Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 346: One Q Over the Coup Coup's Nest

(+) Yeah! (+)

masterplum posted...

You guys are acting like we don't have a judicial branch for a reason. You don't need to slippery slope it, it wouldn't be th first time the law says the government needs to do X and the government doesn't do X so it goes to court. Tie election funding to it the same way the federal government browbeat states into increasing the drinking age to 21.

I read today that other countries were flabbergasted that a country as rich as ours would take this long to count. We aren't hiring enough people to count votes fast enough

I don't see how it's a slippery slope argument to expect that not all states would be successful in counting all ballots within a day and to want to know what the proposed resolution is

---

Reg posted...

Even putting the logistical issues Red mentioned aside, you damn well know that this isn't being proposed in good faith and that this isn't the intent.

Does it matter? With how much money there is in elections we can't force states to count faster?

The only permanent disinfanchisement this causes is ballots received after election day, and that is a highly controversial tiny part of the vote.

---

Wanglicious posted...

if you want to have a proper count in 24 hours you're asking for a ton more bodies.
there's nothing wrong with having preliminary results on election day and dealing with states on a case by case basis. if you want to promote certainty here's an easy answer without changing much:

early votes are counted early.
preliminary results released the night of.
full results released days later.

which is what we currently have in states that didn't run into any major controversies.

Then get a ton more bodies! It would even make it more secure as more people means less chance of a single bad actor commiting fraud

---

masterplum posted...

Does it matter? With how much money there is in elections we can't force states to count faster?

The only permanent disinfanchisement this causes is ballots received after election day, and that is a highly controversial tiny part of the vote.

Several states have laws about when they start counting mail in votes, so ballots received after election day would not be the only issue.

---

masterplum posted...

Does it matter?

Does it matter if its counted within 24 hours? We literally had more people vote than ever and we knew the winner by Friday.

An arbitrary time limit is unbelievably dumb.

---

masterplum posted...

Does it matter? With how much money there is in elections we can't force states to count faster?

Yes it fucking matters because Rick Scott does not want to give more money to states to count votes.

masterplum posted...

Then get a ton more bodies! It would even make it more secure as more people means less chance of a single bad actor commiting fraud

...What. It's the exact opposite. The more people you have, the less oversight there can be per person.

---

Your goal is admirable but you're not looking at it from the right way, plum. We can't have quick results when the states are making it so difficult to vote.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

Several states have laws about when they start counting mail in votes, so ballots received after election day would not be the only issue.

Then they can change those laws

---

Sure, those states can change the law. Doesn't mean the federal government gets to just say hey "hey count in 24 hours or else".

---

masterplum posted...

Then they can change those laws

Why do you want to make it harder for people to vote? What is wrong with properly filled out ballots that were properly sent and postmarked by election day, but did not reach their destination on election day due to no real fault of the voter?

StealThisSheen posted...

...What. It's the exact opposite. The more people you have, the less oversight there can be per person.

You have less concentrated power

---

Basically your argument is "just get more people to count and count faster lol" with no real plan for any issues that arise.

---

masterplum posted...

You have less concentrated power

What power are you even referring to?

---

"Maybe we can teach children faster if we just hire more teachers! Complete high school in one year."

---

Reg posted...

Why do you want to make it harder for people to vote? What is wrong with properly filled out ballots that were properly sent and postmarked by election day, but did not reach their destination on election day due to no real fault of the voter?

This is not making it harder for people to vote at all. There are tons of ways you can make it just as easy. States can send out ballots earlier.

You guys are intermingling the problems of voter suppression with this. Getting the vote counted within 24 hours is completely 100% fine as long as everyone has ample opportunity to vote. Having too little polling locations or ballot boxes is of course bad, but is irrelevant to counting ballots

---

StealThisSheen posted...

Basically your argument is "just get more people to count and count faster lol" with no real plan for any issues that arise.

