There are no national elections, and no vote count to be transmitted to the Feds. The only thing close is when the electors elect the president. They vote in person in DC in December. No transmitting required.
The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
Moderator: Global Moderator
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
- Cortopassi
- Executive Member
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
- Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
Sure, with small changes of how people are going to vote, and what percentage come out to vote, it will swing one way or the other.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 10:45 amLet's assume for the moment that the polls are accurate, even though we know that many people will not admit that they support Trump because they are afraid of violence.Cortopassi wrote: ↑Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:49 pmI just don't understand how you can state that with such confidence. Even the most Trump positive polls has the race pretty even, no? With most having Biden in some sort of lead?
With most minds made up: https://www.thestreet.com/mishtalk/poli ... is-made-up
Go to https://www.nbcnews.com/specials/swing- ... ge65up=473, and push the "reset" button to show their base case.
That simulation says Trump loses to Biden.
Now make the tiniest change imaginable: increasing the turnout among "noncollege white" voters by 1%, from 55% to 56%, and see what happens.
Does that answer your question?
You can agree or disagree on the baseline and the previous results and changes to demographics they incorporated over the past four years.
But in any case, it will be close. Either could win. I don't see why you think democrats have to cheat to win?
And your comment about Trump supporters worried about violence, I, personally, do not disclose my preference to anyone outside of here and my immediate family. In fact, I guarantee you that if I am talking with a school parent, esp. if the discussion revolves around the virus and getting kids back to school, they would almost certainly peg me as someone who will vote for Trump.
I think the silence of who you support works both ways. Another personal observation, of those I know who have vocally expressed a preference and I have actually talked to in the past month or two, the vast majority are openly supportive of Trump. Other than a few Biden signs around the neighborhood, no one has actively come out pushing Biden.
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
I'll rephrase the larger point, that being however the vote count is tabulated to reflect the popular vote for a county, state, nation, I can't see a practical way to guarantee any individual that the total is accurate. This is important because otherwise there would be no way to know whether the elector is faithful to the will of the voters.
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
There is no national popular vote. Anything that's called that is a mirage.glennds wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 11:32 amI'll rephrase the larger point, that being however the vote count is tabulated to reflect the popular vote for a county, state, nation, I can't see a practical way to guarantee any individual that the total is accurate. This is important because otherwise there would be no way to know whether the elector is faithful to the will of the voters.
But your larger point is right: there isn't a way to prove that the vote total is accurate. It might be possible to be able to prove to Person A that his vote for Candidate B was counted. It might even be possible to publish a list of one-time identifiers for each voter, along with how they voted. Individuals could find themselves on that list and verify. But there isn't a practical way to guarantee that ONLY actual people who really voted appear on that list.
- Cortopassi
- Executive Member
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
- Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
I try to deal with 140 sets of parents for marching band, where about 1/4 of them change every year because of graduation. It is really difficult to keep things straight/up to date.glennds wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 11:32 amI'll rephrase the larger point, that being however the vote count is tabulated to reflect the popular vote for a county, state, nation, I can't see a practical way to guarantee any individual that the total is accurate. This is important because otherwise there would be no way to know whether the elector is faithful to the will of the voters.
I think all of us would be quite shocked (or maybe not) at how many mistakes are made along the way at all levels when you are talking millions of voters. Not intentional, but just errors that creep in and stay in for a long time. Percentage-wise probably quite small, but in some of these states that makes a difference.
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
This is my point. I think we can agree that the US currency as it currently exists would promptly collapse if there was a wide enough loss of confidence in it.Xan wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 11:37 amThere is no national popular vote. Anything that's called that is a mirage.glennds wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 11:32 amI'll rephrase the larger point, that being however the vote count is tabulated to reflect the popular vote for a county, state, nation, I can't see a practical way to guarantee any individual that the total is accurate. This is important because otherwise there would be no way to know whether the elector is faithful to the will of the voters.
But your larger point is right: there isn't a way to prove that the vote total is accurate. It might be possible to be able to prove to Person A that his vote for Candidate B was counted. It might even be possible to publish a list of one-time identifiers for each voter, along with how they voted. Individuals could find themselves on that list and verify. But there isn't a practical way to guarantee that ONLY actual people who really voted appear on that list.
Similarly, if the level of mistrust is wide enough and deep enough, there is a point at which it would not be possible to provide satisfactory proof to voters and the election process itself will collapse. Some level of trust is necessary. At least in a representative based democracy.
When I say national popular vote, I am talking about the collective sum of the state popular votes. I might also call state popular votes to be the effective sum of the county, parish or borough votes. I think we're just splitting semantics and you get my point.
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
Your larger point is spot on.glennds wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 1:41 pmWhen I say national popular vote, I am talking about the collective sum of the state popular votes. I might also call state popular votes to be the effective sum of the county, parish or borough votes. I think we're just splitting semantics and you get my point.
