2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
People really don't understand how counting ballots works. The reason you know results sooner is because the race is over. The winner is clear. Calling the result does not mean every vote has been counted. It has always taken a long time to count every single ballot. The reason it seemed to take longer last time is the winner wasn't clear until much later (mostly because of the excessive amount of mail-in ballots which leaned left vs. the already counted in-person ballots that leaned right).
For example, Pennsylvania: if the only ballots left to count are in the very left-leaning urban areas and the blue candidate is already way ahead, you can safely call the election for the blue candidate. However, like this last time, if the red candidate is leading and you still have the urban ballots plus a lot of mail-in votes (both of which lean way left), then you have to wait until all of those are counted before you can safely call the result. This makes it look like they are going slower or there are some hijinks going on, but that's not the case. It's just how counting ballots works.
I'm never sure why people think the campaigns have secret, accurate insider polls that tell them what the race really looks like.
They certainly do polling that they don't make public. Whether they are more accurate or not, I don't know.
What you wrote:
People really don't understand how counting ballots works. The reason you know results sooner is because the race is over. The winner is clear. Calling the result does not mean every vote has been counted. It has always taken a long time to count every single ballot. The reason it seemed to take longer last time is the winner wasn't clear until much later (mostly because of the excessive amount of mail-in ballots which leaned left vs. the already counted in-person ballots that leaned right).
For
What Playbig read:
Dems stole the election from Trump and here are a bunch of made up reasons why it wasn't fraud.
Trump said they looked into it and she never worked there. For him to say that wouldn't be him lying when someone somewhere could easily show up with a picture of her working there, a receipt, pay stub or any other form of proof to prove him wrong. Trump wouldn't have said it if he wasn't 100% sure it was correct.
I worked at Mazzios in 2002 and I have no pictures, pay stubs, or any proof of me working there.
Do you have pay stubs from your teenage jobs from 20+ years ago?
It very rarely takes a full day in Italy, most often you simply wake up with the results being available the day after the election.
All counted by hand, at night.
If we can do that every one can, we are famous for low government efficiency especially in some areas.
There were something like 25 different items I voted on in this election. You are comparing that to an election where 2 things are voted on. Also seemingly you guys have a national system, we have 50 different systems of voting lol
People really don't understand how counting ballots works. The reason you know results sooner is because the race is over. The winner is clear. Calling the result does not mean every vote has been counted. It has always taken a long time to count every single ballot. The reason it seemed to take longer last time is the winner wasn't clear until much later (mostly because of the excessive amount of mail-in ballots which leaned left vs. the already counted in-person ballots that leaned right).
Every single vote gets counted here within 24 hours in most places here, sometimes you know the winner sooner than 100% of precints report the counts ofc, which in the vast majority of the cases happen in a few hours.
Our electoral "sections" are around 1k eligible voters each, 6 people counting by hand, some vote contestation and whatnot, unless something exceptional happens you should be done in 5-6 hours max, very often 3-4 hours.
And of course it's utterly insane to have mail votes to begin with, but if you want to have them, at the very very least mandate it to be sent early enough and only count votes that arrived by election day (or better yet, an earlier cutoff date), and if that is the case it shouldn't add any time to the counting at all (which is what we do for italians voting from outside the country).
Again we are talking Italy which is kinda third-world level of inefficiency in some places. If we can do this every first world country should be able to do the same or better
There were something like 25 different items I voted on in this election. You are comparing that to an election where 2 things are voted on. Also seemingly you guys have a national system, we have 50 different systems of voting lol
We can be voting for more than one thing as well, but yes it there are more items to count, get more people to do the counting? it's 100% feasible and not doing it is a choice, and imho it's a terrible choice.
Those are deliberate choices. Which btw is why some states count very quickly in the USA, so those that don't, don't as a political choice.
Okay, let's review. Here's the first part.
I'm never sure why people think the campaigns have secret, accurate insider polls...
To most people that would imply that you're doubtful that these polls exist. But you did add the word "accurate" and added this
So perhaps you do realize they have internal polls, but that they do a poor job of knowing what's going on? I don't know, maybe you just think they are all incompetent. What I do know is that you fail miserably in advancing discussion with your oh so witty one liners. Try to be better.
There were something like 25 different items I voted on in this election. You are comparing that to an election where 2 things are voted on. Also seemingly you guys have a national system, we have 50 different systems of voting lol
It's a huge difference. But nuance is too difficult for some to grasp.
Okay, let's review. Here's the first part.To most people that would imply that you're doubtful that these polls exist. But you did add the word "accurate" and added thisSo perhaps you do realize they have internal polls, but that they do a poor job of knowing what's going on? I don't know, maybe you just think they are all incompetent.
