Amusing stuff. I cannot say I entirely like some of these state rules where votes can come in days after so long as posted on the day etc, but if the rules say you can do that, and apparently they do, then they are live votes, end of.
It seems every time Trump looks like he might have a chance there is a massive delay for no reason then a big dump of Biden votes.
Because the GOP controlled PA legislature kept up daft rules like secrecy envelopes, and no vote being able to be tabulated before the day starts. Trump also discouraged his supporters from using VBM. And he's absolubtely despised in Philadelphia in particular.
It's not just that it is slow, it is a slow but steady speed and then suddenly stops completely for a few hours.
It seems every time Trump looks like he might have a chance there is a massive delay for no reason then a big dump of Biden votes.
Because the GOP controlled PA legislature kept up daft rules like secrecy envelopes, and no vote being able to be tabulated before the day starts. Trump also discouraged his supporters from using VBM. And he's absolubtely despised in Philadelphia in particular.
It's not just that it is slow, it is a slow but steady speed and then suddenly stops completely for a few hours.
Georgia hasn't changed for hours now.
Its not stopped they're just not reporting it yet. If you put an American news channel on they keep showing on camera the counts going on its just the numbers aren't being reported one by one as they go.
Its 8am over there, they've said in most places the next updates should be expected after 9am.
I know a three word phrase is the tradition, but surely someone on his staff could at least tell him to demand the illegal counts be stopped, or words to that effect, so he could pretend he only wants to stop illegitimate votes. Which is presumably the legal arguments his lawyers will try, but his tantrums rather give the game away that its just about stopping the counts themselves, not that they should surprise anyone.
I think other than his family and perhaps sometimes Giuliani when he needs a hatchet job, Trump probably doesn't really listen to anyone much
Looking at that maybe I'm not religious simply because I find overt displays of any kind too embarrassing to get into. I get awkward even with crowd chanting.
It is complete cringe for at least 90% of us I would guess + the speaking in tongues is more a sign of mental illness. My very mainstream congregation would probably call the police if she turned up our way on any given Sunday.
It's be a long time since I was at a church event, but I recall them being more sedate. My very devout relatives, who are at their CoE church 3-4 times a week for various matters, went to a concert in London once which was one of those high energy american style religious events, and they couldn't sit through it, as it just was not their cup of tea, religious event wise.
What are people thinking about next May's elections? Will they happen?
The sensible, pragmatic decision would be to decide now to switch them to all-postal so that there's plenty of time to plan printing, posting and public information.
I suspect that would be seen as too negative on the virus, so the risk is that we're faced with last-minute decisions.
Time to introduce secure on-line voting.
Secure online voting is not attainable. Certainly not by May, and possibly not ever. The only reliable, secure methods of voting involve paper and pencil.
Quite. Online voting is a chimera - paper counts do not cause problems or delays, if done right and properly resourced, nor would the level of health risk leading to a switch to online voting be a proportionate response when, as with many acticities, we can take other steps.
Well, the experience of Estonia suggests that online voting can be at least as secure as banking, and stealing money is a bigger game than stealing votes.
Looking at that maybe I'm not religious simply because I find overt displays of any kind too embarrassing to get into. I get awkward even with crowd chanting.
It is complete cringe for at least 90% of us I would guess + the speaking in tongues is more a sign of mental illness. My very mainstream congregation would probably call the police if she turned up our way on any given Sunday.
At Pentecost, the followers of Jesus found themselves able to speak in languages that they did not know, but others could understand.
I have never met anyone able to understand or translate Charismatic "speaking in tongues". It is just gibberish, but as part of an ecstatic spiritual experience.
Surely once we blow the current mist away Biden will have won this fairly comfortably.
Its funny how people were saying for ages "don't overreact to early votes since the on the day GOP votes will be counted first in the key states" only for everyone to lose their mind at first when that happened!
Its turning out as a pretty solid and comfortable Biden victory once all the votes are counted.
The genuinely better than expected Trump performance in some of the earlier key states caused understandable doubt about other assumptions.
Amusing stuff. I cannot say I entirely like some of these state rules where votes can come in days after so long as posted on the day etc, but if the rules say you can do that, and apparently they do, then they are live votes, end of.
I’ve been thinking the same. It seems mad to me that votes can be accepted after Election day. You just need to tell people to get them in on time. BUT if those are the rules they are the rules. You abide by them until you change them.
