Question - why do CNN not report their exit polls (at least the numbers) in their TV coverage? Is it just to maintain the suspense and keep people watching?
In Britain the rural areas are always last; in the US they seem to have overcome this, I guess because they are smaller?
I believe they count in situ not centrally which speeds things up
That's correct. The precinct officials read the results off the machines and phone them in. None of these results we get on the night are officially certified. It's not like the UK where the result isn't revealed until the returning officer declares the official, certified result.
On Senate news from 538: Perhaps the most shocking result so far is in Missouri. Democrat Jason Kander looks to be running very strongly in the exit polls. That would be a huge pickup for Democrats.
They look like they have a a 54-46 lead on the exit poll which would make it much more likely that they get to 50+ they need.
In Britain the rural areas are always last; in the US they seem to have overcome this, I guess because they are smaller?
I believe they count in situ not centrally which speeds things up
That's correct. The precinct officials read the results off the machines and phone them in. None of these results we get on the night are officially certified. It's not like the UK where the result isn't revealed until the returning officer declares the official, certified result.
Yes, the way we do it is bullshit.
The Americans can call their election at the same time we do, despite the 5+ hour time difference.
In Britain the rural areas are always last; in the US they seem to have overcome this, I guess because they are smaller?
I believe they count in situ not centrally which speeds things up
That's correct. The precinct officials read the results off the machines and phone them in. None of these results we get on the night are officially certified. It's not like the UK where the result isn't revealed until the returning officer declares the official, certified result.
Yes, the way we do it is bullshit.
The Americans can call their election at the same time we do, despite the 5+ hour time difference.
Having been to a fair few counts I'm much happier reporting tallies of all votes not a partial guesstimate
In Britain the rural areas are always last; in the US they seem to have overcome this, I guess because they are smaller?
I believe they count in situ not centrally which speeds things up
That's correct. The precinct officials read the results off the machines and phone them in. None of these results we get on the night are officially certified. It's not like the UK where the result isn't revealed until the returning officer declares the official, certified result.
Fiddling around verifying every ballot box to the last vote takes a lot of the time in the UK. It's a safeguard, I guess, although the likelihood of either stuffing or removing votes from the box even without it seems low.
Comments
Bring on a lady president!
Per CNN, Jason Kander is ahead in the early exit polls. This would be a huge pickup for the Dems. http://www.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls/missouri/senate …
Perhaps the most shocking result so far is in Missouri. Democrat Jason Kander looks to be running very strongly in the exit polls. That would be a huge pickup for Democrats.
They look like they have a a 54-46 lead on the exit poll which would make it much more likely that they get to 50+ they need.
How many total votes in Dade in 2012?
The Americans can call their election at the same time we do, despite the 5+ hour time difference.
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/florida
I think they're precincts but be careful they can be completed precincts so highly misleading when partial precinct in.
700 votes in it right now
Clinton 46.8%
Trump 45.8%
If......
He's found his life's calling doing this job.
Stick a fork in the Donald.