US Election

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
Locked
User avatar
lpm
After Pie
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: US Election

Post by lpm » Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:00 pm

The alphabetical order of voting tomorrow.

State / EC votes / Biden cumulative / Trump cumulative / Biden lead

Ala. 9 = 0 / 9 = -9
Alaska 3 = 0 / 12 = -12
Ariz. 11 = 11 / 12 = -1
Ark. 6 = 11 / 18 = -7
Calif. 55 = 66 / 18 = 48
Colo. 9 = 75 / 18 = 57
Conn. 7 = 82 / 18 = 64
Del. 3 = 85 / 18 = 67
Fla. 29 = 85 / 47 = 38
Ga. 16 = 101 / 47 = 54
Hawaii 4 = 105 / 47 = 58
Idaho 4 = 105 / 51 = 54
Ill. 20 = 125 / 51 = 74
Ind. 11 = 125 / 62 = 63
Iowa 6 = 125 / 68 = 57
Kan. 6 = 125 / 74 = 51
Ky. 8 = 125 / 82 = 43
La. 8 = 125 / 90 = 35
Maine 2 = 127 / 90 = 37
ME-1 1 = 128 / 90 = 38
ME-2 1 = 128 / 91 = 37
Md. 10 = 138 / 91 = 47
Mass. 11 = 149 / 91 = 58
Mich. 16 = 165 / 91 = 74
Minn. 10 = 175 / 91 = 84
Miss. 6 = 175 / 97 = 78
Mo. 10 = 175 / 107 = 68
Mont. 3 = 175 / 110 = 65
Neb. 2 = 175 / 112 = 63
NE-1 1 = 175 / 113 = 62
NE-2 1 = 176 / 113 = 63
NE-3 1 = 176 / 114 = 62
Nev. 6 = 182 / 114 = 68
N.C. 15 = 182 / 129 = 53
N.D. 3 = 182 / 132 = 50
N.H. 4 = 186 / 132 = 54
N.J. 14 = 200 / 132 = 68
N.M. 5 = 205 / 132 = 73
N.Y. 29 = 234 / 132 = 102
Ohio 18 = 234 / 150 = 84
Okla. 7 = 234 / 157 = 77
Ore. 7 = 241 / 157 = 84
Pa. 20 = 261 / 157 = 104
R.I. 4 = 265 / 157 = 108
S.C. 9 = 265 / 166 = 99
S.D. 3 = 265 / 169 = 96
Tenn. 11 = 265 / 180 = 85
Texas 38 = 265 / 218 = 47
Utah 6 = 265 / 224 = 41
Vt. 3 = 268 / 224 = 44
Va. 13 = 281 / 224 = 57
Wash. 12 = 293 / 224 = 69
D.C. 3 = 296 / 224 = 72
W.Va. 5 = 296 / 229 = 67
Wis. 10 = 306 / 229 = 77
Wyo. 3 = 306 / 232 = 74
What ever happened to that Trump guy, you know, the one who was president for a bit?

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: US Election

Post by dyqik » Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:05 pm

lpm wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:44 pm
dyqik wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:18 pm
I think there's possibly a technical flaw in that as well - the EC winner is the one who gets the majority of the votes cast, not 270 EVs.
Yes, as I said this is what I think, but the New Yorker thing implied the opposite.

I said above that it would matter whether they'd get to Texas in time. This is wrong.

Because it's done alphabetically, tomorrow Trump takes an immediate lead from Alabama and Alaska, holds it through Arizona and Arkansas, when he's up 18-11. Then he gets hit by California's 55.

Biden remains in the alphabetical lead ever after.

Trump gets a nice run through South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Utah but only enough to haul it back to Biden ahead 265-224. Vermont's 3 and then Virginia's 13 votes takes Biden over 270. (I don't know when DC's 3 get counted, I put them after Washington State).
I expect Texas to be renamed to Aardvarkia sometime today, then.

User avatar
headshot
Snowbonk
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:40 am

Re: US Election

Post by headshot » Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:12 pm

Surely Texas would rename thus:

Image

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: US Election

Post by dyqik » Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:48 pm

dyqik wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:35 pm
New Yorker, not NYTimes article.