Philly still 120k to count mainly Mail in (Wont finish today will be tomorrow) Bucks County 28k left all mail in will finish theirs today 300k elsewhere in PA
On the allegation about Biden's votes suddenly jumping by thousands of votes when Trump's doesn't: unclear if this is right, but even if it is, I don't think it's suspicious. Surely the normal thing to do in a manual count would be to catalogue the votes for a given candidate in chunks of (say) 1000, then put ten of those together in chunks of ten thousand, and periodically add batches of those ten-thousand chunks to your overall count.
If true then that explains it, but is there any evidence that this happened? I didn't see any similar jumps for Trump in any state or for Biden in non-marginals.
Look, I actually don't really care whether Trump wins or not, he's not my President and I'm up if it turns out the way it looks as though it is.
But what really gets me is the hypocrisy of those on here who say the likes of @DAlexander is pedalling conspiracy theories etc etc but, if a 200% turnout happened in a heavily Republican area that swung a state election, would be screaming at the top of their voices about the election is rigged, it's a travesty etc etc. We would be getting detailed explanations about how democracy is in danger etc etc.
Same point @isam made re people criticising Trump for dragging this through the courts when the Democrats have been using the impeachment process to remove an elected President because they didn't like him. It was as bad as the sh1t with Bill Clinton. Jesus, you even had protestors with votive candles to Robert Mueller.
Just admit it, you want him out and any means will do. Great if it is done democratically but you would be quite happy to accept fraud involved if it got the outcome you wanted.
Meanwhile, the Chancellor suddenly deciding to hose another £8bn in the general direction of the problem barely registers...
Well it wouldn't, given how much has already been hosed. If we were going to be more fiscally careful in response we would have done that months ago, it barely makes a difference now, the grandchildren will still be paying for it regardless.
What are people thinking about next May's elections? Will they happen?
The sensible, pragmatic decision would be to decide now to switch them to all-postal so that there's plenty of time to plan printing, posting and public information.
I suspect that would be seen as too negative on the virus, so the risk is that we're faced with last-minute decisions.
Time to introduce secure on-line voting.
Secure online voting is not attainable. Certainly not by May, and possibly not ever. The only reliable, secure methods of voting involve paper and pencil.
Quite. Online voting is a chimera - paper counts do not cause problems or delays, if done right and properly resourced, nor would the level of health risk leading to a switch to online voting be a proportionate response when, as with many acticities, we can take other steps.
Well, the experience of Estonia suggests that online voting can be at least as secure as banking, and stealing money is a bigger game than stealing votes.
What are people thinking about next May's elections? Will they happen?
The sensible, pragmatic decision would be to decide now to switch them to all-postal so that there's plenty of time to plan printing, posting and public information.
I suspect that would be seen as too negative on the virus, so the risk is that we're faced with last-minute decisions.
Time to introduce secure on-line voting.
Secure online voting is not attainable. Certainly not by May, and possibly not ever. The only reliable, secure methods of voting involve paper and pencil.
Quite. Online voting is a chimera - paper counts do not cause problems or delays, if done right and properly resourced, nor would the level of health risk leading to a switch to online voting be a proportionate response when, as with many acticities, we can take other steps.
Well, the experience of Estonia suggests that online voting can be at least as secure as banking, and stealing money is a bigger game than stealing votes.
Opposing states want to influence your policy whereas they might not want your money.
What are people thinking about next May's elections? Will they happen?
The sensible, pragmatic decision would be to decide now to switch them to all-postal so that there's plenty of time to plan printing, posting and public information.
I suspect that would be seen as too negative on the virus, so the risk is that we're faced with last-minute decisions.
Time to introduce secure on-line voting.
Secure online voting is not attainable. Certainly not by May, and possibly not ever. The only reliable, secure methods of voting involve paper and pencil.
Quite. Online voting is a chimera - paper counts do not cause problems or delays, if done right and properly resourced, nor would the level of health risk leading to a switch to online voting be a proportionate response when, as with many acticities, we can take other steps.
Well, the experience of Estonia suggests that online voting can be at least as secure as banking, and stealing money is a bigger game than stealing votes.
Opposing states want to influence your policy whereas they might not want your money.
Estonia has a very hostile state opposing it, and is quite comfortable about taking the risk.
