|
United States10402 Posts
On November 06 2020 11:31 Kamisamanachi wrote:
I am just a guy watching all this process of election from India. But, from whatever i have seen, this is one of the weirdest election count processes i have seen in a while. I mean , Asian countries like India counts their votes in like 12-13 hours and more than 700 mil people vote there.
Can anyone provide any explanation as to why it takes so long to count the vote in US?
AMERICAAAAAA FUCK YEAH!
we suck. our systems are so trash and because of how often we hate being wrong, we just ignore it and act like eveythings ok.
|
On November 06 2020 11:27 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 11:10 FlaShFTW wrote:On November 06 2020 11:08 Stratos_speAr wrote:On November 06 2020 11:06 FlaShFTW wrote:
Arizona dump:
Biden +32k
Trump +44k
Trump gained 57.8%, not sure if this is above or below the line, but basically it's gonna turn into another Georgia race. Expect this to reach recount territory. It most likely won't be a recount. Arizona only allows a recount if the final tally is within .01%, and they don't allow requests for a recount. Ah ok interesting. Then no recount regardless. https://alex.github.io/nyt-2020-election-scraper/battleground-state-changes.htmlIf this guy's info is right, then Biden is on pace to flip Georgia. (Also peep the 1337 gain kekw) lol, AZ is breaking Biden 43.0% / 57.0% Trump, Trump needs 57.32% according to that guy. Somewhere in a dark room in Fox News headquarters you can hear a guy who's had way too much coffee over the last 10 hours, eye fixated on multiple screens in anticipation and a little bit of fear, screaming "TOLD YA"
Well, I believe he did say 1 in 1200 chance, maybe this was it.
|
On November 06 2020 11:33 Toadesstern wrote:
Still thinking about Fox News calling AZ so early when it seems to be as close as GA, or at least somewhat in the similar range....
What's the chance that they thought it's only mail ballots left and thought they would heavily lean Dem and just forgot that AZ has a high amount of Republicans using vote by mail and that's how we got here
I think they expected a red shift but their model simply overrated the influence of existing vote shares for counties. In any other election I think that AZ lead would have been safe for Biden.
|
On November 06 2020 11:29 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 11:19 Husyelt wrote:On November 06 2020 10:55 WombaT wrote:On November 06 2020 10:49 Husyelt wrote:On November 06 2020 10:42 WombaT wrote:
Why in 2020 is it acceptable for adults in positions of wealth and power to all caps like a child?
Eric Trump should be shot out of a cannon into a son for both the message of that email and the manner it was articulated. Focus group research and buzz words must be in CAPS. As much as I agree why aren’t you hard at work on your latest masterpiece? You are my first groupie, and while I am blushing right now, I must confess the new video is taking some time. Perhaps next week. Terrifying to think I have exposed my visage to you via YouTube comment thumbnails, a privilege alas I haven’t extended to any other TLers! Look forward to your next one, incidentally what do you use to edit your videos/sound?
Heh. I use Reason for audio, and Unreal Engine / After Effects for the visuals.
|
United States10402 Posts
NYT update on PA:
Monroe County with a massive flip, going from a slight Trump lean to +6 Biden.
PA down to 42k.
|
|
|
On November 06 2020 11:33 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 11:31 Kamisamanachi wrote:
I am just a guy watching all this process of election from India. But, from whatever i have seen, this is one of the weirdest election count processes i have seen in a while. I mean , Asian countries like India counts their votes in like 12-13 hours and more than 700 mil people vote there.
Can anyone provide any explanation as to why it takes so long to count the vote in US? They use imperial measurements when counting votes which is less efficient than the metric system.
lol. At this point, i will take this as valid explanation. I really think a country as rich as US should not have any problem with having voter ID's or efficient election count processes. and that too, when stakes are so high in the election for rest of the world too
|
On November 06 2020 11:31 Kamisamanachi wrote:
I am just a guy watching all this process of election from India. But, from whatever i have seen, this is one of the weirdest election count processes i have seen in a while. I mean , Asian countries like India counts their votes in like 12-13 hours and more than 700 mil people vote there.
Can anyone provide any explanation as to why it takes so long to count the vote in US?
Incompetence.
Not just "durrr we don't know how to count" incompetence, but state legislatures (often controlled by Republicans) that refuse to dedicate a budget to improve the election/ballot counting system as well as refusing to change laws that stop states from counting ballots until a certain day (with the current outstanding states, they can't count anything until after polls close on election day, even if they received the ballots weeks ahead of that day).
|
Northern Ireland26799 Posts
On November 06 2020 11:35 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 11:33 Toadesstern wrote:
Still thinking about Fox News calling AZ so early when it seems to be as close as GA, or at least somewhat in the similar range....
