Rdskns2000

Presidential Election:11/3/20 - Union Joe vs Confederate Don

Recommended Posts

The Election Day nightmare scenarios  

 

>>>

If the presidential election is close, chaos is likely to result. There might not even be a declared winner. Here's everything you need to know:

What could go wrong?
The coronavirus pandemic could wreak havoc at the polls, especially if November finds us in the midst of a second wave, as many infectious-disease experts predict. The potential for disaster was made evident in recent primaries: Shortages of workers, caused by fear of the coronavirus, led to shuttered and understaffed polling places, creating logjams that left voters waiting for hours in long lines to cast a ballot. That happened in Maryland, Georgia, Wisconsin, Washington, D.C., and elsewhere — and problems are expected to be far worse in November, when voter turnout will be considerably higher. "We're just going to have a catastrophe," said Michael McDonald, a political science professor at the University of Florida who studies elections.<<<<<<<<<

 

 

I think odds are strong we won't know the winner for a couple of weeks, since it takes forever to count mail-in ballots.  Trump will challenge the validity of any result and I expect full on hell.  If you are old enough to remember 2000, we haven't seen anything yet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

330-208 would be a new view of landslide if you consider how unlikely a lot of these states would ever back a Dem president these days.

 

When Texas likely turns blue in 8 or so years though..I do agree with others that winning a national election will be darn near impossible for the GOP.

Until then, don't forget about Texas' Faithless Electors in the mean time.  Before we saw what a nightmare a Trump presidency would be, there were two of 'em.  What if there were even more this time?

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump trying to suppress the vote in the battleground state of PA:

 

Trump campaign sues Pennsylvania, county election boards over mail-in voting

 


President Trump’s reelection campaign is suing Pennsylvania's secretary of state and 67 county election boards in an effort to change how mail-in ballots are sent and counted. 

 

The federal lawsuit was filed in Pittsburgh on Monday by the Trump campaign, the Republican National Committee, and four Pennsylvania Republican members of Congress: Glen Thompson, Mike Kelly, John Joyce and Guy Reschenthaler. 

 

“To be free and fair, elections must be transparent and verifiable. Yet, Defendants have inexplicably chosen a path that jeopardizes election security and will lead -and has already led - to the disenfranchisement of voters, questions about the accuracy of election results, and ultimately chaos heading into the upcoming November 3, 2020 General Election,” the lawsuit reads. 

 

The suit claims the issues are a “direct result” of Pennsylvania’s “hazardous hurried, and illegal implementation of unmonitored mail-in voting” that the Trump campaign and Republicans claim can lead to fraud and “chaos.” 

 

A spokesperson for Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar, a Democrat, said the department will not comment on pending litigation.

 

Pennsylvania passed a law last year that expanded mail-in ballot voting options to allow anyone to vote by mail without providing a reason.

 

Click on the link for the full article

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Out of curiously what would be a legitimate argument against mail-in ballot?

 

is there some language in the constitution or something that could actually be used (even if horridly misconstrued) that would at least have some level of legitimacy?

 

(excluding process and fraud arguments. I mean something that has a little meat to it. Cause they all seem like obvious facades )

Edited by tshile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight: our military deployed around the world for decades, have voted by mail (I'm assuming). Sonehow now voting by mail is prone to illegalities that can't & won't be identified? And it doesnt work? 

I'm really starting to hate a lot of people. Like really ****ing hate. 

Serenity now...Serenity  now...

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, EmirOfShmo said:

So let me get this straight: our military deployed around the world for decades, have voted by mail (I'm assuming). Sonehow now voting by mail is prone to illegalities that can't & won't be identified? And it doesnt work? 

I'm really starting to hate a lot of people. Like really ****ing hate. 

Serenity now...Serenity  now...

 

Calgon, take me away!

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, EmirOfShmo said:

So let me get this straight: our military deployed around the world for decades, have voted by mail (I'm assuming). Sonehow now voting by mail is prone to illegalities that can't & won't be identified? And it doesnt work? 

I'm really starting to hate a lot of people. Like really ****ing hate. 

Serenity now...Serenity  now...

 

Welcome :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, EmirOfShmo said:

So let me get this straight: our military deployed around the world for decades, have voted by mail (I'm assuming). Sonehow now voting by mail is prone to illegalities that can't & won't be identified? And it doesnt work? 

I'm really starting to hate a lot of people. Like really ****ing hate. 

Serenity now...Serenity  now...

If you ever reach Insanity Later, make sure you take it out on the right... things.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, tshile said:

Out of curiously what would be a legitimate argument against mail-in ballot?

 

is there some language in the constitution or something that could actually be used (even if horridly misconstrued) that would at least have some level of legitimacy?

 

(excluding process and fraud arguments. I mean something that has a little meat to it. Cause they all seem like obvious facades )

 

I'll bite, I doubt the Founders wanted a preference of vote by mail over vote in person, let alone a system where voting in person was rare or didn't exist.  Even I would have to get used to that, but that's because I'm not military nor live on the west coast.  I would prefer voting in person, even if its early voting. 