Amusing stuff. I cannot say I entirely like some of these state rules where votes can come in days after so long as posted on the day etc, but if the rules say you can do that, and apparently they do, then they are live votes, end of.
I guess it is a bit of insurance against having a president who deliberately tries to hobble the postal service so votes don't arrive on time.
Unfortunately Republicans are going to keep control of many key state legislatures despite losing the votes. Often thanks to blatant gerrymandering. That means they can keep on doing it.
On the allegation about Biden's votes suddenly jumping by thousands of votes when Trump's doesn't: unclear if this is right, but even if it is, I don't think it's suspicious. Surely the normal thing to do in a manual count would be to catalogue the votes for a given candidate in chunks of (say) 1000, then put ten of those together in chunks of ten thousand, and periodically add batches of those ten-thousand chunks to your overall count.
If true then that explains it, but is there any evidence that this happened? I didn't see any similar jumps for Trump in any state or for Biden in non-marginals.
Look, I actually don't really care whether Trump wins or not, he's not my President and I'm up if it turns out the way it looks as though it is.
But what really gets me is the hypocrisy of those on here who say the likes of @DAlexander is pedalling conspiracy theories etc etc but, if a 200% turnout happened in a heavily Republican area that swung a state election, would be screaming at the top of their voices about the election is rigged, it's a travesty etc etc. We would be getting detailed explanations about how democracy is in danger etc etc.
Same point @isam made re people criticising Trump for dragging this through the courts when the Democrats have been using the impeachment process to remove an elected President because they didn't like him. It was as bad as the sh1t with Bill Clinton. Jesus, you even had protestors with votive candles to Robert Mueller.
Just admit it, you want him out and any means will do. Great if it is done democratically but you would be quite happy to accept fraud involved if it got the outcome you wanted.
Getting angrier and playing victim doesn't make something more convincing. The issue is whether when raising 'maybe it's fraud' claims, is there evidence to support it or is it just shit stirring? That business with the vertical line yesterday did not speak well for those who claimed to be genuinely worried not shit stirring.
That you have leaped to assuming anyone wanting to wait for credible evidence of rigging to emerge doesn't care about vote rigging speaks volumes. You're creating a strawman to oppose.
If you would like confirmation, I hope every ineligible vote that exists is cast out, even if it meant Trump were to win. I care far more about proper electoral practice than the outcome.
"The Georgia secretary of state keeps revising the estimate of the number of absentee ballots remaining: The latest word is 61,367. That means Biden has to win at least 65 percent of them in order to take the lead." - 538 blog
NATHANIEL RAKICH NOV. 5, 10:15 AM The Georgia secretary of state keeps revising the estimate of the number of absentee ballots remaining: The latest word is 61,367. That means Biden has to win at least 65 percent of them in order to take the lead.
What are people thinking about next May's elections? Will they happen?
The sensible, pragmatic decision would be to decide now to switch them to all-postal so that there's plenty of time to plan printing, posting and public information.
I suspect that would be seen as too negative on the virus, so the risk is that we're faced with last-minute decisions.
Time to introduce secure on-line voting.
Secure online voting is not attainable. Certainly not by May, and possibly not ever. The only reliable, secure methods of voting involve paper and pencil.
Quite. Online voting is a chimera - paper counts do not cause problems or delays, if done right and properly resourced, nor would the level of health risk leading to a switch to online voting be a proportionate response when, as with many acticities, we can take other steps.
Well, the experience of Estonia suggests that online voting can be at least as secure as banking, and stealing money is a bigger game than stealing votes.
It's a solution looking for a problem.
A single computerised and online voting system for a whole country is a motive with a universal adaptor on it.
F1: plans for a night race in Saudi Arabia next year.
Unfortunately, the plans for a North Korean race have fallen through, so there's only one event at a country with concentration camps (assuming Russia doesn't still have the Chechen one).
Still, thank goodness the sport's taken a stand for human rights.
See, this is what I'm talking about to those bitching about people being skeptical of fraud claims. Trump is literally ignoring that in some states apparently you are allowed, and supposed, to count such votes. When he's doing stuff like that it makes other claims about the process look silly. He's making it harder for serious claims to get attention.
It seems every time Trump looks like he might have a chance there is a massive delay for no reason then a big dump of Biden votes.