But I don't think the discussion about "national popular vote" is just semantics. It's important to know that there isn't such a thing as a national popular vote, and it's damaging to blithely discuss it as though there is one. For example, states don't count their mail-in or absentee ballots at all unless there's a race where they could make a difference.
- Cortopassi
- Executive Member
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
- Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
This is where we disagree. One of us will be right.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 12:58 pm Way more voters in most demographics are going to vote for Trump than last time.
I believe (and I am biased) that a lot of people who found Trump appealing in 2016 vs. the shitty choice of Clinton (like me) have much less reservation about the not as shitty choice of Biden. And throw in 4 years of just being plain exhausted by how Trump operates and sucks every news cycle -- time for a change.
- Mark Leavy
- Executive Member
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
- Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
Axios is reporting that many Democrats are pivoting away from encouraging mail in ballots. Not so much that they are worried about fraud, but that too many ballots may get lost or tossed for irregularities.
And many of the states that are supporting mail in ballots will be doing it for the first time this year. Screwups are bound to happen in states that don't have any experience. If the screwups are completely random, then the party that does the most "mailing in" will be hurt the most.
My impression is that the Democrats are noticing that a lot of their constituency can't be relied on to properly fill out a form and mail it in.Democrats are exponentially more likely to vote by mail than Republicans this year — and if enough mail-in ballots are lost, rejected on a technicality or undercounted, it could change the outcome of the presidential election or other key races.
And many of the states that are supporting mail in ballots will be doing it for the first time this year. Screwups are bound to happen in states that don't have any experience. If the screwups are completely random, then the party that does the most "mailing in" will be hurt the most.
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
Looks like the Dems are already hard at work:
Military Ballots Found in the Trash in Pennsylvania, All Were Trump Votes
Military Ballots Found in the Trash in Pennsylvania, All Were Trump Votes
- Mark Leavy
- Executive Member
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
- Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
In all honesty, this looks like a very small number and fairly isolated.Tortoise wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 4:34 pm Looks like the Dems are already hard at work:
Military Ballots Found in the Trash in Pennsylvania, All Were Trump Votes
However... if even one of your ream of condoms in the nightstand drawer has a pinhole through it, it does give one pause.
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
Please tell me more.
This would suggest the in-person votes are given priority over mail-in or absentee ballots? I hadn't heard this before.
What if the race looked like it were not close enough to turn to the mail-in and absentee ballots yet there were enough of those to make a difference?
Either way, I do not think this is widely known, so I'm intrigued.
- Mark Leavy
- Executive Member
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
- Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
I'll vouch that I've known about this for at least a decade. It was never thought of as ominous. Just practical and standard procedure. Once the math makes it impossible for the underdog to upset the leader, why bother continue counting?glennds wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:48 pmPlease tell me more.
This would suggest the in-person votes are given priority over mail-in or absentee ballots? I hadn't heard this before.
What if the race looked like it were not close enough to turn to the mail-in and absentee ballots yet there were enough of those to make a difference?
Either way, I do not think this is widely known, so I'm intrigued.
These days may be different.
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
I've tried to do some research of my own on this. To the best I can tell, the idea that mail-in or absentee ballots are not counted unless they could make a difference, is internet misinformation. Two reference sources:Mark Leavy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:59 pmI'll vouch that I've known about this for at least a decade. It was never thought of as ominous. Just practical and standard procedure. Once the math makes it impossible for the underdog to upset the leader, why bother continue counting?glennds wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:48 pmPlease tell me more.
This would suggest the in-person votes are given priority over mail-in or absentee ballots? I hadn't heard this before.
What if the race looked like it were not close enough to turn to the mail-in and absentee ballots yet there were enough of those to make a difference?
Either way, I do not think this is widely known, so I'm intrigued.
These days may be different.
https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/by-ma ... ots-count/ The intro paragraph is helpful - "The law requires all valid votes to be counted in every election regardless of how they are cast."
Here is an interesting table that will show you how the statutes vary state by state regarding both the processing and counting of absentee/mail ballots. In many cases, mail ballot counting starts before election day. In other cases it does not happen until election day polls close. However there seems to be a consistent theme that either way absentee/mail-in results are not released until after polls close. It also seems obvious from the statute summary that mail-in and absentee ballots are clearly not conditional.
The variation between states is interesting. In some cases, it is at the discretion of the registrar.
