US Presidential Election 2020

Manic Moran

Christy42 wrote: »

There is something to be said for being sure about it ahead of time. Has Harris put out a defense or have they been given an opportunity to do so? The judge seemed mighty quick to push the ruling through. A bigger question is when did Republicans find out about this? Did they simply wait for the vote to suppress it or how are they only finding out about a voting system 100,000 people used?

Oh, they've been trying for a while. Prior attempts, using slightly different legal argument have failed, which is why I don't see that they have much chance this time around either.

Suppressive means to reduce voting. The drive through increased voting. It is not suppressive. It is like someone offering lifts to the voting booth for certain areas is not suppressive. However these things shouldn't be organised by parties but it is yet more evidence the US really struggles at running elections.

Actually, I agree with you on this. Interestingly, it is exactly the same logic which was used by the court to uphold the limit on one drop-off-point for postal ballots per county: The argument was over just how much expansion there would be, not if it was a restriction. That logic did not seem to go over well in certain quarters, however.

Perhaps I should have said 'relative suppression', if you're making it easier for one crowd to vote than another.

looksee

First, I am utterly, totally mystified as to how a majority of people in the US can possibly support someone who is as utterly irresponsible and inept as Trump. I am at a loss to see how it could even be a close race given the lies, corruption, bad decisions and impossibly bad people he has surrounded himself with. How can there be a country that would prefer to have a carnival barker running the show than someone, anyone, with any degree of competence at all?

Second, the sheer neck of the US criticising Tanzania for their elections when they are obviously completely incapable of organising one for themselves.

prawnsambo

Manic Moran wrote: »

Perhaps I should have said 'relative suppression', if you're making it easier for one crowd to vote than another.

It just boggles my mind to read this. Just make it easier for everyone. Isn't that supposed to be how it works?

droidus

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

If there were any doubt about Nevada, this should quell it:

https://twitter.com/JohnRSamuelsen/status/1322827814513614848

Thats it, Nevada's done. Time to get back to worrying about PA.

SimonTemplar

https://twitter.com/saletan/status/1322912856153739266?s=20

Trump and the Republicans are building a narrative that votes counted after election night are not valid and are somehow an attempt by democrats to steal back the election. This is obviously nonsense. There is nothing in American law that states that all votes need to be counted on election night. In fact, the whole concept of election night is a media creation rather than something enshrined in law.

There may be some grey area regarding votes received after election day but all postal votes received up to election day may need a few days to be fully counted and are just as valid as those cast in person.

You can't steal back an election if all the votes haven't even been counted yet.

This is very damaging and deceitful by the GOP.

I don't understand what the legal basis for such a battle would even be.

Graham

SimonTemplar wrote: »

I don't understand what the legal basis for such a battle would even be.

There doesn't necessarily need to be a strong legal basis, just enough to throw the results into question.

Mr.Nice Guy

SimonTemplar wrote: »

Trump and the Republicans are building a narrative that votes counted after election night are not valid and are somehow an attempt by democrats to steal back the election. This is obviously nonsense. There is nothing in American law that states that all votes need to be counted on election night. In fact, the whole concept of election night is a media creation rather than something enshrined in law.

There may be some grey area regarding votes received after election day but all postal votes received up to election day may need a few days to be fully counted and are just as valid as those cast in person.

You can't steal back an election if all the votes haven't even been counted yet.

This is very damaging and deceitful by the GOP.

I don't understand what the legal basis for such a battle would even be.

It's very insidious stuff. I recall an article in The Guardian discussing this a few weeks back:

Democrats have said a massive victory is the surest way to avoid lengthy legal disputes that could even spill over into street violence. Trump has spent months seeking to undermine the credibility of the election in general and mail-in voting in particular.

Opinium found that Biden’s lead relies on the success of mail-in voting, likely to hit record levels during the pandemic. Some 55% of in-person voters intend to vote for Trump while 42% intend to vote for Biden. But when it comes to mail-in voters, 75% intend to vote for Biden and only 22% intend to vote for Trump.

As a result, America may witness a so-called “red mirage” in which Trump appears to be winning based on the early count of in-person votes, only to be overtaken by Biden’s mail-in ballots hours or day later. Only 30% of voters expect to know who the winner is on election night.

