November 8, 2020 8:54 am at 8:54 am #1917717
I have 3 questions (below).
As of right now (Sunday 15:20 Israel time), according to Fox’s website, here is a list of some of the US States voting tallies:
Arizona: Biden with a 0.5% lead, with 10% votes still to count.
Georgia: Biden with a 0.2% lead, with 1% votes still to count.
Nevada: Biden with a 2.8% lead, with 8% votes still to count.
Pennsylvania: Biden with a 0.6% lead, with 1% votes still to count.
Wisconsin: Biden with a 0.7% lead, with 1% votes still to count.
There is clearly still plenty of room in those remaining votes to swing the balance, so why have the news media already called a result?
(And, moreso, apparently many of the remaining votes come from counties that are significantly right-leaning.)
On the flip side:
North Carolina: Trump with a 1.4% lead, with 1% votes still to count.
-Why is NC being depicted as still in limbo when it is now mathematically impossible for that lead to swing the other way?
(Could possibly ask the same of AZ.)
[Side question: Why Nebraska and Maine show both red and blue?]
Why is the Associated Press, (or any news media) the decider of the election result. Surely there must be some more neutral, bipartisan, official body to be in charge of this?November 8, 2020 9:26 am at 9:26 am #1917727
1 & 2. The media is leftist. Their election polls, exit polls and reporting of vote tallying is designed to make the Democrat Party numbers look better than reality.
3. They are not. But they pretend to be. And the left pretends with them. But it is of zero legal effect or meaning.November 8, 2020 9:53 am at 9:53 am #1917746KGNParticipant
The media is corrupt, the Democrats are corrupt, and the political establishment is VERY corrupt.November 8, 2020 10:15 am at 10:15 am #1917771
The ballots to be counted are being predicted to follow the similar percentages as those already counted. X percent Trump, Y percent Biden and there will not be enough Trump votes to change the outcome.
NC in limbo? depends on which news network. Biden does not need NC electoral college votes to win
Nebraska and Maine award Electoral College Votes differently than most states. They award the 2 votes allocated for each member of the senate (all states get these) to the statewide popular vote winner. They allocate the Electoral vote for each member of the US House of Representatives to the popular vote winner in each Congressional district. Thus you can have a split vote Red/Blue in those states, while the other 48 states and DC are winner of statewide popular vote takes all.
The AP does NOT decide the election results, election officials in each state do. However, the AP and other news organizations call or make predictions. They are considered reliable by many, but not all.
It is not over until the votes are certified by authorities in each
h state and the Electoral College votes in December and the Congress meets January 4 to accept that result.
BTW, most litigation to challenge election results fail, recounts by request (not required by state law) are paid for by the candidate requesting the recount.
Also, unlike most countries, the USA does not have uniform voting rules. Each state gets to make its own rules regarding things such as absentee ballots, challenges, etc.
This year, some states sent vote by mail ballots to every registered voter, my state sent absentee ballot applications to every registered voter, but you had to apply for an actual ballot.November 8, 2020 10:15 am at 10:15 am #1917770Reb EliezerParticipant
They check how many votes are still left to be counted and what is the statistical trend in the area. If the state has a majority for one candidate, the number of electoral votes is accumulated for that candidate. The total required is 270 to win which is the majority of the total electors of 538 comprising of the number of the senators and legistlators in Congress. If there is a split of 269, the House of Representatives will decide the result. This is called The Electoral College appointed by legislature of each state. Usually the electors vote in December according to the majority of each state.November 8, 2020 11:44 am at 11:44 am #1917795
For a long time the media have been treating elections like sports events.
Within a few months after this election is definitively over, they’ll get bored and start talking about the 2024 election.November 8, 2020 11:47 am at 11:47 am #1917799akupermaParticipant
The media relied in the past on sophisticated sampling techniques that started breaking down when cell phones started to replace landlines, and collapsed totally due to the high percentage of people using mail-in ballots (which in the past were largely limited to people who couldn’t get to the polling place on the election day).
