Things about the election that don't smell right

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
6,999
2,485
113
Your post seems you have a poor understanding of election and media in general - lets look at point 4 in brief
There's always a danger in starting a post in the way that you did. Let's see what happens this time.

" While I understand election rules that would prevent announcing any election results before the polls close, I'm at a loss as to why votes can't be counted as they are received (subject to litigation challenging the propriety of those particular votes, in which case they should be segregated), and then promptly announced following the close of the polls. See point 1."

In the Canadian system this would be insane from a security of the vote point of view. You put all votes in a sealed box. The seal is not broken until it is ready to be counted, and watched by witness of all parties involved.
You could modify the system- say have boxes for hour one then hour two etc but it means that the boxes could easily be tampered with as they are opened - if not then but at recounts. The cost of such a system would be logically more expensive for less certainty of the vote.
The number of mail-in, drop-off ballots necessitated batching the ballots that were received. Opening these batches (in the presence of party scrutineers) is no different that dealing with any paper ballot system. There is also no reason that the counting, in these extraordinary circumstances, couldn't have been done prior to closure of the polls, if only starting on the morning of the vote.

In short, you've told me nothing I haven't demonstrated I already know, failed to explain the relevance of your reference to Canadian electoral procedure, and in in the end raised nothing more than cost as reason not to do it. However, having decided to expand mail in voting, the states concerned had already committed to the cost consequences of their choice.

Electronics would be way for counting in real time. However, electronic systems are easy to cheat, anyone in control of the software could change the count at anytime, You see your vote as going to x, but the computer transfer some of x (wherever could be believed ) to y if and only if y is actually lossing. Why cheat all the time too suspicious you only have to win by one vote after all (but dont have the computer program win by one vote, way too suspicious)
Red herring and unresponsive to the point I was making.

Stuffing ballot boxes is already a problem made very easy to do with continuous counts.
Not if the votes are controlled by batching, as you clumsily refer to.

To simplify
You were making a sophisticated point?

1) continuous count are much more expensive to have any type of security.
2) even with the extra cost, they are much more likely to allow cheating.
3) The advantage of having instant gratification of a count would be minimal. The change of power does not happen til January - so there is no need for a result before then other than curiosity.
1. Election security and timely reporting cost money - more money when you want to introduce alternative ways of submitting ballots and when people take advantage of those opportunities at a significant level.
2. Not if you employ batching.
3. Timely election results are extremely important because elections are important. A lot can happen between an election and the release of results, including many more opportunties to tinker with ballots and/or reporting.

In short, yep, the usual thing happened when someone opens their post the way you did. You proved your thinking to be far less disciplined and sophisticated than you presumed.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
7,376
2,137
113
For example, I just heard on CNN Nevada allows mail-in ballots to be counted up to 7 days after Election Day so far as they are post marked before that day. That’s insane.
It's hard to follow what each state is doing, changing rules on the fly and how each State's Court rules.

I believe Nevada adopted the fucked up process of automatically mailing out ballots. This is a state known for a transient population. 223,000 were returned addressee unknown. To make things more complicated, Nevada separates the ballot portion from the signature portion never to be married again. There is no way to challenge an illegally authorized ballot.
 
Last edited:

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,964
6,108
113
A bad smell is not conclusive evidence. However, anyone would be foolish to ignore it and not try to resolve whether there is a problem that accounts for it. I am struck by a few features that have become pervasive in American elections and/or were features of this particular election:

1. Democratic strongholds persistently report later than the remainder of their state. This makes no sense to me, particularly in Democratic run states like Pennsylvania where the state is free to allocate election resources wherever they feel they are are needed. There is no reason why large urban voting centers need to be underresourced (on a per ballot basis). Even in Republican run states, election staff in the Democratic strongholds tend to be Democrats simply for pragmatic reasons (location). If I was trying to think of ways to cheat in an election, certainly having my vote come in only after the opponent's vote was fully counted would be in my toolbox.