Because the GOP controlled PA legislature kept up daft rules like secrecy envelopes, and no vote being able to be tabulated before the day starts. Trump also discouraged his supporters from using VBM. And he's absolubtely despised in Philadelphia in particular.
It's not just that it is slow, it is a slow but steady speed and then suddenly stops completely for a few hours.
Georgia hasn't changed for hours now.
Because the counting machines are working at capacity and people stop for the night?
See, this is what I'm talking about to those bitching about people being skeptical of fraud claims. Trump is literally ignoring that in some states apparently you are allowed, and supposed, to count such votes. When he's doing stuff like that it makes other claims about the process look silly. He's making it harder for serious claims to get attention.
On the allegation about Biden's votes suddenly jumping by thousands of votes when Trump's doesn't: unclear if this is right, but even if it is, I don't think it's suspicious. Surely the normal thing to do in a manual count would be to catalogue the votes for a given candidate in chunks of (say) 1000, then put ten of those together in chunks of ten thousand, and periodically add batches of those ten-thousand chunks to your overall count.
If true then that explains it, but is there any evidence that this happened? I didn't see any similar jumps for Trump in any state or for Biden in non-marginals.
Look, I actually don't really care whether Trump wins or not, he's not my President and I'm up if it turns out the way it looks as though it is.
But what really gets me is the hypocrisy of those on here who say the likes of @DAlexander is pedalling conspiracy theories etc etc but, if a 200% turnout happened in a heavily Republican area that swung a state election, would be screaming at the top of their voices about the election is rigged, it's a travesty etc etc. We would be getting detailed explanations about how democracy is in danger etc etc.
Same point @isam made re people criticising Trump for dragging this through the courts when the Democrats have been using the impeachment process to remove an elected President because they didn't like him. It was as bad as the sh1t with Bill Clinton. Jesus, you even had protestors with votive candles to Robert Mueller.
Just admit it, you want him out and any means will do. Great if it is done democratically but you would be quite happy to accept fraud involved if it got the outcome you wanted.
Leaving aside that impeachment trial is not the same as a court The Democrats impeached Trump due to conclusive evidence that he had abused his office to attempt to influence the election. Had the "jury" contained 12 normal people rather than 100 partisan senators, he'd have been convicted
On the allegation about Biden's votes suddenly jumping by thousands of votes when Trump's doesn't: unclear if this is right, but even if it is, I don't think it's suspicious. Surely the normal thing to do in a manual count would be to catalogue the votes for a given candidate in chunks of (say) 1000, then put ten of those together in chunks of ten thousand, and periodically add batches of those ten-thousand chunks to your overall count.
If true then that explains it, but is there any evidence that this happened? I didn't see any similar jumps for Trump in any state or for Biden in non-marginals.
Look, I actually don't really care whether Trump wins or not, he's not my President and I'm up if it turns out the way it looks as though it is.
But what really gets me is the hypocrisy of those on here who say the likes of @DAlexander is pedalling conspiracy theories etc etc but, if a 200% turnout happened in a heavily Republican area that swung a state election, would be screaming at the top of their voices about the election is rigged, it's a travesty etc etc. We would be getting detailed explanations about how democracy is in danger etc etc.
Same point @isam made re people criticising Trump for dragging this through the courts when the Democrats have been using the impeachment process to remove an elected President because they didn't like him. It was as bad as the sh1t with Bill Clinton. Jesus, you even had protestors with votive candles to Robert Mueller.
Just admit it, you want him out and any means will do. Great if it is done democratically but you would be quite happy to accept fraud involved if it got the outcome you wanted.
But the same hypocrisy runs both ways too.
There's been no criticism from the same people who are so exercised over this, than over the attempts to prevent mailed ballots being delivered, to the extent that a Republican appointed Judge is demanding to know why his order to the USPS to stop sitting on ballots was disregarded.
Its over in Georgia SOS office now says over 61k still left in GA
Biden has to be better than the 1.5 available on BF
It’s like election officials (of all parties) are just trolling Trump. Offering low numbers of outstanding ballots to give him a chance and then just revising them upwards every couple of hours.