The US is hardly along among federations of choosing a head of state in a system designed so one region can’t force its candidate on the country over the objection of other reasons. The Democrats are very popular in the urban areas along the coasts, and the Republicans are the leading party in the rest of the country.November 9, 2020 7:26 am at 7:26 am #1918038
Now that the media have been pushing the pretence that Biden has already officially won… maybe this is already obvious to many of you but I just realised, but if the results and numbers do indeed change to give Trump the victory after all the court cases and the dust settles (which is a very likely reality), can you imagine the response on the streets!? There will be anarchy and rioting that will make the Floyd looting like kids play. This could even cause a social, gen-Z type of civil war!
Or am I over-reacting?November 9, 2020 9:49 am at 9:49 am #1918102
TSC: If the thugs riot after Trump wins, the President will send in the National Guard and the U.S. Marines to quell the rioters and arrest the insurrectionists.November 9, 2020 9:49 am at 9:49 am #1918103gadfly1Participant
Shady – no you are correct. That’s why there is no chance of the numbers changing.November 9, 2020 9:50 am at 9:50 am #1918116Avi KParticipant
They look at where the uncounted votes are located. If they are in cities that are overwhelmingly Democratic they will PREDICT a win for the Democrat where it is very close.November 9, 2020 10:29 am at 10:29 am #1918129jackkParticipant
The AP is the gold standard when it comes to presidential elections. They have been doing them for over a 100 years.
They predicted that Trump won at 2:22 AM Wednesday morning in 2016 when it was a major surprise for him to win.
Trump had no problem declaring victory immediately.
He is just a sore loser. Especially, since he knows the personal and financial ramifications that this will have for him.
In short, he is not going to retire into the sunset like all ex-presidents.November 9, 2020 11:05 am at 11:05 am #1918139
As you said, the AP *predicted* a winner (and flipped on that even!?). My point is they don’t have the authority to *declare* a winner. No media organisation should have that right, let alone any biased media org.
Biden’s win is NOT official yet. If a news organisation want to call him the presumptive winner, or projected winner, then go right ahead, but it’s irresponsible at best for a journalist to misportray this.
And as much as the media would like to also portray Trump as a sore loser clutching at straws, that’s not how he’s behaving here at all.
I’m no massive fan of Trump, but the media are really painting this in disgusting and dangerous.November 9, 2020 3:55 pm at 3:55 pm #1918265jackkParticipant
I will repeat. The AP called the election in 2016 at 2:22AM
Was Trump’s nomination official yet? No.
What about in 2012 or 2008 or 2004? No,no,no.
When the votes are counted , the winner is projected and IT IS OVER. That is the way the system works.
Trump is clearly a loser and a very sorry one.
He will stop at nothing to burn down America. Even in his last 2 months.
Stop treating him like a baby with hurt feelings.
He has zero chances of overturning the will of 75,000,000 voters.November 9, 2020 5:00 pm at 5:00 pm #1918292
jackk, you forgot about the election in 2000. It took 37 days to resolve.
Have some patience.November 9, 2020 7:06 pm at 7:06 pm #1918312hujuParticipant
The answer to the opening poster’s initial question is, yes, someone can explain it. That person is CTLawyer. A few others got a few things right as well, but CTLawyer’s answers hit all the nails on their respective heads. The answers that refer to left wing media are not worth the paper they are not printed on.November 9, 2020 7:25 pm at 7:25 pm #1918338
I have been villified in the CR over the years, but I do not let my explanation of the law, Constitution of electoral system be colored by political beliefs.
A month before the election I stated I would not make political posts here, as my opinions would not change any minds and most active members live in states that vote blue anyway.