In particular, section 15, which lays out the procedure for withdrawing and debating, doesn't use the word "recess", while section 16 specifies that recesses can't be beyond 10am the next morning (Sundays excluded), which doesn't match up to the two hour time limit on debate at all. So it can't be that the withdrawing to debate and vote on disputed votes is a recess, and thus there's no limit on the time for debating and voting.
However, I asked the author of the article about that on Twitter, and she pointed out that section 16 does say that a recess can only be taken if an objection has been raised, which could be interpreted as the debate happening during a recess. I think that's a real stretch though.

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: US Election

Post by dyqik » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:00 pm

It would also raise a major issue - you could stop the count and debates entirely by submitting a huge number of fake electoral vote slates from Arizona, each of which would have to be debated.

User avatar
lpm
After Pie
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: US Election

Post by lpm » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:07 pm

Why doesn't Pelosi orchestrate that? She gets her allies to drag out the Senate/House joint session non-stop with hundreds of envelopes of Arizona EC votes. Neither President or Vice President get chosen by 20 January and she becomes president at noon.

Enough envelopes from enough states and the joint session continues for four years, while she gets on with running the country.
What ever happened to that Trump guy, you know, the one who was president for a bit?

raven
Fuzzable
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 8:58 pm

Re: US Election

Post by raven » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:16 pm

Somebody probably already posted about the Transition Intergrity Project here - they ran war games to see what might happen after this election. (Their report is here.)

Scary how many of their predicitons were right.
The concept of “election night,” is no longer accurate and indeed is dangerous.
We face a period of contestation stretching from the first day a ballot is cast in mid-September until January 20. The winner may not, and we assess likely will not, be known on “election night” as officials count mail-in ballots. This period of uncertainty provides opportunities for an unscrupulous candidate to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the process and to set up an unprecedented assault on the outcome. Campaigns, parties, the press and the public must be educated to adjust expectations starting immediately.
A determined campaign has opportunity to contest the election into January 2021.
We anticipate lawsuits, divergent media narratives, attempts to stop the counting of ballots, and protests drawing people from both sides. President Trump, the incumbent,will very likely use the execu-tive branch to aid his campaign strategy, including through the Department of Justice. We assess that there is a chance the president will attempt to convince legislatures and/or governors to take actions –including illegal actions –to defy the popular vote. Federal laws provide little guidance for how Congress should resolve irregularities when they convene in a Joint Session on January 6, 2021. Of particular concern is how the military would respond in the context of uncertain election results. Here recent evidence offers some reassurance, but it is inconclusive.
The administrative transition process itself may be highly disrupted.
Participants in our exercises of all backgrounds and ideologies believed that Trump would prioritize personal gain and self-protection over ensuring an orderly administrative handoff to his successor. Trump may use pardons to thwart future criminal prosecution, arrange business deals with foreign governments that benefit him financially, attempt to bribe and silence associates, declassify sensitive documents, and attempt to divert federal funds to his own businesses.
These risks can be mitigated; the worst outcomes of the exercises are far from a certainty.

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: US Election

Post by dyqik » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:17 pm

lpm wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:07 pm
Why doesn't Pelosi orchestrate that? She gets her allies to drag out the Senate/House joint session non-stop with hundreds of envelopes of Arizona EC votes. Neither President or Vice President get chosen by 20 January and she becomes president at noon.

Enough envelopes from enough states and the joint session continues for four years, while she gets on with running the country.
The main reason is that the safe harbor provision in the ECA means that the real slates can't be disputed if the electors are certified by a given date, and that no other slate can be considered. Since only Wisconsin missed the safe harbor date, that would be the only state you could do that for pseudo-legitimately.

raven
Fuzzable
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 8:58 pm

Re: US Election

Post by raven » Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:58 pm

That New Yorker article suggests that Trump asked "Raffensperger to announce a fictitious finding of just enough ballots for Trump to win the state".

I've read the transcript of the phone call and, unless I've mistranslated Trump's usual word salad which is entirely possibly, that's not quite what he and his team were asking. Trump starts with a lengthy ramble about groups of ballots they allege they have enough evidence to dispute -- 5,000 odd ballots by dead people here, 4,900 odd from folks who'd left Georgia there, etc etc - and those groups add up to way more than the difference between Biden and Trump. So the gist of the Trump side's argument seems to be that as they think there are enough disputed ballots to flip the result, Raffensperger should be willing to look into all their allegations without them needing to take him to court.

