US Presidential Election 2020

[brihard]

>Were any Florida results released before 8 p.m. Eastern?

I have no screenshots of live update sites.  Will this do as a statement of the state of FL's intent?

"The results of 800,000 ballots will be announced at 7 o'clock tonight so you will get a very good idea of what things look like in Broward at 7 o'clock," predicted Broward Supervisor of Elections Peter Antonacci before polls closed."

I'll accept that and concede that I was likely wrong. I won't insist you dig up concrete proof, it's more likely that you're right on this one than not.

>Your other examples - voter ID requirements, etc - doesn't speak to the notion that results reporting in one state 'suppresses' the vote in others.

The other example speaks to shifting the goalpost to "choice".  Choices are influenced, and I'm writing about influence.

You are, but more narrowly within 'influence', you're writing about 'voter suppression'. All suppression is influence; not all influence is suppression.

>'Voter suppression' isn't merely people deciding not to vote for whatever reason.

Did I claim it was the only kind of suppression?  I claim it is one kind of suppression.  It doesn't have to be intentional.  We can partition suppression into "intentional" vs "unintentional" if you wish, and into "statutory" vs "influential", and whatever other axes you wish.  Much of suppression clearly consists of attempts to influence people with information, whether it is factual, false, misrepresentation, or speculative.  Regardless of plausible deniability, I'll continue to believe that some people are willing to give things a nudge in a preferred direction when they're in a position to do so.

Finally, it doesn't even matter if you refuse to call it "suppression".  There's still a problem with a thumb on the scale that doesn't need to be there.  To recap: people who want to maximize turnout and count every vote should be against speculative early calls, not finding reasons to excuse them.  If you disagree with those aspirations, fine.

'Suppression' implies intent. 'Voter suppression' is action or wilful inaction to try to get people in a targeted cohort to not vote. You can find various definitions of it from scholarly sources - I could not, from a quick search, find it having been defined in USSC case law, though that doesn't mean it's not in there somewhere - and you will find that pretty consistently, there's intent and deliberation.

I will agree that there is a potential for early calls in the east to influence voters in the west, but I absolutely reject, based on actual definitions of the term (here's one, here's another, that these early calls serve to suppress votes.

I'm not quibbling with you that potentially anything can influence votes, but suppression? Absolutely not in this particular instance.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

It's not over until the Electoral College makes a decision and their votes are accepted by congress on Jan 6.

 

[Infanteer]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-pretty-convincing-win-for-biden-and-a-mediocre-performance-for-down-ballot-democrats/

Mate Silver's breakdown of the election numbers so far.  Note the total numbers for the popular vote, and the fairly convincing win being projected - it appears that Biden was able to build more space in certain states than Trump built on Clinton in 2016.  Silver identifies where the polling was on, and where there is some work to do.

 

[brihard]

It's not over until the Electoral College makes a decision and their votes are accepted by congress on Jan 6.

By the same logic it’s not “over” ’til the president elect survives to take the oath on Inauguration Day, but make no mistake, the matter is decided, and likely by a pretty considerable margin when a final tally of electoral votes is made. What remains is merely process, sprinkled with some drama. Trump is out of a job in January.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

By the same logic it’s not “over” ’til the president elect survives to take the oath on Inauguration Day, but make no mistake, the matter is decided, and likely by a pretty considerable margin when a final tally of electoral votes is made. What remains is merely process, sprinkled with some drama. Trump is out of a job in January.

The matter isn't decided until the lawsuits are. People can say it's over and that Biden is president, but the fact is, he can still lose depending how the courts fall out. Nothing is, currently,  in the bag. It's still a crapshoot

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

The matter isn't decided until the lawsuits are. People can say it's over and that Biden is president, but the fact is, he can still lose depending how the courts fall out. Nothing is, currently,  in the bag. It's still a crapshoot

The lawsuits won't change the outcome, lets just hope that perhaps they change an election system that is obviously in disrepair with no mechanics in sight.

 

[brihard]

The matter isn't decided until the lawsuits are. People can say it's over and that Biden is president, but the fact is, he can still lose depending how the courts fall out. Nothing is, currently,  in the bag. It's still a crapshoot

Hang on to that if it comforts you, but nothing I’ve seen suggests that any of the pending legal action (or any of the matters already brought and dismissed) stand a realistic chance of thwarting the will of the electorate and reversing the now apparent result.

Filing a lawsuit does not put other matters or processes in abeyance. Anyone can sue for basically anything. A suit being filed does not mean anything has changed. While bits of vexatious litigation wind their way through the courts, the transition team will be carrying on doing their thing, and Biden I’ll be sworn in in January.

But feen no need to take my word for it, you’ll be able to enjoy the show along with the rest of us... you may just not like the season finale as much.

Hell of a time to re-enter the politics threads though. Welcome back.

 

[blacktriangle]

What would happen if Biden fell into very poor health or died prior to being sworn in? Would Harris just step up and be sworn in?