2. Races that the Democrats won, but were unexpectedly close, got no airtime or comment. Trump is on track to get 44-45% of the vote in New York, one of the most reliably blue states! How did this not merit any mention? Is it just co-incidence that it doesn't fit the narrative that voters in this part of the country don't like Trump? Michigan and Pennsylvania are not far away, and are largely industrialized states.

3. I primarily watched CNN's coverage. Wolf Blitzer was clearly troubled by the disappearance of early Democrat leads in Florida, Georgia, Texas, North Carolina, Ohio, etc. Why? Biden didn't need those wins. Wasn't he super confident, based on the polls, that Biden would get what he needed in the northern states and/or Arizona anyway? There's something wrong when a network touts polls so consistently, and then doesn't appear to have any faith in them at all on election night. That behaviour made them look like frauds in my eyes.

4. While I understand election rules that would prevent announcing any election results before the polls close, I'm at a loss as to why votes can't be counted as they are received (subject to litigation challenging the propriety of those particular votes, in which case they should be segregated), and then promptly announced following the close of the polls. See point 1.

5. The unnecessary lies/distortions about how "normal" everything is during this election. It is NOT normal for mail in ballots to be so substantial that anyone could think that they could upend a 700,000 vote lead. The normal insignificance of mail in balloting is why they've never received much scrutiny in the past, and why they don't impede calling state victories on election night, not because there was never anything to question. There is nothing normal about this election. Further, I did not and do not buy the move to expanded mail in balloting based on public health grounds. The perception of fair and reliable election results is more socially important than the miniscule public health risks of people voting in person voting with masks on.

6. The unnecessary lies/distortions about how "unprecedented" and "undemocratic" it was of Trump to say, in essence, that he believes he won and that his opponents are concocting schemes to deny him his victory. This criticism is hogwash. Anyone who ever challenged an election result by demanding a recount or challenging the process in court was implicitly claiming victory and skullduggery on the part of his opponents. It has happened innumerable times, and was the essence of the Bush v. Gore challenge. Complaining that a state is attempting to manipulate election results by changing voting rules is a democratic, rather than undemocratic argument, Elections need clear rules, or they are subject to manipulation. See point 1, again.

7. CNN wouldn't declare Florida for Trump until he had a 3.5 point lead with less than 5% of the vote to count. WTF was up with that! At 90% of the vote, did they think Biden was going to blow Trump out on the remaining vote? Smelled bad. Smelled bad for hours on end. On the other end of the scale, their reluctance to call Arizona is also fishy. Bigger lead (for the Democrats). What is holding them back? Similarly, what's wrong in Nevada that prevented them from making that call?

Did any of this bother you?
Do you get these talking points e-mailed to you directly from the WH or Moscow?
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,418
7,288
113
I tried watching CNN, God they were awful. Blitzer and the other guy king i believe are too old and easily confused. Fox is pretty polished imo compared to CNN, regardless of who they support. Younger hosts who just present themselves better.
I watched Fox and they are totally a BS channel that were still expecting Trump to be re-elected. They have all of Trump's campaign dudes on, with people like Jason Miller who is promoting all those ridiculous conspiracy theories such as these:

Trump Adviser: Democrats Could “Steal” Electoral Votes by Counting Ballots After Election Day

 

drc75

Active member
Jan 9, 2017
584
177
43
The problem with the US electoral system as a whole is there is no uniformity. Each state decides how to conduct its election, which gives rise to huge differences. For example, I just heard on CNN Nevada allows mail-in ballots to be counted up to 7 days after Election Day so far as they are post marked before that day. That’s insane.
Bingo!! You've hit the nail on the head. Pennsylvania couldn't even OPEN mail in envelopes until 7:00 Election Day, hence the delay in reporting. New Jersey on the other hand opened and tallied as envelopes were received. They reported fairly quickly. Different states, different state constitutional requirements.
 

doggystyle99

Well-known member
May 23, 2010
7,901
1,210
113
I watched Fox and they are totally a BS channel that were still expecting Trump to be re-elected. They have all of Trump's campaign dudes on, with people like Jason Miller who is promoting all those ridiculous conspiracy theories such as these:

