3 ms·

Wait, which side are you talking about? Is it the same side that’s been pushing election security bills with the most basic attempts to improve security of elec

Wait, which side are you talking about? Is it the same side that’s been pushing election security bills with the most basic attempts to improve security of elections? We don’t even need security – we need confidence. And this recent idea that it takes weeks to count votes, that we might not know the results for weeks – is completely unacceptable and is already doing irreparable damage to people’s faith in elections.

amanaplanacanal 5y ago
Is that really a recent thing though? Or has it always taken some places weeks to count votes, just not in close states?
- HWR_14 5y ago
  It's recent because of the huge amount of write in ballots. Usually the winner is called the night of because they* just ignore the mail in numbers, even in battleground states. This year, there were too many (and they were too different a population from the in person ballots) to do that. * "They" meaning the news media. The official vote took longer and counted the mail in ballots
  - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
    Ah yes, COVID. And then some states passed laws that the mail in ballots couldn't start being counted until after election day.
HWR_14 5y ago
> this recent idea that it takes weeks to count votes, that we might not know the results for weeks – is completely unacceptable Why on earth would that be? The "counting period" was originally set at 5 weeks. Between laws saying that you cannot start counting mail in ballots before the close of polls on election day, laws that (rightly) limit how many hours that can be spent counting ballots, etc. I'm not sure how to square that with instant results. Maybe we just be patient counting the scores in a contest that takes 18 months to run?
- TechBro8615 5y ago
  You have a super computer in your pocket. There is no reason counting votes should take any longer than it takes to receive them.
  - HWR_14 5y ago
    You want to trust democracy to OCR? Heck, there are lawsuits where humans disagree. But, even if you ignore that two individuals (or three) representing all the candidates each count by hand a stack of ten, have to agree, sign off that they agree, etc. I think you underestimate other problems. You're focused on the counting. Just consider how long it takes to open the outer envelope, check the signature on the inner envelope (again, by multiple people who represent different campaigns), and physically remove and unfold that sheet of paper. Now multiply by several million. Add in some extra time for managing stack of ten ballots. Or, to put it another way, we don't vote with a phone app. We are willing to pay extra for security.
  - dillondoyle 5y ago
    Addition is fast. Opening ballots, verifying signatures, checking voter is legit, and then marking it all down takes time. Especially when bound by law to not open envelopes until 7pm eday.
    - TechBro8615 5y ago
      On another thread here, someone was explaining to me that mail-in ballots are separated from their provenance by design. So what exactly are these election workers spending hours doing to “verify signatures” and “check voter is legit?”
      - yuubi 5y ago
        That information is on the outside of the envelope and is verified before the envelope is opened. In some states, the ballot is inside another envelope that is opened after the voter info is separated from the ballot.
thinkcontext 5y ago
Is this a joke? The side that was chasing after nonsense like Italian satellites, bamboo fibers, etc and firing AGs that wouldn't play ball is the side that is seeking to instill confidence?! Its a good thing that side has now been busy changing laws to allow themselves to overrule election results, I know that instills confidence in me.
- TechBro8615 5y ago
  I can point to examples of clowns on the blue team too. This logical fallacy of “crazy by association” seems to be an increasingly popular trend in online political discussion. I wonder how many people simply choose not to engage.
  - thinkcontext 5y ago
    Except that your Italian satellite clowns are the ones in control of your party and are purging anyone who doesn't toe the clown line from it.
    - TechBro8615 5y ago
      By “purging,” do you mean that the red team is banning people they disagree with from speaking on the websites they own? And I honestly don’t even know who you’re talking about but I assume it’s the pillow/pcap guy. Have you heard about the president’s son, or the New York governor, or the speaker of the house who moonlights as a prolific stock trader? Good people are not leading us.
      - thinkcontext 5y ago
        Trump is the leader of your party. He is the one that had Meadows send Italian satellites to DOJ and all the other nonsense. He is the one that axed Barr after Barr said there was no evidence to support the crazy that Trump was spewing. He's the one purging people from your party that speak out against this insanity. Your other whataboutisms are weak sauce compared with this. In particular the Cuomo one is not good for you, he's out, while your party continues to embrace the p**y grabber that has a higher harassment allegation count.

amanaplanacanal 5y ago

Is that really a recent thing though? Or has it always taken some places weeks to count votes, just not in close states?