And Trump is absolutely convinced if they looked into it they'd find 11,780 illegal/fraudulent votes they could cast out.

Raffensperger & his team - when they can get a word in edgeways - absolutely dispute those numbers, debunk some of the wilder conspiracy theories Trump is spewing (again), and basically end with 'we'll see you in court'.

I'm pretty sure if Trump ever gets prosecuted based on that call, he'll just argue he genuinely believed there'd been massive voter fraud and was perfectly entitled to ask Raffensperger to investigate it. He didn't threaten him at all./s

Because in his mind, he does genuinely believe he won Georgia. His rallies were so much bigger, he had to have won. Everybody told him he'd won. He can't have lost. It's a complete mystery as to why a republican like Raffensperger won't investigate it, why the investigations they already did didn't find anything. He just can't understand it.

His brain is basically swiss cheese and can't absorb facts that dispute with his preconceived reality. So sad.

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: US Election

Post by dyqik » Tue Jan 05, 2021 5:10 pm

dyqik wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 3:48 pm
dyqik wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:35 pm
New Yorker, not NYTimes article.

In particular, section 15, which lays out the procedure for withdrawing and debating, doesn't use the word "recess", while section 16 specifies that recesses can't be beyond 10am the next morning (Sundays excluded), which doesn't match up to the two hour time limit on debate at all. So it can't be that the withdrawing to debate and vote on disputed votes is a recess, and thus there's no limit on the time for debating and voting.
However, I asked the author of the article about that on Twitter, and she pointed out that section 16 does say that a recess can only be taken if an objection has been raised, which could be interpreted as the debate happening during a recess. I think that's a real stretch though.
She's continuing down that route. However, I can't make that interpretation make sense with section 15, which states that the Senate withdraws to debate the question, while the Speaker of the House puts the question to the House.

FlammableFlower
Catbabel
Posts: 931
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:22 pm

Re: US Election

Post by FlammableFlower » Tue Jan 05, 2021 6:03 pm

raven wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:58 pm
That New Yorker article suggests that Trump asked "Raffensperger to announce a fictitious finding of just enough ballots for Trump to win the state".

I've read the transcript of the phone call and, unless I've mistranslated Trump's usual word salad which is entirely possibly, that's not quite what he and his team were asking. Trump starts with a lengthy ramble about groups of ballots they allege they have enough evidence to dispute -- 5,000 odd ballots by dead people here, 4,900 odd from folks who'd left Georgia there, etc etc - and those groups add up to way more than the difference between Biden and Trump. So the gist of the Trump side's argument seems to be that as they think there are enough disputed ballots to flip the result, Raffensperger should be willing to look into all their allegations without them needing to take him to court.

And Trump is absolutely convinced if they looked into it they'd find 11,780 illegal/fraudulent votes they could cast out.

Raffensperger & his team - when they can get a word in edgeways - absolutely dispute those numbers, debunk some of the wilder conspiracy theories Trump is spewing (again), and basically end with 'we'll see you in court'.

I'm pretty sure if Trump ever gets prosecuted based on that call, he'll just argue he genuinely believed there'd been massive voter fraud and was perfectly entitled to ask Raffensperger to investigate it. He didn't threaten him at all./s

Because in his mind, he does genuinely believe he won Georgia. His rallies were so much bigger, he had to have won. Everybody told him he'd won. He can't have lost. It's a complete mystery as to why a republican like Raffensperger won't investigate it, why the investigations they already did didn't find anything. He just can't understand it.

His brain is basically swiss cheese and can't absorb facts that dispute with his preconceived reality. So sad.
What boggles my mind is that his calculations come up with him winning by one vote. That is somewhat comical, that he can find just enough fraudulent/miscounted votes to tip it to him.

User avatar
lpm
After Pie
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: US Election

Post by lpm » Tue Jan 05, 2021 6:17 pm

I'm not sure there can be any objections to a state's electors in the Senate/House joint session. The wording seems to imply there must be a competing slate of electors submitted (which was certainly the intention of the amendment, which was the result of multiple submissions of slates of electors in a disputed election).