Trump Adviser: Democrats Could “Steal” Electoral Votes by Counting Ballots After Election Day

This is literally the the first election ever in the history of the USA that they are still counting ballots after election day :ROFLMAO:
I mean if a person literally googles general or mid term elections results of the past nothing like this has ever happened before :ROFLMAO:
 
  • Like
Reactions: omegaphallic

drc75

Active member
Jan 9, 2017
584
177
43
I watched Fox and they are totally a BS channel that were still expecting Trump to be re-elected. They have all of Trump's campaign dudes on, with people like Jason Miller who is promoting all those ridiculous conspiracy theories such as these:

Trump Adviser: Democrats Could “Steal” Electoral Votes by Counting Ballots After Election Day

Funny, they didn't seem to have that problem in Florida and Bush/Gore election......
 

Fun For All

Well-known member
Feb 9, 2014
11,419
5,637
113
Trump is launching lawsuits and sending his lawyers out to investigate.
If these lawyers want to be useful how about investigating this...

How the fuck did Guy Carbonneau get into the Hockey Hall of Fame?
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,418
7,288
113
Explains the reason why such a Post was s tarted by OP:

How a Michigan election map with false information went viral and landed in Trump's Twitter feed

"WHAT IS THIS ALL ABOUT?" President Trump asked in a tweet on Wednesday morning.
He had shared an image of an electoral map of Michigan that purported to show an unexplained jump overnight in the number of returned ballots in the state. The charge: According to the data in the map, 138,000 ballots had come in out of nowhere, and all of them were for Biden.
The claim had been going viral in parts of the right all morning. A headline on one right-wing website read, "Voter Fraud in Michigan -- Massive Dump of Over 200,000 Ballots for Biden All the Sudden Appear Overnight." At least 14,000 tweets had included the image.
The image was real. But the idea that it indicated fraud was absolutely false, though the people sharing it likely initially did not know that the data in the map was wrong.

The image was a screenshot of a map on the website Decision Desk HQ, which tracks election results and has powered results data for media outlets like BuzzFeed News. After Trump's tweet on Wednesday, Decision Desk HQ said there had been an error in the data it had been sent from Michigan's Shiawassee County. "Once we identified the error, we cleared the erroneous data and updated it with the correct data as provided by officials," Decision Desk HQ said in a statement to CNN. A clerk with the Shiawassee County Clerk's Office confirmed to CNN that that a typing error had been made when votes were being entered for Biden, and that the error was corrected within 30 minutes.
Decision Desk HQ is known as a reliable source of information but it did not explain why it took hours to make a statement about the error.
But the story of how a screenshot of an error on an electoral map on a niche website made its way to the President of the United States is one emblematic of the online misinformation ecosystem and Trump's central role within it.
Working with the Alethea Group, a disinformation research company, CNN found evidence that the screenshot may have made its first appearance online when it circulated early Wednesday morning on a QAnon forum on the hate-filled platform 8Kun, a successor to 8chan. CNN has reached out to 8Kun for comment.
The screenshot then made its way to anonymous accounts on Twitter, some posting in Spanish, and one with the hashtag #LatinosforTrump in its username.
Those tweets were then picked up by some conservative influencers and right-wing websites, forums, and Telegram channels that are known peddlers of misinformation.
The President is determined to paint a picture of a "rigged" election and this is unlikely to be the last time he promotes an unsubstantiated claim that has circulated in the dark underbelly of the internet and uses it to try bolster his attempts to undermine American democracy.
A receptive audience of quasi-influencers
The President posted the map twice, in a tweet and a retweet, around 10:30 am Wednesday morning.
Twitter (TWTR) labeled the information in the tweet as being "disputed."
A Twitter spokesperson told CNN the company was automatically applying labels to tweets with the image — the company had found and labeled at least 14,000 tweets that included the image as of Wednesday afternoon, the spokesperson said.
Trump's tweet was a sort of nesting doll of bad information. In it, the President quote-tweeted — that is, added his own commentary to -- a tweet from Matt Walsh, a conservative personality, who in turn had quote-tweeted a tweet from Matt Mackowiak, a Texas GOP county chairman.
Mackowiak had shared a screenshot of the map and written, "An update gives Biden 100% of new votes — 128k+"
Mackowiak shared the tweet before Decision Desk HQ said there had been an error.
After his tweet was picked up by the President and Decision Desk HQ noted the inaccuracy, Mackowiak acknowledged that there had been an error.
"I have now learned the MI update referenced was a typo in one county. I have deleted the original tweet," he wrote.
Anonymous accounts
Some of the earliest tweets CNN found containing the map screenshot were shared shortly before 6am ET.
Cindy Otis, vice president of analysis at the Alethea Group, found a copy of the image posted to 8Kun shortly after 5:30am ET.
It is possible, Otis pointed out, that the image first circulated on private channels or even elsewhere on the open web prior to this. However, it is clear that anonymous accounts played a pivotal role in the early amplification of a false image that would later be used by President Trump.
The image was also tweeted early by an anonymous account with less than 700 followers.
That tweet was retweeted a prominent conservative with hundreds of thousands of followers.
The retweeting of the anonymous account is just one example of how potentially questionable content from anonymous accounts with small followings can be propelled to massive audiences by people of influence.
Clean-up
Asked about the false image on Wednesday, Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said she had not seen it but called "on all of you in the media to help us, and all of you watching, to help us ensure accurate data and information is what is discussed in the ecosystem right now as opposed to false or misleading claims."
By the time Decision Desk HQ and Mackowiak had pointed out what really happened, the false claim had spread like wildfire.
But, unlike the President, they at least had attempted to correct the record.