I keep stressing that each state has it’s own election rules/laws. There is no national rule except the minimum age of 18 to be an elector.
i live in a town of ticket splitters. It went D for President for the first time since 1964. It voted D for Congress, R for State Legislators, both houses. I have been an Assistant registrar of Voters for many years., At the polling places, there is one Asst Registrar from each party, and equal numbers of poll workers, D, R and Unaffiliated. Absentee ballots are opened and counted by equal numbers of D and R, with a U to break ties when the D and R have differing opinions on the ballot.November 9, 2020 7:33 pm at 7:33 pm #1918343
If someone thinks that the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, NPR, PBS, AP, Reuters, etc. are something other than left-wing propaganda outlets, than he has his head deeply buried in the sand.November 9, 2020 7:42 pm at 7:42 pm #1918346Reb EliezerParticipantNovember 10, 2020 12:51 am at 12:51 am #1918384charliehallParticipant
The races were called based on the number of votes still to be counted and from where they were being counted. For example, in Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Nevada, they were mostly from very heavily Democratic areas. I saw the trend in the stats for Pennsylvania and called that state for Biden on Wednesday. This isn’t rocket science.November 10, 2020 3:55 am at 3:55 am #1918421
“I would love, and I would, I would dedicate my life to this country. But I see it as being a mean life.
And I also see that somebody with strong views, and somebody with the kind of views that are may be a little bit unpopular – which may be right, but may be unpopular – wouldn’t necessarily have a chance of getting elected against somebody with no great brain but a big smile. And that’s a sad commentary for the political process.”
-Donald Trump 1980
November 10, 2020 3:56 am at 3:56 am #1918424
Thank you @CTLAWYER for the clear answers.
Re your point:
“The AP does NOT decide the election results, election officials in each state do. However, the AP and other news organizations call or make predictions. They are considered reliable by many, but not all.
… It is not over until the votes are certified by authorities in each state”.
Great, that’s exactly what I was asking about. The media is treating it as though the results are finalised and official. It’s fair to make highly likely *predictions*, but journalistic integrity demands that they refer to the results as “predictions”, or to the candidate-elect as “projected”, “presumptive” or whatnot. It is dangerous to treat the current numbers as final results. (Especially when those results are so razor-edge and being contended legally.)
“The ballots to be counted are being predicted to follow the similar percentages as those already counted”, or as @Reb Eliezer said “check … what is the statistical trend in the area”.
If so, then there should be little difference between calling it when there are 5% of votes left to count and a variance 1%, compared to when 50% of the votes remain uncounted and there is a variance of 10% between candidates. Ok, a statistician can rightly disagree with me on that. But my point is that, being that it is mathematically possible for the result to shift sides, it is irresponsible to not count all the way before calling a result. Especially when there is SO much hanging on these razor edges. (And especially when a change is not just possible but has a fair likelihood, and especially when we see different pockets of ballots have very clear leanings, and don’t just reflect state-wide averages.) And, on that last bracketed point, apparently some of the ballots still uncounted are from counties which are indeed predominantly right-leaning, even if the state is more left.November 10, 2020 7:53 am at 7:53 am #1918455jdf007Participant
The electoral college elects the president and decides the winner. This occurs in late December (Dec 23rd I believe this year).
Look at it this way. In 2016, up until late December, Hollywood and the media were pleading with the electors of the electoral college (made up of 538 people) to not vote with the voters, and go their own way. IE: “faithless electors”.
If the media was not the decider of the election then, what makes them the decider now? Why are they not asking for faithless electors on Biden?
We have a system in place, it’s hundreds of years old. The editors of the AP will come and go. Their argument is what atheism gets you. Self-importance.
Also a UN delegation visited in 2012 to see the American system. They were in shock that you can vote on the honor system. No ID, no nothing. The worlds largest democracy, India, has ID.November 10, 2020 8:09 am at 8:09 am #1918461
There needs to be a winner agreed upon, long before the states certify the votes.
Certification may not take place until December and the changeover (if there is one) takes place in January.
The new President to be needs to receive intelligence briefings, assemble a transition team, investigate and interview candidates for Executive Branch appointments (e.g. Cabinet members). Our law provides for funds for the transition.
Mr. Trump has been refusing to allow intelligence briefings to a man who has held the highest security clearance (as VP), far higher than his kids and in-laws hold. He has ordered transition funds not be released.
The above is instructional and factual.
Now for a BIASED observation:
Why is Trump attempting all these legal challenges?
It continues the cash cow for his heavily in debt campaign. If one reads the disclaimer that is attached to the fundraising emails for Trump’s legal appeals (and I have) it states that funds may be used for payment of campaign debt.