No wonder there is so much misinformation on PA votes, CNN reporter just told her news feed, 'I just checked and there seem to be 'just under a million mail in votes' not counted,,,,wtf? Then 2 minutes later said yes all round about 700,000 in total,,,,hopeless
On the allegation about Biden's votes suddenly jumping by thousands of votes when Trump's doesn't: unclear if this is right, but even if it is, I don't think it's suspicious. Surely the normal thing to do in a manual count would be to catalogue the votes for a given candidate in chunks of (say) 1000, then put ten of those together in chunks of ten thousand, and periodically add batches of those ten-thousand chunks to your overall count.
If true then that explains it, but is there any evidence that this happened? I didn't see any similar jumps for Trump in any state or for Biden in non-marginals.
Look, I actually don't really care whether Trump wins or not, he's not my President and I'm up if it turns out the way it looks as though it is.
But what really gets me is the hypocrisy of those on here who say the likes of @DAlexander is pedalling conspiracy theories etc etc but, if a 200% turnout happened in a heavily Republican area that swung a state election, would be screaming at the top of their voices about the election is rigged, it's a travesty etc etc. We would be getting detailed explanations about how democracy is in danger etc etc.
Same point @isam made re people criticising Trump for dragging this through the courts when the Democrats have been using the impeachment process to remove an elected President because they didn't like him. It was as bad as the sh1t with Bill Clinton. Jesus, you even had protestors with votive candles to Robert Mueller.
Just admit it, you want him out and any means will do. Great if it is done democratically but you would be quite happy to accept fraud involved if it got the outcome you wanted.
But the same hypocrisy runs both ways too.
There's been no criticism from the same people who are so exercised over this, than over the attempts to prevent mailed ballots being delivered, to the extent that a Republican appointed Judge is demanding to know why his order to the USPS to stop sitting on ballots was disregarded.
Looking at that maybe I'm not religious simply because I find overt displays of any kind too embarrassing to get into. I get awkward even with crowd chanting.
It is complete cringe for at least 90% of us I would guess + the speaking in tongues is more a sign of mental illness. My very mainstream congregation would probably call the police if she turned up our way on any given Sunday.
At Pentecost, the followers of Jesus found themselves able to speak in languages that they did not know, but others could understand.
I have never met anyone able to understand or translate Charismatic "speaking in tongues". It is just gibberish, but as part of an ecstatic spiritual experience.
I'm trying to imagine what the Wee Free would make of that performance. For some reason it involves....
Amusing stuff. I cannot say I entirely like some of these state rules where votes can come in days after so long as posted on the day etc, but if the rules say you can do that, and apparently they do, then they are live votes, end of.
I guess it is a bit of insurance against having a president who deliberately tries to hobble the postal service so votes don't arrive on time.
Unfortunately Republicans are going to keep control of many key state legislatures despite losing the votes. Often thanks to blatant gerrymandering. That means they can keep on doing it.
It seems werid that they can set rules for federal elections, not merely state ones.
Does anyone believe that Trump's legal cases will make any difference to the overall outcome? Personally, my vague impression of US courts is that, though politicised, they generally act with a fair degree of integrity.
Would it be fair to think that a lot of Trump's complaints will be thrown out, often by Republican county and state courts, or by the Supreme court on appeal, or, where there are remedies, that these will not be sufficient to turn the outcome, especially if PA and GA fall Biden.
There is no chance of the overall election outcome being altered in the courts and he and his people - Guiliani etc - know this. Their aim is to create a popular narrative with his base that their hero didn't really lose. He won - like he always does, being a Winner - but was then cheated out of it by the evil and devious Swamp. Trump needs this narrative to hold in order to protect and burnish his brand post-presidency.
Thank god those disaffected voters aren’t all armed and dangerous. Oh, wait....
I know. Trump is on one level a clown - ha ha - but he is also a very corrupt and dangerous individual. A wannabe fascist with millions of the "shoeless ones" behind him, many of them possessing more guns than brains. It is so reprehensible what he is doing now, ascribing his clear defeat at the polls to fraud. A democracy can't function if people don't trust the electoral process.
On the allegation about Biden's votes suddenly jumping by thousands of votes when Trump's doesn't: unclear if this is right, but even if it is, I don't think it's suspicious. Surely the normal thing to do in a manual count would be to catalogue the votes for a given candidate in chunks of (say) 1000, then put ten of those together in chunks of ten thousand, and periodically add batches of those ten-thousand chunks to your overall count.
If true then that explains it, but is there any evidence that this happened? I didn't see any similar jumps for Trump in any state or for Biden in non-marginals.