There are fears that Trump will use that time to spread conspiracy theories and declare victory. Half (50%) of voters are worried that if the president loses the election, he will not concede. There is a partisan divide: two-thirds (66%) of Trump voters are worried that the election will be rigged.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/13/election-poll-biden-leads-trump-17-points

I can't see any scenario where Trump concedes gracefully. It's not in his character. Wouldn't surprise me if he tweets out on election night that he has won, and then if mail-in votes change the outlook he'll claim that the deep state are trying to steal his win or some nonsense. The scary thing is millions of Americans will swallow that, and many of them are well-armed too.

briany

Graham wrote: »

There doesn't necessarily need to be a strong legal basis, just enough to throw the results into question.

There would need to be more than the results being in question. If you don't have a strong legal basis, then you're starting off from a bad footing taking things to the inevitable supreme court case. Even the likes of Barrett and Kavanaugh would have to know that they cannot be seen to be cowboys on this one, given the importance of their decision.

The other possible strategy of throwing the results into question is a veiled call to arms. This is almost too dark to countenance. Plus, when push comes to shove, I don't think your beer-bellied, scraggle-bearded, gun-nut class of Trump supporter really has the heart for an actual physical fight. If they get a bad stitch from walking to the store, fighting a running gun battle would likely be a step too far.

Manic Moran

prawnsambo wrote: »

It just boggles my mind to read this. Just make it easier for everyone. Isn't that supposed to be how it works?

Yes.

The problem is that the two main parties trying to win also control the system, everyone is more worried about winning than making things easier and fair. Very much US politics is about the ends justifying the means, unfortunately.

Graham

I don't disagree with either of your points Briany but its becoming more likely that Trump is working towards one or both of them.

At this point it's almost impossible to know what Trump's plan is if the election doesn't go his way.

prawnsambo

briany wrote: »

There would need to be more than the results being in question. If you don't have a strong legal basis, then you're starting off from a bad footing taking things to the inevitable supreme court case. Even the likes of Barrett and Kavanaugh would have to know that they cannot be seen to be cowboys on this one, given the importance of their decision.

The other possible strategy of throwing the results into question is a veiled call to arms. This is almost too dark to countenance. Plus, when push comes to shove, I don't think your beer-bellied, scraggle-bearded, gun-nut class of Trump supporter really has the heart for an actual physical fight. If they get a bad stitch from walking to the store, fighting a running gun battle would likely be a step too far.

Yeah. It reeks of desperation.

Christy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Oh, they've been trying for a while. Prior attempts, using slightly different legal argument have failed, which is why I don't see that they have much chance this time around either.



Actually, I agree with you on this. Interestingly, it is exactly the same logic which was used by the court to uphold the limit on one drop-off-point for postal ballots per county: The argument was over just how much expansion there would be, not if it was a restriction. That logic did not seem to go over well in certain quarters, however.

Perhaps I should have said 'relative suppression', if you're making it easier for one crowd to vote than another.

Hardly, it seems to be for the entire county so I can't see relative suppression. It is just the entire county is left leaning. If Harris is responsible for this they can't have been expected to force other counties to do the same. It is no more biased than any system of voting. Unless the system is centralised for the country or at least on state level I can't see a way differences don't crop up between areas.

Any areas who manage to get more of their people to vote is doing a good job imo, as long as no one favours sectors within their area of control.

They trialled the system in July as well with no controversy.

prawnsambo

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yes.

The problem is that the two main parties trying to win also control the system, everyone is more worried about winning than making things easier and fair. Very much US politics is about the ends justifying the means, unfortunately.

Yeah. Both main parties have had the opportunity to end gerrymandering, improve voting systems or any number of other electoral reforms, but have sat on their hands because it may have suited them once they were in power. Even the ludicrous situation of SC judges sitting for life is locked in the same alternating power paradigm.

duploelabs

prawnsambo wrote: »

Yeah. Both main parties have had the opportunity to end gerrymandering, improve voting systems or any number of other electoral reforms, but have sat on their hands because it may have suited them once they were in power. Even the ludicrous situation of SC judges sitting for life is locked in the same alternating power paradigm.

I think there will be a lot of checks and balances will be installed in the Biden presidency to ensure those 'gentlemens agreements' won't be abused in further administrations

dark crystal

Rayden Mushy Carpentry wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ThePlumLineGS/status/1322852329910116359

interested to see how this holds up come election day

This one was very interesting re: those who didn't vote in 2016.

I've always said that the ones who sat out the last election, either due to complacency over Hillary being a 'shoe-in', being sore over Sanders losing out on the Democratic nomination or because they just didn't like either candidate, have been feeling collective guilt over Trump's eventual win.