So if a mad Senator objects to Arizona's envelope of electors, will they even break for a two hour debate on Arizona? Doesn't there need to be at least some sort of competing envelope, e.g. one giving Arizona's 11 EC votes to Trump signed by the state's Republican elected dog catcher?

It's not just that no slates have gone uncertified, but alternative slates haven't even been invented?

(I know there are precedents where the Senate and House have split for two hour debates on faithless electors etc, but I'm not convinced there should have been.)
What ever happened to that Trump guy, you know, the one who was president for a bit?

User avatar
lpm
After Pie
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: US Election

Post by lpm » Tue Jan 05, 2021 6:28 pm

Reading again, the legislation was clearly about choosing between two competing slates. But it does implicitly allow for dismissing entirely a state's submission. So they could attempt to toss out each Biden state in turn.

What they definitely can't do is delay counting a state's submission while waiting for an imaginary 10 day commission on fraud.
What ever happened to that Trump guy, you know, the one who was president for a bit?

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: US Election

Post by dyqik » Tue Jan 05, 2021 7:13 pm

lpm wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 6:17 pm
I'm not sure there can be any objections to a state's electors in the Senate/House joint session. The wording seems to imply there must be a competing slate of electors submitted (which was certainly the intention of the amendment, which was the result of multiple submissions of slates of electors in a disputed election).

So if a mad Senator objects to Arizona's envelope of electors, will they even break for a two hour debate on Arizona? Doesn't there need to be at least some sort of competing envelope, e.g. one giving Arizona's 11 EC votes to Trump signed by the state's Republican elected dog catcher?

It's not just that no slates have gone uncertified, but alternative slates haven't even been invented?

(I know there are precedents where the Senate and House have split for two hour debates on faithless electors etc, but I'm not convinced there should have been.)
There is a box-of-frogs submission from Arizona, but it shouldn't be considered because of the safe harbor provisions.

User avatar
lpm
After Pie
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: US Election

Post by lpm » Tue Jan 05, 2021 7:13 pm

Hi Donald,

Sorry, I've had a good look, but I'm all out of ideas. I think you're toast.

Still you never wanted the job anyway. I've heard your Dubai golf course is looking great. Have you sorted out your accomodation? Will see you there next month.

All the best,
Your ever faithful lpm
What ever happened to that Trump guy, you know, the one who was president for a bit?

User avatar
lpm
After Pie
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: US Election

Post by lpm » Tue Jan 05, 2021 7:14 pm

Sorry, ignore that, it was a private email I posted in the wrong place. bl..dy hotmail accounts.
What ever happened to that Trump guy, you know, the one who was president for a bit?

User avatar
shpalman
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3127
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
Location: One step beyond

Re: US Election

Post by shpalman » Tue Jan 05, 2021 7:21 pm

molto tricky

User avatar
Brightonian
Snowbonk
Posts: 547
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:16 pm
Location: Usually UK, often France and Ireland

Re: US Election

Post by Brightonian » Tue Jan 05, 2021 10:19 pm

I was expecting the exit polls about 18 minutes ago. Where are they???

Edit: they've just shown 39% R, 36% D, 25% Ind.

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: US Election

Post by dyqik » Tue Jan 05, 2021 10:22 pm

Brightonian wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 10:19 pm
I was expecting the exit polls about 18 minutes ago. Where are they???

Edit: they've just shown 39% R, 36% D, 25% Ind.
Er, there's only R and D on the ballot.

I guess this is voter registration/identity rather than vote. In any case, the early vote was massive again, so exit polls aren't particularly useful.

User avatar
Brightonian
Snowbonk
Posts: 547
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:16 pm
Location: Usually UK, often France and Ireland

Re: US Election

Post by Brightonian » Tue Jan 05, 2021 10:25 pm

dyqik wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 10:22 pm
Brightonian wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 10:19 pm
I was expecting the exit polls about 18 minutes ago. Where are they???

Edit: they've just shown 39% R, 36% D, 25% Ind.
Er, there's only R and D on the ballot.

I guess this is voter registration/identity rather than vote. In any case, the early vote was massive again, so exit polls aren't particularly useful.
Yes, "party affiliation" they say. So they're not actually asking people who they actually voted for???