The point isn't that they are notably incompetent. The point is that there is no reason to believe that internal polling is much more accurate than the polling to which you have access.
We can be voting for more than one thing as well, but yes it there are more items to count, get more people to do the counting? it's 100% feasible and not doing it is a choice, and imho it's a terrible choice.
Those are deliberate choices. Which btw is why some states count very quickly in the USA, so those that don't, don't as a political choice.
Let’s say I grant all this to you. Do you think that not having the results on election day means there is vote rigging?
I agree that 1a-2a enthusiasts, culture war rightwing people and so on, being already politically motivated, won't be undecided either.
But low info/propensity undecided tend to care about the economy/inflation imho, and most polls indicate that for whatever reason, indipendents believe Trump to be better about that than Harris
I don't know if you are correct, but at least this is a viable theory.
The point isn't that they are notably incompetent. The point is that there is no reason to believe that internal polling is much more accurate than the polling to which you have access.
I don't agree with this at all. I believe the clearest reason is motivation. There is much more motivation to be accurate for internal polling. Media polls have external motivating factors like generating interest, biased workers, resources, etc. Internal polling must be accurate or it is useless and can devote a lot more resources.
According to The Associated Press, which is another accredited pollster: “Trump has lost what had been an advantage on the economy, which many voters say is the most important issue this election season.”
When voters were asked by the AP whom they trust on key issues, Harris polled +12 on middle class taxes, +5 on housing costs, +2 on jobs and employment. She also polled +24 on abortion, a key issue that the Democrats have tied to economic freedom for women and families.
Trump led by two points on the cost of groceries and gas, and five points on tariffs.
Let’s say I grant all this to you. Do you think that not having the results on election day means there is vote rigging?
Not necessarily but coupled with massive use of mail votes, the insanity of electronic vote, and not requiring an ID to vote it certainly helps giving that impression to many, or at least opening up the question, which shouldn't even arise.
Every vote should be counted by hand, seen by the eyes of a republican and a democratic representative + public officials, on paper, with ID, to avoid all doubts.
And of course all those counting proceedings should get video recorded.
I don't agree with this at all. I believe the clearest reason is motivation. There is much more motivation to be accurate for internal polling. Media polls have external motivating factors like generating interest, biased workers, resources, etc. Internal polling must be accurate or it is useless and can devote a lot more resources.
Credible , high quality public pollsters have motivation for reputational reasons.
But internal polling can be better just because they could spend more per poll especially these days
Okay, let's review. Here's the first part.To most people that would imply that you're doubtful that these polls exist. But you did add the word "accurate" and added thisSo perhaps you do realize they have internal polls, but that they do a poor job of knowing what's going on? I don't know, maybe you just think they are all incompetent. What I do know is that you fail miserably in advancing discussion with your oh so witty one liners. Try to be better.
Rocco seems to have understood my post perfectly well, maybe you can ask him for help.
The point isn't that they are notably incompetent. The point is that there is no reason to believe that internal polling is much more accurate than the polling to which you have access.
Yeah, it's sort of like pro sports teams and drafts. Maybe they have much, much better info than the public, but you can't point to any obvious evidence of that.
Not necessarily but coupled with massive use of mail votes, the insanity of electronic vote, and not requiring an ID to vote it certainly helps giving that impression to many, or at least opening up the question, which shouldn't even arise.
Every vote should be counted by hand, seen by the eyes of a republican and a democratic representative + public officials, on paper, with ID, to avoid all doubts.
And of course all those counting proceedings should get video recorded.
What’s wrong with electronic ballots? As long as they are coupled with a receipt and random machine audits I don’t see the problem. Also have Republicans ever proposed a standalone bill for free national voter ID? I agree that we should have one but it seems like they only propose it as a way to circumvent poll taxes.
By the way pretty sure that last part already happens?
And has there ever been any more than a handful of voter fraud cases each year?
Rocco seems to have understood my post perfectly well, maybe you can ask him for help.
Rocco is wrong as well. This post explains why.
I don't agree with this at all. I believe the clearest reason is motivation. There is much more motivation to be accurate for internal polling. Media polls have external motivating factors like generating interest, biased workers, resources, etc. Internal polling must be accurate or it is useless and can devote a lot more resources.
Most of the polls right now that go into these aggregations are low quality internet polls or from biased pollsters. Not reliable.
But maybe you think that Trump's internal polls are just him asking for a show of hands at his rallies? (That's supposed to be a joke, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was true.)
