Are Some Of The Rust Belt The Swing States Show Boating?

[ToraToraTora]

It's funny how most of the states are counted, done and dusted and it just so happens that the swing states are going to take a fortnight! There was some official from one state or other on sky news this morning saying that they wont be finished until the 12th because of their "timeline" worryingly she said something about "fixing" the votes though I think that's an Americanism for dealing with the ones that are unclear. Anyway have they set up their election counting laws so they get a lot of time in the limelight?

[ToraToraTora]

Alaska is a foregone conclusion probably already added to Trumps total.

[tomus42]

You do get the sense that they're enjoying the attention. Perhaps when someone crosses the 270 and no-one cares too much about the remaining numbers, they'll magically all appear fairly quickly.

[ToraToraTora]

yes bang on Tomus, BA.

[ToraToraTora]

ich: "What is despotic about counting votes? " - nothing but to the outside world this is going to look like a total shambles.

[jim360]

It's looking like a total shambles because of one person only.

It's also worth pointing out that there are loads of states that still have to count votes. It's just that most of those states are so heavily in favour of Biden or Trump that it doesn't matter, from an Electoral College point of view.

[Jackdaw33]

Don't forget there are also important Congress races to be decided.

[ichkeria]

I agree that it could have been better managed as I said at the start, but it’s sad, without wishing to sound too twee, that the action of trying to manage the lot they’ve been dealt in order to ensure everyone’s vote counts, might be seen as a shambles. I mean, you are probably right that the outside world will look on in amusement, especially such pillars of freedom as Iran, N Korea, Russia and China.
Tough, to be honest.

[ToraToraTora]

jim: //It's looking like a total shambles because of one person only.// - well Trump's not helping but the counting is the main problem and the myriad of state"rules" - can you imagine a UK election if we didn't get the result by the next day?

//It's also worth pointing out that there are loads of states that still have to count votes. It's just that most of those states are so heavily in favour of Biden or Trump that it doesn't matter, from an Electoral College point of view.//" - yes but they are not the focus and thus will barely get a mention.

[ToraToraTora]

They could have devised a machine readable ballot that could read count and check validity all in one go then feed stacks into the machine and it'd be done much quicker.

[ichkeria]

I don't follow your logic Tora.
Of course they won't get any attention.
But that they all have in common is they are counting votes.
I get the "it looks like a shambles" argument" but not the "they're loving the publicity" bit

[jim360]

I think people would cope in the UK if there were a delay in the result, because we'd readily accept that it was close and that the delay was about ensuring the result was delivered correctly, rather than quickly.

[ichkeria]

As far as I know they do have machine readable ballots.
I doubt if any two stares do things the same way though.

[ToraToraTora]

... a couple of days jim, In UK we have the vote on Thursday and I have never know the result not be sorted by Friday evening. One state, said last night, their process means that they won't declare until 12th! Not sure which one it was only on in the background.

[jim360]

The November 12th deadline is partly to allow mail-in ballots, or ballots from overseas citizens.

It also is clearly very relevant that mail-in voting was much bigger this year than in any previous election. Why that might be is anybody's guess, it's a complete mystery to me, but there we are -- inevitably, counting and verifying mail-in ballots is a longer process.

[Jackdaw33]

In the UK the result is known the next day but if that result is inconclusive we may have to wait a few days before we find out who will form the new government, as happened in February 1974 and 2010.

[THECORBYLOON]

Even if there is a majority of Electoral College (EC) votes for one candidate at the moment, that is not the end of it.

The members of the EC have to cast their votes in December but in some States, they are not legally obliged to vote for the winning candidate in their State.

That just adds another level of doubt to the final result.

[Peter Pedant]

// they'll magically all appear fairly quickly.// toam

which is what happened in 2000 - the hanging chad election
it boiled down to 576 in one country that used a voting machine punch out

when the supreme ct said halt

and six months later they said well it wdnt have made any difference
which is kinda what they said at the time - 50 000 votes and 500 wonky, isnt worfa bucket of poss ( Truman 1946)

trump has seized on the supreme ct saying HALT ! and has latched onto - "oh I will get my boys and girls to say that again !"
incredible

[ToraToraTora]

TCL: "The members of the EC have to cast their votes in December but in some States, they are not legally obliged to vote for the winning candidate in their State. " - they are not legally obliged to vote in any way in any state. The college reps for each party are sent depending on who won the state (or the split in Maine/Nebraska) but they do not have to vote with their party, those that do not usually abstain rather than vote for the other side, faithless electors are rare.

[Peter Pedant]

// but in some States, they are not legally obliged to vote for the winning candidate//

erm all I thought
not winning candidate - the candidate they were elected to vote for

and when THAT went to the supreme ct - the ratio decidendi ( whooooooaaa ! long latin word vair) was?

the electors were elected representatives and not delegates

which is being acted out mega in front of us
Trump has always been a delegate of his party and screw the rest
and Biden is already doing the " I am here to heal and rule in everyone's best interests not just my own and the people who elected me" - very presidential

the electoral college turncvoats even have a name
ungrateful electors or something

[Peter Pedant]

// the electors were elected representatives and not delegates//
oops delegates have to do what they were delegated to do
elected reps do what THEY think best in the circs and so it is lawful to vote for someone else