, "it doesn't even matter if you refuse to call it "suppression"."  Call it whatever you want.  It doesn't matter who it influences (people leave because they think their guy is winning, people leave because they think their guy is losing).  Results shouldn't be published while an election is in progress.  Do you defend the practice, or agree that the practice should be changed?

 

[Brad Sallows]

What is this reference to "1 ballot drop box for a million + voters - by design"?

Is that Abbott's decision in TX to deploy one ballot box per county, where the status quo prior to his decision was none?

 

[Navy_Pete]

What is this reference to "1 ballot drop box for a million + voters - by design"?

Is that Abbott's decision in TX to deploy one ballot box per county, where the status quo prior to his decision was none?

Here's an article about it in a Texas new website (which likely has a democrat lean to it), but goes through the whole thing where the election officials were trying to adapt and make it easier to vote during the pandemic, and had other things like drive through voting and updated their polling centers. They previously had a drop box, but added a lot more in Harris county and elsewhere because they wanted to give people options. Of interest, Texas doesn't have ballot tracking for absentee votes like other places, so it was a genuine concern for people that wanted to make sure their vote wouldn't get lost in the mail.

Not really sure how making it easier is a partisan issue; they kept the same rules but made more sites available for anybody to cast their vote for whoever they want. The GOP lawsuit specifically said the changes made it easier for Democrats to vote and that hurt Trump's chances to win Texas, so not sure how that can be anything other then voter suppression where they target specific counties/groups to keep the Democrat votes down.

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/10/15/harris-county-texas-voting/

 

[Brad Sallows]

I can see why a wrangle arose.  States set the rules; the rules need to be applied uniformly throughout a state.  Expanding voting options is laudable, subject to integrity controls, but those options can't favour only voters in one county.  It wasn't a case of keeping Democratic voters down in one county; it was a case of not giving advantages to voters in one Democratic-leaning county.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I can see why a wrangle arose.  States set the rules; the rules need to be applied uniformly throughout a state.  Expanding voting options is laudable, subject to integrity controls, but those options can't favour only voters in one county.  It wasn't a case of keeping Democratic voters down in one county; it was a case of not giving advantages to voters in one Democratic-leaning county.

That's only because of how they do the elections in this insane fractile organization that runs at the county level. There was nothing stopping all of Texas from following the lead; the only reason this favoured a democratic leaning county was because it's big with a lot of people, and the local election officials did things within their authority to make it easier around COVID.  You can't on one hand devolve power down to the local level so they can do stuff that makes sense for the local context, then forbid them from doing something novel because other local authorities didn't do the same.

If that was their objection, they should have rolled out the same reforms at the state level (where the population and area size made sense). Their initiatives followed the actual election laws, and seems very big government anti Republican to come down on local authorities trying to do their best during a global pandemic, when they aren't getting central directives.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Plenty of organizations devolve execution with decision-making authority within existing rules, without devolving decision-making authority to change rules.

 

[QV]

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/

Well, RCP has put PA into the undecided column... Biden at 259... so not President elect?

Maybe my post from the other day was prematurely deleted by the admin.

 

[Remius]

The rest of the world seems to disagree with that.  Can you link to what you are seeing.  Everyone except Trumpland has accepted that he’s won.