 

[MilEME09]

What would happen if Biden fell into very poor health or died prior to being sworn in? Would Harris just step up and be sworn in?

Simple answer is yes

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

What would happen if Biden fell into very poor health or died prior to being sworn in? Would Harris just step up and be sworn in?

He'll be fine, he's on The Clinton's good side.....[couldn't let that straight line go unanswered] ;D

 

[Remius]

Hang on to that if it comforts you, but nothing I’ve seen suggests that any of the pending legal action (or any of the matters already brought and dismissed) stand a realistic chance of thwarting the will of the electorate and reversing the now apparent result.

Filing a lawsuit does not put other matters or processes in abeyance. Anyone can sue for basically anything. A suit being filed does not mean anything has changed. While bits of vexatious litigation wind their way through the courts, the transition team will be carrying on doing their thing, and Biden I’ll be sworn in in January.

But feen no need to take my word for it, you’ll be able to enjoy the show along with the rest of us... you may just not like the season finale as much.

Hell of a time to re-enter the politics threads though. Welcome back.

To quote Jake Tapper.

'Maybe he'll remain as a force in Republican politics... but his presidency is coming to a close,'

Time to move on.  It’s what I stated when Clinton lost the last one.

 

[brihard]

To quote Jake Tapper.

'Maybe he'll remain as a force in Republican politics... but his presidency is coming to a close,'

Time to move on.  It’s what I stated when Clinton lost the last one.

I don’t imagine that he’ll enjoy losing the adulation, or not being the centre of attention. Maybe the next business he sets up and torpedoes will be a TV network?

 

[Edward Campbell]

The lawsuits won't change the outcome, lets just hope that perhaps they change an election system that is obviously in disrepair with no mechanics in sight.

The system is old, it was designed in the 18th century, but it is doing what it was intended to do: it makes every state's votes count. Right now nine US states have more ½ of the US population: CA, TX, FL, NY, PA, IL, OH, GA, NC. Now they, being on the Atlantic and Pacific and Gulf coasts and being in the North and South, may be representative of the USA but that is not what the founding fathers wanted. Unless Americans want pure, simple, one-person, one-vote, winner-take-all, then some sort of mechanism like an electoral college is needed, albeit without the possibility of "unpledged" or "unfaithful" electors which now exists in some states.

We do not need to elect our head of state, she inherited that job from her late father, King George VI, and she appoints a vice-regal surrogate; and we do non elect our prime minister, either. We each vote for individual members of parliament and they, in turn, determine which party forms the government and which party leader, chosen by party members, gets to be PM. Our system is even older.
 

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Edward, I wasn't clear enough I guess,...the SYSTEM is ok, the delivery of it isn't.  Kinda like communism....

 

[GAP]

U.S. election live updates: Biden declared next U.S. president,
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/us-politics/article-us-election-live-updates-donald-trumps-saturday-morning-electoral/

U.S. news outlets have projected that Joe Biden has won enough states to take the presidency

Donald Trump disputes the outcome, accusing Biden of “rushing to falsely pose as the winner,” as his supporters stage protests

 

[MilEME09]

U.S. election live updates: Biden declared next U.S. president,
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/us-politics/article-us-election-live-updates-donald-trumps-saturday-morning-electoral/

U.S. news outlets have projected that Joe Biden has won enough states to take the presidency

Donald Trump disputes the outcome, accusing Biden of “rushing to falsely pose as the winner,” as his supporters stage protests

Its ironic that he says that given he claimed victory almost right away and insists he won.

 

[PMedMoe]

Donald Trump disputes the outcome, accusing Biden of “rushing to falsely pose as the winner,” as his supporters stage protests

:rofl:  That's rich, coming from him. 

 

[FJAG]

What antivirus are you using? I got Malawarebytes and it had no problem with the website.

Avast.

:cheers:

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Hang on to that if it comforts you, but nothing I’ve seen suggests that any of the pending legal action (or any of the matters already brought and dismissed) stand a realistic chance of thwarting the will of the electorate and reversing the now apparent result.

Filing a lawsuit does not put other matters or processes in abeyance. Anyone can sue for basically anything. A suit being filed does not mean anything has changed. While bits of vexatious litigation wind their way through the courts, the transition team will be carrying on doing their thing, and Biden I’ll be sworn in in January.

But feen no need to take my word for it, you’ll be able to enjoy the show along with the rest of us... you may just not like the season finale as much.

Hell of a time to re-enter the politics threads though. Welcome back.

I'm not worrying one way or the other. Just stating some things that people may not be paying attention to and that all I'm doing is following along. Not stating anything controversial or untrue. I'm just a believer in never say never. I haven't heard the fat lady sing.

Trump has already speculated on starting his own cable news network.

Thanks for the welcome back. I've been back for awhile, just haven't seen anything worth being involved in. It's funny to see nothing has changed though.

 

[Altair]

I am looking forward to January 20th and the end of this little American experiment.