That's exactly what courts are for if there is a problem. You think they just throw out all not counted votes? That's not how it would work

---

masterplum posted...

ou guys are intermingling the problems of voter suppression with this. Getting the vote counted within 24 hours is completely 100% fine as long as everyone has ample opportunity to vote. Having too little polling locations or ballot boxes is of course bad, but is irrelevant to counting ballots

So lets talk about making voting more accessible rather than the pointless argument of somehow needing to count votes in 24 hours?

---

masterplum posted...

This is not making it harder for people to vote at all. There are tons of ways you can make it just as easy. States can send out ballots earlier.

Then certain people in government make it their mission to sabotage the postal service, so that those ballots are greatly delayed both in reaching the voter and reaching the election officials afterwards.

masterplum posted...

You think they just throw out all not counted votes? That's not how it would work

It absolutely is how it would work if Rick Scott, the guy proposing this, had control over it.

red13n posted...

So lets talk about making voting more accessible rather than the pointless argument of somehow needing to count votes in 24 hours?

These are two completely separate issues.

You don't have to hate everything the other political party suggests

---

Like saying "count votes as fast as you can" seems fine.

"count votes in 24 hours or else" is not.

---

Reg posted...

Then certain people in government make it their mission to sabotage the postal service, so that those ballots are greatly delayed both in reaching the voter and reaching the election officials afterwards.

It absolutely is how it would work if Rick Scott, the guy proposing this, had control over it.

I didn't realize Rick scott was dictator of the world and we couldn't agree with some of the things he says and disagree with others

---

Hi, I've worked in elections. Counting every vote in a state in 24 hours is hilariously impossible even with drastically increased manpower, which would cost millions. Ok thanks.

masterplum posted...

You don't have to hate everything the other political party suggests

How about you recognize I hate things my own party suggests all the time and it is you on a pointlessly partisan tangent here?

---

All digital voting with finger print scanning to validate voting identity. Nationwide fingerprints. Everyone given a government digital location to vote who doesn't have a cell or tablet or pc device with fingerprint scanning technology so that they can vote for themself there.

---

red13n posted...

Like saying "count votes as fast as you can" seems fine.

"count votes in 24 hours or else" is not.

^

masterplum posted...

You don't have to hate everything the other political party suggests

I don't hate this because a Republican is suggesting it. I hate it because it's a blatantly transparent voter suppression move. And you're trying to talk it up entirely because a Republican suggested it in bad faith without any understanding of what the consequences would be. You have no fucking idea what you're talking about, and seem very blatantly uninterested in resolving that.

red13n posted...

Like saying "count votes as fast as you can" seems fine.

"count votes in 24 hours or else" is not.

But right now there is no incentive for states to count quickly. It's absurd how long it takes. Other more liberal democracies have said that.

---

red13n posted...

How about you recognize I hate things my own party suggests all the time and it is you on a pointlessly partisan tangent here?

I didn't vote for a single republican this year what the fuck are you talking about

---

masterplum posted...

That's exactly what courts are for if there is a problem. You think they just throw out all not counted votes? That's not how it would work

So then by your argument the 24 hour limit is literally pointless? Because "okay so 24 hours to count but if you don't finish in time the courts will just fix it don't worry no biggie" is absolutely not how they would approach it. So why even have it?

---

masterplum posted...

I didn't vote for a single republican this year what the fuck are you talking about

i didnt say you did, i said you went on a pointless partisan tangent.

---

We aim for accuracy and accountability in counting votes, not speed.

masterplum posted...

I didn't vote for a single republican this year what the fuck are you talking about

I think his point was that you are a partisan democrat and he is a democrat who criticizes his own party too and doesn't blindly support them. Your post oddly bolstered his comment.

---

masterplum posted...

Other more liberal democracies have said that.

You want to provide sources on this btw?

masterplum posted...

But right now there is no incentive for states to count quickly. It's absurd how long it takes.

again, what is absurd about it? We have 2 and a half months until the transfer of power takes place.