Look, I actually don't really care whether Trump wins or not, he's not my President and I'm up if it turns out the way it looks as though it is.
But what really gets me is the hypocrisy of those on here who say the likes of @DAlexander is pedalling conspiracy theories etc etc but, if a 200% turnout happened in a heavily Republican area that swung a state election, would be screaming at the top of their voices about the election is rigged, it's a travesty etc etc. We would be getting detailed explanations about how democracy is in danger etc etc.
Same point @isam made re people criticising Trump for dragging this through the courts when the Democrats have been using the impeachment process to remove an elected President because they didn't like him. It was as bad as the sh1t with Bill Clinton. Jesus, you even had protestors with votive candles to Robert Mueller.
Just admit it, you want him out and any means will do. Great if it is done democratically but you would be quite happy to accept fraud involved if it got the outcome you wanted.
Getting angrier and playing victim doesn't make something more convincing. The issue is whether when raising 'maybe it's fraud' claims, is there evidence to support it or is it just shit stirring? That business with the vertical line yesterday did not speak well for those who claimed to be genuinely worried not shit stirring.
That you have leaped to assuming anyone wanting to wait for credible evidence of rigging to emerge doesn't care about vote rigging speaks volumes. You're creating a strawman to oppose.
If you would like confirmation, I hope every ineligible vote that exists is cast out, even if it meant Trump were to win. I care far more about proper electoral practice than the outcome.
I think you have missed the point @kle4 and I think you know what I am talking about. The ones who leap on @DAlexander re his question re the voter rolls are the same ones who will post any old sh1t from Twitter if it supports their theories.
Its over in Georgia SOS office now says over 61k still left in GA
Biden has to be better than the 1.5 available on BF
It’s like election officials (of all parties) are just trolling Trump. Offering low numbers of outstanding ballots to give him a chance and then just revising them upwards every couple of hours.
Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said that as of 9:15 a.m. today there are approximately 61,367 ballots still outstanding. Channel 2′s Justin Gray received the following breakdown:
Wasn’t Sands interned rather than a convicted terrorist.
Internment ended in the Seventies, Sands died in the Eighties.
Sands was arrested during a gun battle in 1976 after the IRA bombing of a furniture factory in a residential area and sentenced to 14 years for possessing weapons. He was serving the sentence for the crime when he kindly agreed to kill himself.
The other thing I've noticed about American elections is that the counts are very partisan in a ways ours are not.
I've been to so many counts, and there's a sense of bonhomie and relief that it is over, and there's nothing more you can do.
The only bits of nastiness/kerfuffle was back in 2008/09 when the BNP kicked off and didn't want to share a stage with the winning (non white) candidates and a few years ago the Kipper delaying the result because their egos wanted more votes and they were contesting every rejected ballot papers, papers no returning officer in the country would acept.
On the allegation about Biden's votes suddenly jumping by thousands of votes when Trump's doesn't: unclear if this is right, but even if it is, I don't think it's suspicious. Surely the normal thing to do in a manual count would be to catalogue the votes for a given candidate in chunks of (say) 1000, then put ten of those together in chunks of ten thousand, and periodically add batches of those ten-thousand chunks to your overall count.
If true then that explains it, but is there any evidence that this happened? I didn't see any similar jumps for Trump in any state or for Biden in non-marginals.
Look, I actually don't really care whether Trump wins or not, .
So Philly officials (who i trust) say there are 120K votes left to be counted there. so if those go (worst case) 3 to 1 to Biden thats +60K off the lead. Still dont beleive there are nearly 600K (The 700k figure quoted less 120 in Philly) uncounted mail votes elsewhere but who knows,
Wasn’t Sands interned rather than a convicted terrorist.
Internment ended in the Seventies, Sands died in the Eighties.
Sands was arrested during a gun battle in 1976 after the IRA bombing of a furniture factory in a residential area and sentenced to 14 years for possessing weapons. He was serving the sentence for the crime when he kindly agreed to kill himself.
"The Georgia secretary of state keeps revising the estimate of the number of absentee ballots remaining: The latest word is 61,367. That means Biden has to win at least 65 percent of them in order to take the lead." - 538 blog
On the allegation about Biden's votes suddenly jumping by thousands of votes when Trump's doesn't: unclear if this is right, but even if it is, I don't think it's suspicious. Surely the normal thing to do in a manual count would be to catalogue the votes for a given candidate in chunks of (say) 1000, then put ten of those together in chunks of ten thousand, and periodically add batches of those ten-thousand chunks to your overall count.