What's the chance that they thought it's only mail ballots left and thought they would heavily lean Dem and just forgot that AZ has a high amount of Republicans using vote by mail and that's how we got here I think they expected a red shift but their model simply overrated the influence of existing vote shares for counties. In any other election I think that AZ lead would have been safe for Biden.
Part of me just finds it amusing that the intern accidentally pressed some button to call it and Fox have just silently prayed it turns out that way ever since.
|
On November 06 2020 11:33 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 11:31 Kamisamanachi wrote:
I am just a guy watching all this process of election from India. But, from whatever i have seen, this is one of the weirdest election count processes i have seen in a while. I mean , Asian countries like India counts their votes in like 12-13 hours and more than 700 mil people vote there.
Can anyone provide any explanation as to why it takes so long to count the vote in US? They use imperial measurements when counting votes which is less efficient than the metric system.
But the UK uses imperial system too. I'm blaming founding fathers. They in their grand wisdom intended that common sense be damned as long as states can have their freedom. Like who thinks a federal election should have rules set on federal level. Blah, nobody would want that, right?
|
On November 06 2020 11:27 Nevuk wrote:
Alaska is a weird, weird state.
It has elected, by far, the furthest left senator the US has ever had from a major party (Mike Gravel, who is probably left of Sanders and should be remembered very fondly for releasing the pentagon papers), in addition to being an R leaning state.
People don't really like calling it early as it has a propensity for unusual voting patterns (somewhat like NH).
Remember, this is where a person whose last name was "Murkowski" won an election where she to be a write in, spelled correctly, against her own party's nominee.
I add Montana to that list of states with strong independent/libertarian qualities that on occasion give Democrats a good surprise. Alaska and Montana definitely have a dominant Republican presence, but they don't vote party line if they see a Democrat they like. Though Bullock got blown out despite his good reputation in Montana as a governor. It would be hilarious if the mail-ins in Alaska actually end up electing Al Gross to the Senate and suddenly things aren't so pessimistic for Senate Democrats.
|
On November 06 2020 11:31 food wrote:Damn, what a shitty tabloid level of journalism. I don't know, as unorganized as they sounded, they sounded... human? I don't see a big issue with this.
It's the daily mail.
Murdochs british empire.
|
PA has also been hamstrung a fair bit because they wanted to count early and mail ballots before November 2nd but were blocked from doing so.
|
On November 06 2020 11:26 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 11:17 Wegandi wrote:On November 06 2020 11:03 WombaT wrote:On November 06 2020 10:45 Wegandi wrote:On November 06 2020 10:40 WombaT wrote:On November 06 2020 10:31 Wegandi wrote:On November 06 2020 10:24 WombaT wrote:On November 06 2020 10:05 Wegandi wrote:
Whatever I reiterate my point that democrats wailing about GOP not compromising are themselves not willing to compromise. The political tension in this country is high and people are drifting apart. This isnt some unique thing to the GOP. Shit rings hollow just like Graham re: ACB and Merrick Garland. Why would you compromise with the GOP and what on, what are you getting out of that arrangement? The President can’t even tucking concede an election like a man. After 4 years of well, we know what. If your strategy is rampant obstructionism and we’re at this point we are today, either rebuild the shambles of a party to a point where mutual compromise is not just pragmatic, but in the interests of the populace at large. Or don’t and continue down the current path and we’ll see where that goes. Inb4 the Dems are partisan too, well no shit. Cory Booker and Rand Paul re: criminal justice? Maybe you get dems OK with tax cuts and lower tax rates for some environmental thing or w/e? But thats the thing neither side will ever allow a budge on any position. Id happily sign off on axing oil subsidies to lower marginal income rates of all brackets by 25%. Booker and Paul are not exactly in line with the GOP on those issues. I’d consider them as borderline independents in the inverse sense Bernie is an Independent who is in the Democrat camp. The GOP rank and file and associated media propagandists? Even in your hypothetical it’s a trade for something that should (IMO) obviously be done vs the Dems kneecapping their ability to fund their wider programs, why would they go for it? The ideal is in hypothetical land Rand Paul and Cory Booker slide across the aisle on this one issue which they’re clearly in alignment on, and go back to doing battle on fiscal policy. And the alternative in some other issue. You have to give to get. Ok so youre not willing to compromise on tax cuts. What about regulations? What are you willing to compromise with? The point of compromise is neither side is entirely happy. You willing to expand gun rights? Which is why the narrative that GOP are obstructionists and will never compromise, etc. is so stupid. Neither side is. Its purity or youre thrown to the wolves. The discord and disunity in the country is to be blamed on everyone not just the GOP. Tax cuts for universal health care? I wasn’t quibbling with the idea of compromise, merely your example as a rather uneven trade was all. Sure everyone is to blame, just not everyone is equally to blame. Fair enough. Universal Health care eh....thats gonna cost big. Eliminate the income tax. Gonna have to pay for it with tariffs and capital gains taxes lol. Hey we’re getting somewhere. I’m not sure how we get out of the current situation, even in the U.K. with a (relatively) rare counter example there’s a lot more crossing of the aisles than we see in the US. As to why it’s strange because in theory the US has a lot of checks and balances that should enable more not less divergence from the party line. I suppose the fundage needed to run, especially at a Senate level is considerably more, so you’re kind of more dependent on toeing the party line? I can’t remember the exact stat but it was something akin to decades of every single U.K. election including local ones and European ones didn’t even make up a singular Presidential campaign in terms of spending
There is public funding in the US for most elections, but you have to win the primary of a party that received >5% of the vote in the last election to get it. It's also not competitive amounts of money, just enough to actually run (Obama declined to take it in 2008 because he thought the system was broken. Still not sure what to make of that, but it definitely made him more beholden to wall street).