 

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
9,153
7,264
113
Trump and russian disinformation. Dem votes come from cities. Those polling areas more crowded as states w repub state legislatures try to suppress the vote by limiting polling locations. Thus staff cannot count as votes come in. In rural areas - more Republican- it takes 5 minutes to vote. In cities in states where repubs control state legislature - it can take 4- 8 hours to vote. It is a deliberate strategy.
 

explorerzip

Well-known member
Jul 27, 2006
8,118
1,294
113
The problem with the US electoral system as a whole is there is no uniformity. Each state decides how to conduct its election, which gives rise to huge differences. For example, I just heard on CNN Nevada allows mail-in ballots to be counted up to 7 days after Election Day so far as they are post marked before that day. That’s insane.
There's never going to be the slightest bit of uniformity because there's no will to do it. The smallest suggestions are going to meant with cries of socialism. Far better (and lucrative) to sue each other into submission and keep the status quo.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,418
7,288
113

wigglee

Well-known member
Oct 13, 2010
10,392
2,304
113
A bad smell is not conclusive evidence. However, anyone would be foolish to ignore it and not try to resolve whether there is a problem that accounts for it. I am struck by a few features that have become pervasive in American elections and/or were features of this particular election:

1. Democratic strongholds persistently report later than the remainder of their state. This makes no sense to me, particularly in Democratic run states like Pennsylvania where the state is free to allocate election resources wherever they feel they are are needed. There is no reason why large urban voting centers need to be underresourced (on a per ballot basis). Even in Republican run states, election staff in the Democratic strongholds tend to be Democrats simply for pragmatic reasons (location). If I was trying to think of ways to cheat in an election, certainly having my vote come in only after the opponent's vote was fully counted would be in my toolbox.

2. Races that the Democrats won, but were unexpectedly close, got no airtime or comment. Trump is on track to get 44-45% of the vote in New York, one of the most reliably blue states! How did this not merit any mention? Is it just co-incidence that it doesn't fit the narrative that voters in this part of the country don't like Trump? Michigan and Pennsylvania are not far away, and are largely industrialized states.

3. I primarily watched CNN's coverage. Wolf Blitzer was clearly troubled by the disappearance of early Democrat leads in Florida, Georgia, Texas, North Carolina, Ohio, etc. Why? Biden didn't need those wins. Wasn't he super confident, based on the polls, that Biden would get what he needed in the northern states and/or Arizona anyway? There's something wrong when a network touts polls so consistently, and then doesn't appear to have any faith in them at all on election night. That behaviour made them look like frauds in my eyes.