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections ... begin.aspx
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
True, but unlike the depolorables comment there's good cause for Democratic concern here. The Democrats are banking on strong support from black and Hispanic voters, particularly those living in ghetto neighborhoods and dependent on welfare. A substantial proportion of both groups are poorly educated, have limited English language skills, and are likely to have difficulty navigating complex bureaucratic requirements. There's no way that this doesn't translate to a lot of incorrectly filled out or lost ballots before the USPS and the ballot processing pipeline gets its chance to screw things up (whether accidentally or intentionally).MangoMan wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:09 pmOuch. This is like the HRC deplorables comment in reverse.Mark Leavy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 2:55 pm
My impression is that the Democrats are noticing that a lot of their constituency can't be relied on to properly fill out a form and mail it in.
Another factor working against Democrats is that many more of them than Republicans are frightened of COVID-19 to the extent that they'll prefer voting by mail to going to the polls in person.
The only related factor working against Republicans is that the elderly may be more likely to vote by mail because of COVID concerns than they have been in the past. So we'll have to see how these things balance out.
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
Yes, they have to count all the ballots but that apparently doesn't stop a winner from being declared when there aren't enough to count to make a difference. If that were the case we would have never had a winner declared on election night before.glennds wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:19 amI've tried to do some research of my own on this. To the best I can tell, the idea that mail-in or absentee ballots are not counted unless they could make a difference, is internet misinformation. Two reference sources:Mark Leavy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:59 pmI'll vouch that I've known about this for at least a decade. It was never thought of as ominous. Just practical and standard procedure. Once the math makes it impossible for the underdog to upset the leader, why bother continue counting?glennds wrote: ↑Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:48 pmPlease tell me more.
This would suggest the in-person votes are given priority over mail-in or absentee ballots? I hadn't heard this before.
What if the race looked like it were not close enough to turn to the mail-in and absentee ballots yet there were enough of those to make a difference?
Either way, I do not think this is widely known, so I'm intrigued.
These days may be different.
https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/by-ma ... ots-count/ The intro paragraph is helpful - "The law requires all valid votes to be counted in every election regardless of how they are cast."
Here is an interesting table that will show you how the statutes vary state by state regarding both the processing and counting of absentee/mail ballots. In many cases, mail ballot counting starts before election day. In other cases it does not happen until election day polls close. However there seems to be a consistent theme that either way absentee/mail-in results are not released until after polls close. It also seems obvious from the statute summary that mail-in and absentee ballots are clearly not conditional.
The variation between states is interesting. In some cases, it is at the discretion of the registrar.
https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections ... begin.aspx
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
But that does make his point that it may be possible to (eventually) have an "official" national popular vote tally.
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
Perhaps for elections in which the electoral vote differs from the national popular vote, we should view that as a clear example of the electoral college system doing what it was designed to do?
After all, if the founders of the U.S had wanted a direct democracy, I imagine they wouldn’t have created the electoral college.
After all, if the founders of the U.S had wanted a direct democracy, I imagine they wouldn’t have created the electoral college.
Re: The vote by mail fiasco, as it unfolds
It's an interesting issue. Technically speaking you are correct, the Presidential election is not democratic. To your comment about the similar irrelevance of a tally of highway miles, you could carry the point to the extreme and say the whole notion of citizens voting is an illusion. An illusion that 99.*% of the population believes to be real, or at least different than it really is.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:10 pmCorrect. The electoral college was designed precisely to prevent direct democracy, which would have allowed the more populous states to decide every Presidential election.Tortoise wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:06 pm Perhaps for elections in which the electoral vote differs from the national popular vote, we should view that as a clear example of the electoral college system doing what it was designed to do?
After all, if the founders of the U.S had wanted a direct democracy, I imagine they wouldn’t have created the electoral college.
What if there was no popular vote, and we all simply sat on the edge of our seats awaiting the outcome of a vote among members of the electoral college?
There is no federal law that binds electors to a voting pledge or duty of any kind.
This said, 29 states exert legal control over their electors. As you can imagine there is variance among the state by state statutes in this regard. However a general theme is that most of the state laws assert that the elector shall cast his or her vote for the candidate who won a majority of the state's popular vote or for the candidate of the party that nominated the elector. However even these laws carry minor penalties for violation i.e. small fines, usually $1,000. However ignoring the minor violation penalties, I would think there is a presumption if not a legal prerequisite that in these 29 states a popular vote should take place in order for the elector to act... but maybe not.
The bigger issue may be the 21 states that do not bind or exert legal control over their electors in any way. This means the elector can vote (or abstain) as he/she pleases without regard to the popular vote of that state.
Looking at it this way, you might question why there is so much bickering over voting, mail votes, absentee ballots, etc.
As a legal matter, it may all be a tempest in a teapot, and the presidential election may really be in the hands of electors nobody knows, many of whom can vote as they please.
Here is some information supporting what I am describing above, including a list of the 29 states that do exert legal control over electors and their statute references. http://archive.fairvote.org/?page=967
BTW, New York is discussed in this forum frequently, and it so happens that NYS is one of the 21 states that place no requirements or legal repercussions upon their electors.