HWR_14 5y ago
It's recent because of the huge amount of write in ballots. Usually the winner is called the night of because they* just ignore the mail in numbers, even in battleground states. This year, there were too many (and they were too different a population from the in person ballots) to do that. * "They" meaning the news media. The official vote took longer and counted the mail in ballots
- amanaplanacanal 5y ago
  Ah yes, COVID. And then some states passed laws that the mail in ballots couldn't start being counted until after election day.

HWR_14 5y ago

> this recent idea that it takes weeks to count votes, that we might not know the results for weeks – is completely unacceptable Why on earth would that be? The "counting period" was originally set at 5 weeks. Between laws saying that you cannot start counting mail in ballots before the close of polls on election day, laws that (rightly) limit how many hours that can be spent counting ballots, etc. I'm not sure how to square that with instant results. Maybe we just be patient counting the scores in a contest that takes 18 months to run?

TechBro8615 5y ago
You have a super computer in your pocket. There is no reason counting votes should take any longer than it takes to receive them.
- HWR_14 5y ago
  You want to trust democracy to OCR? Heck, there are lawsuits where humans disagree. But, even if you ignore that two individuals (or three) representing all the candidates each count by hand a stack of ten, have to agree, sign off that they agree, etc. I think you underestimate other problems. You're focused on the counting. Just consider how long it takes to open the outer envelope, check the signature on the inner envelope (again, by multiple people who represent different campaigns), and physically remove and unfold that sheet of paper. Now multiply by several million. Add in some extra time for managing stack of ten ballots. Or, to put it another way, we don't vote with a phone app. We are willing to pay extra for security.
- dillondoyle 5y ago
  Addition is fast. Opening ballots, verifying signatures, checking voter is legit, and then marking it all down takes time. Especially when bound by law to not open envelopes until 7pm eday.
  - TechBro8615 5y ago
    On another thread here, someone was explaining to me that mail-in ballots are separated from their provenance by design. So what exactly are these election workers spending hours doing to “verify signatures” and “check voter is legit?”
    - yuubi 5y ago
      That information is on the outside of the envelope and is verified before the envelope is opened. In some states, the ballot is inside another envelope that is opened after the voter info is separated from the ballot.

thinkcontext 5y ago

Is this a joke? The side that was chasing after nonsense like Italian satellites, bamboo fibers, etc and firing AGs that wouldn't play ball is the side that is seeking to instill confidence?! Its a good thing that side has now been busy changing laws to allow themselves to overrule election results, I know that instills confidence in me.

TechBro8615 5y ago
I can point to examples of clowns on the blue team too. This logical fallacy of “crazy by association” seems to be an increasingly popular trend in online political discussion. I wonder how many people simply choose not to engage.
- thinkcontext 5y ago
  Except that your Italian satellite clowns are the ones in control of your party and are purging anyone who doesn't toe the clown line from it.
  - TechBro8615 5y ago
    By “purging,” do you mean that the red team is banning people they disagree with from speaking on the websites they own? And I honestly don’t even know who you’re talking about but I assume it’s the pillow/pcap guy. Have you heard about the president’s son, or the New York governor, or the speaker of the house who moonlights as a prolific stock trader? Good people are not leading us.
    - thinkcontext 5y ago
      Trump is the leader of your party. He is the one that had Meadows send Italian satellites to DOJ and all the other nonsense. He is the one that axed Barr after Barr said there was no evidence to support the crazy that Trump was spewing. He's the one purging people from your party that speak out against this insanity. Your other whataboutisms are weak sauce compared with this. In particular the Cuomo one is not good for you, he's out, while your party continues to embrace the p**y grabber that has a higher harassment allegation count.