If true then that explains it, but is there any evidence that this happened? I didn't see any similar jumps for Trump in any state or for Biden in non-marginals.
Look, I actually don't really care whether Trump wins or not, he's not my President and I'm up if it turns out the way it looks as though it is.
But what really gets me is the hypocrisy of those on here who say the likes of @DAlexander is pedalling conspiracy theories etc etc but, if a 200% turnout happened in a heavily Republican area that swung a state election, would be screaming at the top of their voices about the election is rigged, it's a travesty etc etc. We would be getting detailed explanations about how democracy is in danger etc etc.
Same point @isam made re people criticising Trump for dragging this through the courts when the Democrats have been using the impeachment process to remove an elected President because they didn't like him. It was as bad as the sh1t with Bill Clinton. Jesus, you even had protestors with votive candles to Robert Mueller.
Just admit it, you want him out and any means will do. Great if it is done democratically but you would be quite happy to accept fraud involved if it got the outcome you wanted.
Getting angrier and playing victim doesn't make something more convincing. The issue is whether when raising 'maybe it's fraud' claims, is there evidence to support it or is it just shit stirring? That business with the vertical line yesterday did not speak well for those who claimed to be genuinely worried not shit stirring.
That you have leaped to assuming anyone wanting to wait for credible evidence of rigging to emerge doesn't care about vote rigging speaks volumes. You're creating a strawman to oppose.
If you would like confirmation, I hope every ineligible vote that exists is cast out, even if it meant Trump were to win. I care far more about proper electoral practice than the outcome.
I think you have missed the point @kle4 and I think you know what I am talking about. The ones who leap on @DAlexander re his question re the voter rolls are the same ones who will post any old sh1t from Twitter if it supports their theories.
Some people will indeed post any partisan crap, left and right, but I don't think I've missed the point because you suggested those criticising the conspiracy theories would be happy to accept fraud, and even if they post partisan crap it's a big leap to suggest people doing that would also support fraud. As it is, with so many votes cast I'm sure there are some fraudulent ballots in existence, some administrative foul ups, but allegations of fraud still require something firm to back them up. If Trump had held on I'm some people would be very suspicious about how he managed it - aside from the legal if shitty tactics - but the evidence for such suspicion would need to be strong.
Have all these recent “yes” polls been 16+? Because I doubt that will be the franchise.
I think they have.
I'll also repeat - this is at peak of a pandemic where Sturgeon seen to have acted well and without focus on much of the practicalities. Much can change
On the allegation about Biden's votes suddenly jumping by thousands of votes when Trump's doesn't: unclear if this is right, but even if it is, I don't think it's suspicious. Surely the normal thing to do in a manual count would be to catalogue the votes for a given candidate in chunks of (say) 1000, then put ten of those together in chunks of ten thousand, and periodically add batches of those ten-thousand chunks to your overall count.
If true then that explains it, but is there any evidence that this happened? I didn't see any similar jumps for Trump in any state or for Biden in non-marginals.
Look, I actually don't really care whether Trump wins or not, .
L O L !
Well, actually I do. The meltdown on here would be epic.
The other thing I've noticed about American elections is that the counts are very partisan in a ways ours are not.
I've been to so many counts, and there's a sense of bonhomie and relief that it is over, and there's nothing more you can do.
The only bits of nastiness/kerfuffle was back in 2008/09 when the BNP kicked off and didn't want to share a stage with the winning (non white) candidates and a few years ago the Kipper delaying the result because their egos wanted more votes and they were contesting every rejected ballot papers, papers no returning officer in the country would acept.
Candidates and agents of all parties are often pretty similar kinds of people, with similar interests, and who bump into each other a lot. I find them to be more pleasant with each other by far than their activists and supporters would be. Some local politics round my way has gotten strained mostly because a bunch of new people in one party are using more antagonistic tactics when the old guard, who know the opposite side a good people, think that's crappy.
Comments
NV 7,647 Biden
Georgia 18,586 Trump
AZ 68,390 Biden
NC 76,737 Trump
Penn 135,702 Trump
Its 8am over there, they've said in most places the next updates should be expected after 9am.