He is continuing to fleece the sheep. If he concedes, he has no way to retire his campaign debt and keep people like his son’s girlfriend on the campaign payroll.
Back to educational and factual analysis> the courts are loathe to invalidate election results and large quantities of ballots. This election did not have only one race on the ballots, in some jurisdictions there were dozens of races on the ballot. Invalidating ballots could cause new elections or lawsuits in all those affected races.November 10, 2020 9:07 am at 9:07 am #1918478
“There needs to be a winner agreed upon, long before the states certify the votes.”
Ok, fair enough. But just call that person the “presumptive” winner. As opposed to portraying his win as a done deal. That’s all. Not doing so runs an unfair risk to the unwary masses.
Regarding your more biased observation:
Hmm, interesting. Where could one find the numbers on how much his campaign has raised to date, and how much it has spent on the campaign. ie How much is the debt you speak of? (I would’ve assumed that they still have a surplus of funds even.)
I can appreciate that “the courts are loathe to invalidate election results”. And especially this time round, on an emotional level too. But (even regardless of the especially seriousness of the circumstances) as a lawyer yourself, I’d image you’d agree that any lawyer, minister of the court or public servant is tremendously bound and obligated to uphold the rule of law, no matter how loathsome or impractical that may be.
(I don’t mean to sound snide or contradictory here, please forgive me if I do.)November 10, 2020 11:34 am at 11:34 am #1918507
The new President to be needs to receive intelligence briefings
It’s an oxymoron to have a reference to Biden and “intelligence” in the same sentence.November 10, 2020 11:45 am at 11:45 am #1918505
“By donating through this page, you agree that your contribution to DJTFP will be allocated as follows (Multicandidate PAC amounts in parentheses):
50% of each contribution, up to a maximum of $2,800 ($5,000), to be designated toward DJTFP’s 2020 general election account for general election debt retirement until such debt is retired. 50% of each contribution, up to a maximum of $2,800 ($5,000), to be designated toward DJTFP’s Recount Account. Any amount that exceeds the applicable contribution limit for 2020 general election debt retirement, including any amounts donated to DJTFP after such debt has been retired, will be designated in full toward DJFTP’s Recount Account, up to a maximum of $2,800 ($5,000).”
This is from the Trump lawsuit fundraising emails I have received,
How much debt, millions, but until the required Federal Election report filing date, we won’t know.
The American Government system is divided into three branches with supposedly equal separated powers. Executive, Legislative, Judicial. If the legislatures of the states certify a winner, the courts will be loathe to set those certifications aside.November 10, 2020 12:30 pm at 12:30 pm #1918532
If the legislatures of the states certify a winner, the courts will be loathe to set those certifications aside.
Are the states free to establish their own rules, or do they have to follow federal rules? For example, if a state chose to decide the winner of an election by flipping a coin, or if they let dogs vote, does the federal government have to accept that?November 10, 2020 12:36 pm at 12:36 pm #1918531
“The American Government system is divided into three branches with supposedly equal separated powers. Executive, Legislative, Judicial. If the legislatures of the states certify a winner, the courts will be loathe to set those certifications aside.”.
I’ve been making this exact point.November 10, 2020 2:37 pm at 2:37 pm #1918569mentsch1Participant
The cash cow will probably continue long past his presidency. From what I can tell no recent president has grown poorer post presidency. There are all those libraries to be built.
Also, he has already stated through various channels that he would run again in 2024. Can’t he start collecting for that now and continue for the next 4 years. I would see a fired up base donating post presidency.November 10, 2020 2:38 pm at 2:38 pm #1918568jdf007Participant
When all is said and done, it would not surprise me if the Supreme Court changes the rules so that the nonsense in Michigan and Georgia will never legally happen again. There are laws in place in western states where this nonsense doesn’t happen. We should not be propping up a system of legal cheating.
Also, Most Presidents were inaugurated in March, not January.
Just because something has been done before doesn’t make it right, moral, or sometimes even in the spirit of the law.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.