---

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/22/us-election-foreign-observers-438691

---

I like the notion that a 24-hour vote counting blitz would definitely lead to absolutely no uncertainty or endless recounts and lawsuits, it would just solve everything. great idea

masterplum posted...

But right now there is no incentive for states to count quickly. It's absurd how long it takes. Other more liberal democracies have said that.

We pretty much knew who won in like... 3 days? And it took so long because this is literally the first time we've had this much mail-in voting and it's in the middle of a literal pandemic and we had one side purposely trying to sabotage the process the entire way.

You're having an extreme knee jerk reaction to what normally hasn't been a problem.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

So then by your argument the 24 hour limit is literally pointless? Because "okay so 24 hours to count but if you don't finish in time the courts will just fix it don't worry no biggie" is absolutely not how they would approach it. So why even have it?

That's like saying speed limits are pointless because you can argue before a judge that your speeding was justified

---

masterplum posted...

Then get a ton more bodies! It would even make it more secure as more people means less chance of a single bad actor commiting fraud

alright, then we're now talking about the budget.
currently there are still states that do not have 100% in and we're some 3 weeks out.
poll workers get $200 for 18 hour days.
so you need to cram in enough bodies to make a task that takes weeks into a single day.

seriously man, 24 hours is just super not doable for a full count. PA could've totally be avoided if they just counted mail in votes early. hell, i'm not even sure all the military ballots are in within 24h so you'd run the risk of disenfranchising people actually fighting for the country.

---

masterplum posted...

That's like saying speed limits are pointless because you can argue before a judge that your speeding was justified

this type of equivalency is not even a little bit comparable.

---

There was, however, one big difference this time around. Election Day turned into Election Weekand more. Even our most remote constituencies, like the Scottish Islands, declare results within about 24 hours. But those of us gripped by these U.S. elections found ourselves trapped in Groundhog Day: switching on the TV every morning to find that Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Arizona were perpetually too close to call.

---

masterplum posted...

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/22/us-election-foreign-observers-438691

Okay I stopped after like two when both mentioned the bigger issue being what Trump/republicans are doing and not the actual counting itself.

---

masterplum posted...

There was, however, one big difference this time around. Election Day turned into Election Weekand more. Even our most remote constituencies, like the Scottish Islands, declare results within about 24 hours. But those of us gripped by these U.S. elections found ourselves trapped in Groundhog Day: switching on the TV every morning to find that Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Arizona were perpetually too close to call.

Because, you see, the elections were very close

Surprised this topic suddenly forgot that masterplum's modus operandi up until now has been to make one pro-Trump/GoP troll post a week every week for the last several months and then dissappear into the ether.

Kind of shocked he is sticking around for this one.

---

I feel like if Rhode Island can get all the votes in within 24 hours, every state could

---

I have not forgotten and this is probably the last attempt I'm going to make to engage

masterplum posted...

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/22/us-election-foreign-observers-438691

Ok, skimming through this, it's one British dude asking why we can't just throw more bodies at the problem (And a bunch of other people just basically going "yeah it's a shitshow"), which completely ignores the unique idiosyncrasies of this particular election and the fact that throwing more bodies at the problem doesn't necessarily work to begin with, as others have said.

Your source doesn't say what you're claiming it says, just like your other claims do not hold any water.

Damn you dawgs eating your own in this topic.

---

As far as I'm concerned, we should have a god damn election week. You know how close we would get to 100% participation if in-person voting was a week instead of a day? You can see how expanding mail-in balloting alone led to a massive increase in voters.

---

Like, do you seriously think if everything was magically counted in 24 hours, this would be over and all of these lawsuits and recounts and shit wouldn't be happening?

Do you think Trump would have just went "I lost in 24 hours? Oh, okay. I concede"

The US looks dumb as fuck right now because of all that shit, not the count itself.

---