If most of these people had voted, chances are, Hillary Clinton would be President now.

I reckon if enough of those who didn't vote last time turn out in any kind of numbers this time, it could make all the difference. This, combined with the BLM movement, which may motivate the African-American vote much more than usual, may well be the deciding factors in 2020.

SimonTemplar

Here is the Lt Gov of Utah calling out the BS regarding all votes needed to be counted by election night.

https://twitter.com/SpencerJCox/status/1322933145709080576?s=20

He is a republican. This is good. More and more decent and sensible members of the GOP at all levels of government need to get this message across.

An Ciarraioch

https://twitter.com/USA_Polling/status/1322942527994023940

Given that 93m have already voted, and the general expectation is circa 150m, some rough maths:

Biden: 93*0.66= 61.6m + 57*0.27= 15.4 = 77m

Trump: 93*0.32= 29.76m +57*0.69=39.33 = 69m

Graham

Over the last few days there have been an increasing number of articles across all media formats reminding people that it's normal for results to take a few days.

How likely this information will reach those that think otherwise is another question entirely.

briany

Trump holding a rally right now, claiming that if the Democrats win, Ilhan Omar will be put in charge of immigration.

An Ciarraioch

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

If there were any doubt about Nevada, this should quell it:

https://twitter.com/JohnRSamuelsen/status/1322827814513614848

How so? The graph shows the Dems slightly behind where they were in 2016. Still around half of votes still to be cast.

froog

it's amazing how good trump makes mccain and romney look. both would have been fine presidents.

TomOnBoard

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

https://twitter.com/USA_Polling/status/1322942527994023940

Given that 93m have already voted, and the general expectation is circa 150m, some rough maths:

Biden: 93*0.66= 61.6m + 57*0.27= 15.4 = 77m

Trump: 93*0.32= 29.76m +57*0.69=39.33 = 69m

For me, this holds some concerns in respect of those who voted 'early':

1. how many were cast using 'unusual/new' methods, such as the curbside voting in Harris County, TX?
2. how many were mail-in votes that won't be delivered before various cut-off dates?
3. how many were votes that will be rejected due to such issues as mis-matched signatures, improperly completed ballots etc.

As it stands, the 'early/mail-in' votes will be waaaay more prone to being excluded in swing/battleground/toss-up states than will in-person votes cast on the day itself...

I am worried...

VinLieger

froog wrote: »

it's amazing how good trump makes mccain and romney look. both would have been fine presidents.

In terms of toxic conspiracy theories, polarising the country, sever administration corruption, self enrichment and anti-science specifically regarding covid yes they would have been far superior. However i doubt they would have done much different regarding immigration, corporate taxes or the Supreme court. They may have been slightly better regarding BLM but only marginally because the GOP will always rely on the blue vote.

Water John

Biden going to Ohio on Monday.

JTMan

Which TV network (I have freesat) offers the best coverage of the US election through the night? Thanks.

rossie1977

CNN coverage in usually excellent on election nights

JoeGil

Looks like the corruption is starting to catch up on Biden. The polls are tightening and looks like the result will come down to the wire.

MikeSoys

Have they started counting USA postal ballots yet.. before election day?

Graham

JoeGil wrote: »

The polls are tightening and looks like the result will come down to the wire.

I haven't noticed any significant changes in the polls over the last few days, which polls are you looking at JG?

MikeSoys

MikeSoys wrote: »

Have they started counting USA postal ballots yet.. before election day?

Depends on the state.

L1011

JoeGil wrote: »

Looks like the corruption is starting to catch up on Biden. The polls are tightening and looks like the result will come down to the wire.

Absolutely nobody who might ever consider Biden corrupt and Trump not corrupt wasn't already voting for Trump

ExMachina1000

Will it be possible to watch election coverage live on YouTube?

An Ciarraioch

Graham wrote: »

I haven't noticed any significant changes in the polls over the last few days, which polls are you looking at JG?

Seems to be a flood of Sean Hannity and Trafalgar polls today, as for the others, the margins are tightening slightly, but apart from Florida, nothing that would shake up the Electoral College.

Water John

MikeSoys wrote: »

Have they started counting USA postal ballots yet.. before election day?

For example yes in Florida and those will be announced straight after the close of polls. In contrast Pennsylvania cannot even start opening the outside envelope and verifying the signature etc until Tuesday morning. So there declaration could take days.