4. While I understand election rules that would prevent announcing any election results before the polls close, I'm at a loss as to why votes can't be counted as they are received (subject to litigation challenging the propriety of those particular votes, in which case they should be segregated), and then promptly announced following the close of the polls. See point 1.

5. The unnecessary lies/distortions about how "normal" everything is during this election. It is NOT normal for mail in ballots to be so substantial that anyone could think that they could upend a 700,000 vote lead. The normal insignificance of mail in balloting is why they've never received much scrutiny in the past, and why they don't impede calling state victories on election night, not because there was never anything to question. There is nothing normal about this election. Further, I did not and do not buy the move to expanded mail in balloting based on public health grounds. The perception of fair and reliable election results is more socially important than the miniscule public health risks of people voting in person voting with masks on.

6. The unnecessary lies/distortions about how "unprecedented" and "undemocratic" it was of Trump to say, in essence, that he believes he won and that his opponents are concocting schemes to deny him his victory. This criticism is hogwash. Anyone who ever challenged an election result by demanding a recount or challenging the process in court was implicitly claiming victory and skullduggery on the part of his opponents. It has happened innumerable times, and was the essence of the Bush v. Gore challenge. Complaining that a state is attempting to manipulate election results by changing voting rules is a democratic, rather than undemocratic argument, Elections need clear rules, or they are subject to manipulation. See point 1, again.

7. CNN wouldn't declare Florida for Trump until he had a 3.5 point lead with less than 5% of the vote to count. WTF was up with that! At 90% of the vote, did they think Biden was going to blow Trump out on the remaining vote? Smelled bad. Smelled bad for hours on end. On the other end of the scale, their reluctance to call Arizona is also fishy. Bigger lead (for the Democrats). What is holding them back? Similarly, what's wrong in Nevada that prevented them from making that call?

Did any of this bother you?
Trump fucked the Post Office to impede the mail in voting. Many Repuglican state legislatures refused to let the early votes be tabulated until AFTER the election day votes were counted. Many Democrats voted early because of covid and the fear of 7 hour lineups. So...... nothing is fishy here. The votes need to be counted... ALL OF THEM. This is why Trumps early leads are disappearing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: khufu

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
9,153
7,264
113
He's already tipped his strategy.
1. He's softened the ground for months saying mail in are fraudulent, because he knows repubs much more likely to vote in person.
2. He combined it with a strategy of putting in a lackey at the US post office to sabotage mail delivery so that in some states the slow down would cause thee mail to arrive after the date it could be legally accepted.
3. Then he'd declare victory the night of the election whilst he was ahead, thus putting the burden on others to prove him wrong, and to further his narrative that as the mail in vote got counted, his lead would "mysteriously" evaporate.
4. He'd put out all sorts of bullshit, conspiracies, eventually pushing to create so much chaos (and his flurry of idiotic lawsuits) that he'd cause legislatures to either miss the certification date or appoint a different slate of electors who'd change the state's electoral votes to trump. Or make it so chaotic that he'll just declare things too uncertain so he'll stay in office another term (vote be damned).
 
  • Like
Reactions: wigglee

jerimander

Well-known member
Feb 16, 2014
2,974
646
113
There is a danger of civil war if the people feel they have been robbed. Violent struggle against perceived tyranny is part of American tradition.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,670
6,839
113
I hate to say this, but this vote should be shit canned and the whole thing redone. This is no longer about who wins, but about the integrity of the process. When a candidate like James in Michigan is cruising in the polls and votes for a sure win and gets swamped by the mail in ballots at 3AM, something is very wrong. One citizen, one vote and the voting ID cannot be substituted with this clusterfuck we're witnessing. And to all of you tainted by one of the other candidate- presidents come and go, but the integrity of the process is all that matters. Try to think about following elections and what this will do to the citizens' faith in the system if half of the electorate considers the process as illegitimate and fraudulent.
 
Toronto Escorts