2 ms·

Why just those states, though? Other states show more-or-less similar distributions of in-person to mail-in ballots. It's only these handful of swing states (

Why just those states, though? Other states show more-or-less similar distributions of in-person to mail-in ballots. It's only these handful of swing states (WI, MI, PA, NV, GA) that have such a massively different ratio of votes in-person vs. mail-in.

DeRock 6y ago
What are you using for your source for vote totals by vote method to make that determination? Again, there was a time component here, where battleground states were strategically targeted to delay when votes would be counted. Feel free to read the source I posted above, or look at other state by state summaries here: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/battleground-states-process-mail-ballots-delayed-results/story?id=73717671 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/battleground-states-process-... You will see some difference in ratios by voting method regardless, however. For example, in Arizona, the fact that voting by mail has been common for years, makes it much less partisan.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> It's only these handful of swing states (WI, MI, PA, NV, GA) that have such a massively different ratio of votes in-person vs. mail-in. No, its not. Its only those states that got a lot of attention to their count because they were swing states; the states that were easy to project very early on, no one outside of the media decision desks making the call cared about the details. And lots of them didn't have rules separating and delaying the count of mail-in ballots, anyway, which meant that differences in mail-in ballot patterns (which there almost certainly were because of partisan differences in who voted mail-in, entirely predictable given partisan differences in advocacy for and against mail voting) wouldn't show up clearly in the count timing the way it does in places where the process delayed starting counting mail-in ballots.
- not2b 6y ago
  In Florida, early votes were counted as soon as they were received. In Pennsylvania, by state law the early votes couldn't be counted until the polls closed. That's the main reason for the difference in timing and the large shift.
newacct583 6y ago
That's not true as far as I can see. Which other states are you talking about? Are you confusing party registration with vote, maybe? Are you correcting for ballot return rate, which itself was very different between registrations?

DeRock 6y ago

What are you using for your source for vote totals by vote method to make that determination? Again, there was a time component here, where battleground states were strategically targeted to delay when votes would be counted. Feel free to read the source I posted above, or look at other state by state summaries here: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/battleground-states-process-mail-ballots-delayed-results/story?id=73717671 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/battleground-states-process-... You will see some difference in ratios by voting method regardless, however. For example, in Arizona, the fact that voting by mail has been common for years, makes it much less partisan.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> It's only these handful of swing states (WI, MI, PA, NV, GA) that have such a massively different ratio of votes in-person vs. mail-in. No, its not. Its only those states that got a lot of attention to their count because they were swing states; the states that were easy to project very early on, no one outside of the media decision desks making the call cared about the details. And lots of them didn't have rules separating and delaying the count of mail-in ballots, anyway, which meant that differences in mail-in ballot patterns (which there almost certainly were because of partisan differences in who voted mail-in, entirely predictable given partisan differences in advocacy for and against mail voting) wouldn't show up clearly in the count timing the way it does in places where the process delayed starting counting mail-in ballots.

not2b 6y ago
In Florida, early votes were counted as soon as they were received. In Pennsylvania, by state law the early votes couldn't be counted until the polls closed. That's the main reason for the difference in timing and the large shift.

newacct583 6y ago

That's not true as far as I can see. Which other states are you talking about? Are you confusing party registration with vote, maybe? Are you correcting for ballot return rate, which itself was very different between registrations?