 

Its not a grounds to halt that becoming a preference for folks, just right in line with some folks that want a more literal interpretation of what the founders wanted in regards to how we deal with the Constitution, so I expect that at some point.  We can't ask the founders their thoughts on making sure access to democracy is being prioritized over what they felt made the most amount of sense in how to do it 200+ years ago. USPS didn't even exist yet.

 

I'm not convinced they'd agree with having few if any polling places just because today's technology permitted it.  I don't believe they would support nor should we support eliminating polling places because we could all technically mail in out ballots.  We gotta do what we gotta do with this pandemic, but this like a lot of things are going to get re-evaluated, and we should be careful here.  

 

The goal with mail in voting is access to Democracy, so there should be choices in how to vote as well, not just who to vote for.  Putting all the eggs in one basket is asking for it.

Edited by Renegade7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Recent as of April 2020, by Senator from Oregon.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/oregon-has-used-vote-mail-electing-me-1996-those-who-ncna1195646

 

From November 2018 NBC reportage:

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/you-can-t-hack-paper-how-oregon-fights-election-meddling-n930481

 

And as I advocate, if I can legally sell real property completely over the internet, we can cast votes over the internet.

 

 

Edited by LadySkinsFan
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...Extending $600 /w for unemployment will cost Trump the election..."???

 

Come On What GIF by MOODMAN - Find & Share on GIPHY

 

What is with these Bizaro World mf'ers? How..HOW are they running the most powerful government in the world??? I didn't vote for this BS.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No presidential winner on election night? Mail-in ballots could put outcome in doubt for weeks

 

>>>

Kentucky won't have final results of last week's state primary until Tuesday. New York could take twice as long. In Pennsylvania, the state's largest city, Philadelphia, was still tallying mail-in ballots nearly two weeks after its June 2 primary.

The unprecedented volume of mail-in ballots during the coronavirus pandemic has produced hiccups in some state primaries and operated smoothly in others.

But one thing is constant: States have shattered turnout records for primaries because of the deluge of mail-in ballots, forcing election officials to need days, even weeks, to count all the votes.

Fast-forward to the Nov. 3 presidential election, when all 50 states and the District of Columbia will vote the same day. Many states are expected to turn to mass mail-in voting again but this time for a presidential race that will draw significantly greater turnout than primaries.<<<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea is that people making the extra $600 are making more than they were at work, hence they'll stay on unemployment and the jobless numbers will stay high, hurting his re-election.

 

Like a lot of Right Wing economic orthodoxy, it sounds like it makes sense, but there's no evidence it means anything. And there would be an easy workaround anyway- just cap people's benefit at, say, 85% ofd their work income or something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

The idea is that people making the extra $600 are making more than they were at work, hence they'll stay on unemployment and the jobless numbers will stay high, hurting his re-election.

 

Like a lot of Right Wing economic orthodoxy, it sounds like it makes sense, but there's no evidence it means anything. And there would be an easy workaround anyway- just cap people's benefit at, say, 85% ofd their work income or something. 

 

Even with caping, Georgia already put the playbook out on ripping the rug out from under the "but the Coronavirus" reasons for anything when telling folks to get lost. That's what its really about, not having to raise taxes to keep people at home (which we need) and forcing them to go out and catch the virus to survive (which will make this worse).

 

There's overly generous and there's straight heartless, a middle ground doesn't seem to be the default position for the people around him right now, all paid regardless.

 

I'm not buying this stimulus check idea anymore, focus the resources on the folks that are out of working instead of rushing them back into an economy that wasn't ready for them when they come back and likely won't have a spot for them doing what they did when it eventually does.  Whenever that is.

 

If he rushes to send us another letter saying we got a check from him before making sure the unemployment system doesn't collapse, he's gonna have bigger problems then losing the election.

Edited by Renegade7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, this has nothing to do with "but people won't go back to work" and 100% to do with  not having to knock on the door of the donor class and ask them to start contributing more towards the crisis, thus making them mad and possible not voting for Trump.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, EmirOfShmo said:

So let me get this straight: our military deployed around the world for decades, have voted by mail (I'm assuming). Sonehow now voting by mail is prone to illegalities that can't & won't be identified? And it doesnt work? 

I'm really starting to hate a lot of people. Like really ****ing hate. 

Serenity now...Serenity  now...

We can file our taxes by mail, which is as sensitive and complicated a financial document as most American households will ever produce, and leads to actual money being dispersed by the government....  but we can’t handle something as simple I choose candidate A or candidate B by mail?  It’s ridiculous.  
 

The entire point of this is that mail-in ballots circumvent GOP voter suppression efforts.  They didn’t go to all the trouble of losing polling places to make it as hard as possible for minorities to vote, only to be thwarted by the US Post Office.  

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am mostly surprised that mail-in voting isn't a possibility for everyone in some states so far. I'm German but live in Austria, so I have been voting via mail-in for more than a decade now and I was never asked to give a reason. You just request the paperwork and hand it in.

Is there actually any good reason to not provide everyone with this opportunity other than Republicans fearing a bigger voter turnout?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

The idea is that people making the extra $600 are making more than they were at work, hence they'll stay on unemployment

This definitely is happening, I know people doing it. 
 

not sure how wide spread it is and what it means for the election. I imagine having to raise taxes is part of the issue since the right never wants to do that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.