I think his number 2 called Phil who did the 10 hour overnight / morning shift is a very capable stand-in.
I suspect if Trump loses, he loses all his power and lifeforce.
It's going to interesting to watch.
https://twitter.com/emmanuelmacron/status/1324365235331960833?s=21
I have never met anyone able to understand or translate Charismatic "speaking in tongues". It is just gibberish, but as part of an ecstatic spiritual experience.
Bucks County 28k left all mail in will finish theirs today
300k elsewhere in PA
Down to around 700K left to count.
CNN
But what really gets me is the hypocrisy of those on here who say the likes of @DAlexander is pedalling conspiracy theories etc etc but, if a 200% turnout happened in a heavily Republican area that swung a state election, would be screaming at the top of their voices about the election is rigged, it's a travesty etc etc. We would be getting detailed explanations about how democracy is in danger etc etc.
Same point @isam made re people criticising Trump for dragging this through the courts when the Democrats have been using the impeachment process to remove an elected President because they didn't like him. It was as bad as the sh1t with Bill Clinton. Jesus, you even had protestors with votive candles to Robert Mueller.
Just admit it, you want him out and any means will do. Great if it is done democratically but you would be quite happy to accept fraud involved if it got the outcome you wanted.
ie CNN, Fox, Decision Desk all have their own people inputting results to their websites.
Unfortunately Republicans are going to keep control of many key state legislatures despite losing the votes. Often thanks to blatant gerrymandering. That means they can keep on doing it.
Biden has to be better than the 1.5 available on BF
That you have leaped to assuming anyone wanting to wait for credible evidence of rigging to emerge doesn't care about vote rigging speaks volumes. You're creating a strawman to oppose.
If you would like confirmation, I hope every ineligible vote that exists is cast out, even if it meant Trump were to win. I care far more about proper electoral practice than the outcome.
- 538 blog
Can you imagine telling
i) Staff at polling stations in the UK that voters who have registered on election day can still vote
ii) a returning officer in the UK, while we'll do the count on Thursday night but we'll be waiting up to ten days for the postals to come in.
NOV. 5, 10:15 AM
The Georgia secretary of state keeps revising the estimate of the number of absentee ballots remaining: The latest word is 61,367. That means Biden has to win at least 65 percent of them in order to take the lead.
9.0
It could well flip.
It really could.
Unfortunately, the plans for a North Korean race have fallen through, so there's only one event at a country with concentration camps (assuming Russia doesn't still have the Chechen one).
Still, thank goodness the sport's taken a stand for human rights.
I mean what is your crazy angle here?
There's been no criticism from the same people who are so exercised over this, than over the attempts to prevent mailed ballots being delivered, to the extent that a Republican appointed Judge is demanding to know why his order to the USPS to stop sitting on ballots was disregarded.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/11/03/election-ballot-delays-usps/?outputType=amp
That's 7% of all ballots in 15 states.
- Faces grim as granite.
- Fire
Bryan: 3,027
Burke: 494
Chatham: 17,157
Clayton: 7,408
Cobb: 700
Floyd: 682
Forsyth: 4,713
Fulton: 11,200
Gwinnett: 7,338
Harris: 3,641
Laurens: 1,797
Putnam: 1,552
Sumter: 1,202
Taylor: 456
Totals: 61,367
I've been to so many counts, and there's a sense of bonhomie and relief that it is over, and there's nothing more you can do.
The only bits of nastiness/kerfuffle was back in 2008/09 when the BNP kicked off and didn't want to share a stage with the winning (non white) candidates and a few years ago the Kipper delaying the result because their egos wanted more votes and they were contesting every rejected ballot papers, papers no returning officer in the country would acept.
NEW @Survation Poll - Scottish Independence Referendum
“Should Scotland be an independent country?”
Yes 54% (+1)
No 46% (-1)
1,071 respondents, residents of Scotland, aged 16+, fieldwork 28 Oct - 4 Nov 2020. Changes w/ 2-7 Sep 2020
https://t.co/v5RC9ljbsD https://t.co/7pKhuRL4zf
O
L
!
So he can have 2 months of tantrums etc.
I'll also repeat - this is at peak of a pandemic where Sturgeon seen to have acted well and without focus on much of the practicalities. Much can change
I can imagine crying into your kale salad