User avatar
lpm
After Pie
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: US Election

Post by lpm » Tue Jan 05, 2021 11:08 pm

Polls still open surely? 7pm Georgia time, midnight Plague Island time?
What ever happened to that Trump guy, you know, the one who was president for a bit?

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: US Election

Post by dyqik » Tue Jan 05, 2021 11:20 pm

lpm wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 11:08 pm
Polls still open surely? 7pm Georgia time, midnight Plague Island time?
Yeah

User avatar
sTeamTraen
Dorkwood
Posts: 1499
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:24 pm
Location: Palma de Mallorca, Spain

Re: US Election

Post by sTeamTraen » Wed Jan 06, 2021 12:57 am

Brightonian wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 10:25 pm
dyqik wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 10:22 pm
Brightonian wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 10:19 pm
I was expecting the exit polls about 18 minutes ago. Where are they???

Edit: they've just shown 39% R, 36% D, 25% Ind.
Er, there's only R and D on the ballot.

I guess this is voter registration/identity rather than vote. In any case, the early vote was massive again, so exit polls aren't particularly useful.
Yes, "party affiliation" they say. So they're not actually asking people who they actually voted for???
That does seem like a fairly basic question to ask at an exit poll. But it seems that it's one of the last questions they ask. See for example the November 2020 exit poll, where as far as I can tell, to work out how many people voted for Trump or Biden you have to multiply the percentage of people in each response category (to any question, I guess) by the number who voted R or D, and sum the numbers. For example, with "No Matter How You Voted Today, Do You Usually Think Of Yourself As A:" I got 49.76% for Biden and 49.4% for Trump. It all seems unnecessarily complicated, so I presume I'm missing something.
Something something hammer something something nail

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: US Election

Post by dyqik » Wed Jan 06, 2021 2:31 am

The needles continue to do their damage via that evil tool: hope.

Squeak
Snowbonk
Posts: 505
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:27 am

Re: US Election

Post by Squeak » Wed Jan 06, 2021 4:04 am

FlammableFlower wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 6:03 pm
raven wrote:
Tue Jan 05, 2021 4:58 pm
That New Yorker article suggests that Trump asked "Raffensperger to announce a fictitious finding of just enough ballots for Trump to win the state".

I've read the transcript of the phone call and, unless I've mistranslated Trump's usual word salad which is entirely possibly, that's not quite what he and his team were asking. Trump starts with a lengthy ramble about groups of ballots they allege they have enough evidence to dispute -- 5,000 odd ballots by dead people here, 4,900 odd from folks who'd left Georgia there, etc etc - and those groups add up to way more than the difference between Biden and Trump. So the gist of the Trump side's argument seems to be that as they think there are enough disputed ballots to flip the result, Raffensperger should be willing to look into all their allegations without them needing to take him to court.

And Trump is absolutely convinced if they looked into it they'd find 11,780 illegal/fraudulent votes they could cast out.

Raffensperger & his team - when they can get a word in edgeways - absolutely dispute those numbers, debunk some of the wilder conspiracy theories Trump is spewing (again), and basically end with 'we'll see you in court'.

I'm pretty sure if Trump ever gets prosecuted based on that call, he'll just argue he genuinely believed there'd been massive voter fraud and was perfectly entitled to ask Raffensperger to investigate it. He didn't threaten him at all./s

Because in his mind, he does genuinely believe he won Georgia. His rallies were so much bigger, he had to have won. Everybody told him he'd won. He can't have lost. It's a complete mystery as to why a republican like Raffensperger won't investigate it, why the investigations they already did didn't find anything. He just can't understand it.

His brain is basically swiss cheese and can't absorb facts that dispute with his preconceived reality. So sad.
What boggles my mind is that his calculations come up with him winning by one vote. That is somewhat comical, that he can find just enough fraudulent/miscounted votes to tip it to him.
My read of the word salad was that he's confident he would have won if not for 100s of 1000s of miscounted votes and he just needs Raffensperger to find 11,800 of those dodgy votes and count them properly. He doesn't need all the votes "fixed". Just enough to tip him over the line. I'm in the camp of thinking that a prosecutor would struggle to prove mens rea on this one.

I'd also like to see some reporting on how the US legal system copes with Mafia cases where the bosses use indirect language to try to avoid culpability. Does the legal system really get caught out by "will noone rid me if this troublesome priest" type evasion?

Locked