The primaries are the biggest barrier that requires money to win. There's a reason most of our politicians started out wealthy - that's what it takes to win, unless you're extremely talented politically and a good fit for the district (ie AOC).
While our system is expensive, a lot of it is probably wasted expenditures. Our most expensive stuff is for something of very dubious quality :
TV ads. More people see these from the campaign's youtube or twitter than from the actual TV, as generally everything is DVR'd and has commercials fast forwarded through, with the possible exception of sports. It's also not going to reach younger individuals who generally use netflix or Hulu plus or something without ads.
If money was all it took to flip races then Bloomberg would have won the primary, Hillary would be president and AOC would still be a bartender or have lost her last race. Money buys name recognition, as far as we can tell, but it can't make the voters like you.
Imo, a lot of money for a campaign is a sign that they have a lot of support in the first place : not a sign that they'll be able to use it to get more.
On November 06 2020 11:26 Wegandi wrote:I think that tells you all you need to know (and its across the spectrum). Damn I bet Weiner wishing he had gotten away with it for a few more years. Shucks.
I'm wondering if this'll change without Trump on the ballot. He basically made caring about any scandal a partisan issue by his presence.
It was never a very strong effect, anyways- the last 538 analysis on this was that the biggest effect was politicians resigning due to shame. If they went to election, it was at most, 10 points off their final result.
|
Georgia is down to a 1,902 vote lead for Trump. Biden won the latest batch of 1,031 79/21
|
In other news Steve Bannon got banned on twitter
|
On November 06 2020 11:33 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 11:26 Wegandi wrote:I think that tells you all you need to know (and its across the spectrum). Damn I bet Weiner wishing he had gotten away with it for a few more years. Shucks. The thread’s assessment is focused on state-level stuff, but yes. National level candidates can still be ruined by scandals (for better or worse, a lot of scandals are bullshit), but at state level you will predict races more accurately not knowing about their scandals than knowing about them. Btw by the time I read your response to me earlier the thread was like 20 pages on, but if you still want a response I can look up your post.
Up to you. Im watching some good ol King of Queens reruns so I got time to read if you write.
|
On November 06 2020 11:38 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2020 11:35 TheTenthDoc wrote:On November 06 2020 11:33 Toadesstern wrote:
Still thinking about Fox News calling AZ so early when it seems to be as close as GA, or at least somewhat in the similar range....
What's the chance that they thought it's only mail ballots left and thought they would heavily lean Dem and just forgot that AZ has a high amount of Republicans using vote by mail and that's how we got here I think they expected a red shift but their model simply overrated the influence of existing vote shares for counties. In any other election I think that AZ lead would have been safe for Biden. Part of me just finds it amusing that the intern accidentally pressed some button to call it and Fox have just silently prayed it turns out that way ever since.
I saw it live, they had a middle-aged guy call it with a smirk, they asked him several times and he was chuckling, said it was 4 standard deviations away. They must've sacked him right after, as he's not on TV anymore.
|
On November 06 2020 11:37 CorsairHero wrote:daily mail lol
Shitty source ya, but point stands. (Only other coverage were some tweets which is likewise shitty to follow)
The point that is interesting is that as the Dems move to Sanders/AOC as a party theyre going to lose in a lot of places they meed to retain control. Their policies are not as popular in practice as they think.
|
On November 06 2020 11:38 GoShox wrote:
Georgia is down to a 1,902 vote lead for Trump. Biden won the latest batch of 1,031 79/21
If none of that batch includes the 5K Clayton votes that's pretty much it for Trump.
If it's with...it's also probably also it for Trump. But less so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