JoeGil

L1011 wrote: »

Absolutely nobody who might ever consider Biden corrupt and Trump not corrupt wasn't already voting for Trump

Not sure what the reference to Trump is. Biden family taking money money from China will not sit well with US voters.

Water John

JoeGil wrote: »

Not sure what the reference to Trump is. Biden family taking money money from China will not sit well with US voters.

You must have missed the last two weeks.

Graham

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Seems to be a flood of Sean Hannity and Trafalgar polls today, as for the others, the margins are tightening slightly, but apart from Florida, nothing that would shake up the Electoral College.

I didn't think there had been any significant changes.

JoeGil, which polls have you seen tightening?

Water John

Graham wrote: »

I didn't think there had been any significant changes.

JoeGil, which polls have you seen tightening?

538
'We’ve gotten a lot of new polls in the past couple of days, and we’ll continue to get many more, but so far, there’s little evidence that the race is tightening. If anything, Biden is continuing to make gains in the Midwest (1.7 points, on average, since the final debate).'

TomOnBoard

Water John wrote: »

You must have missed the last two weeks.

Aaand the last 4 years of the Presidency on top of decades of shady dealings...

spacecoyote

JoeGil wrote: »

Not sure what the reference to Trump is. Biden family taking money money from China will not sit well with US voters.

Apart from that secret bank account Trump had in China as well as the revelation he paid more in tax in China than he has in the US...but yeah, the rubbish Rudy has been trying to peddle about the Bidens is really going to sway the undecided voters

Overheal

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Will it be possible to watch election coverage live on YouTube?

Undoubtedly

FrostyJack

Overheal wrote: »

Undoubtedly

Almost sure the last few years each channel CNN, FOX etc will all be streaming on youtube like during the debates. You can channel hop on it to watch the spin on each channel. Cans are ready in the fridge

Just read a comment from an American saying that they will not vote for Biden as he is a liar, has shady dealings, the least transparent candidate in history and has no idea where he stands on anything as he has no plans etc, talk about bizarro world.

relax carry on

FrostyJack wrote: »

Almost sure the last few years each channel CNN, FOX etc will all be streaming on youtube like during the debates. You can channel hop on it to watch the spin on each channel. Cans are ready in the fridge

Just read a comment from an American saying that they will not vote for Biden as he is a liar, has shady dealings, the least transparent candidate in history and has no idea where he stands on anything as he has no plans etc, talk about bizarro world.

Was the comment from a Mr D Trump by any chance? The utter insanity of the American political system is just fascinating.

BonnieSituation

JoeGil wrote: »

Not sure what the reference to Trump is. Biden family taking money money from China will not sit well with US voters.

They're not even trying anymore

TomOnBoard

BonnieSituation wrote: »

They're not even trying anymore

Yeah, as a once- famous, now infamous man said: Sad!

TomOnBoard

I read that the FBI is investigating the "Trump Train" attack on the Biden bus in Texas...

I hope they'll be looking into the instigator-in-chief's role in promoting such actions.... Looks like certain 'very fine people' are no longer willing to 'stand by'...

duploelabs

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I read that the FBI is investigating the "Trump Train" attack on the Biden bus in Texas...

I hope they'll be looking into the instigator-in-chief's role in promoting such actions.... Looks like certain 'very fine people' are no longer willing to 'stand by'...

Would answer why the FBI and not the local law enforcement isn't involved

Capt'n Midnight

L1011 wrote: »

Absolutely nobody who might ever consider Biden corrupt and Trump not corrupt wasn't already voting for Trump

It doesn't matter if Biden is corrupt or not.

It's the US , assume all politicians are somewhat corrupt because there's no other way they could pay for the election campaigns.

What matters is how corrupt they are.

At this stage it looks like Trump a billionaire business man isn't even paying his bills to small businesses for essential services like providing ambulances and transport for people at out of town (because he allegedly doesn't pay the in-town ones) rallies.

Water John

There was a Congressional candidate on the bus, that might explain FBI concern.

pixelburp

Hopefully the attack on the bus was an aberration because the idea this is a precursor to a larger swath of aggressive "support" is a chilling escalation of partisanship. Trump has played with fire throughout his presidency and his desperation to be worshipped is causing this ramping up of zealotry. Of course, for the dissemblers and contrarian types who flit in and out of here, Trump remains technically blameless; his outspoken "concern" for stolen elections, or ask for "poll watching" never amounted to encouraging people to ram motorcades. It's Mafia levels of intellectual deniability.