Jump to content

US Election 2016: the fall of the American republic


Kalbear

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Is anyone following Slate's VoteCastr? It's designed to provide real-time updates to turnout and projected vote totals.

 

9 minutes ago, Chaldanya said:

Yep - refreshing like my life depends on it.

I'm finding that the numbers don't update very often at all.  Like Clinton's voter turnout in Florida has been at 3.78 million for over an hour.  Are you guys having similar problems?

Also, I feel like this provides more the illusion of information than actual information.  The numbers here are based on the polls, so if you are polling ahead, you are going to be shown to be winning, whereas if you aren't, then you won't.  We already know that the polls say Clinton will win, the question is if the polls are right.  This tool does not answer there.  Therefore, really all I'm interested in is the voter turnout, and for that, it doesn't provide enough context (only the 2012 total) to really know whether turnout is high or not. 

On the whole, I'm pretty underwhelmed by it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We scan our own ballots here too.

Nobody is asking to see ID here.  Unless they can't find your name in the registration / vote log?  But then my district / precinct's location is filled with very privileged voters, as well as generationally long time residents who have traditionally been local political party operatives and who are the poll workers.  Nobody would dare try voter suppression or intimidation around here.

It's not like this everywhere, not all over our state.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

I've noticed the same things, along with Fez's post with many of the problems with it, and Slate had a post that I can't find now listing some of the issues they are having with it.

Issues they were having with what? Do you mean issues with looking at what statistics are accurate and which ones ardent. Cause if so that makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Fez said:

I'd ignore it. Its got some real serious problems with it (e.g. Having a projected vote total for Stein in states where she's not on the ballot and can't be written in; having incorrect voter registration numbers for key counties; and not using representative county data to model entire states). 

Yeah a lot of those seem false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a link to the article about Warren Buffett's get out the vote drive in Nebraska 2 that the Omaha World Herald just posted. 

http://www.omaha.com/news/politics/warren-buffett-cruises-omaha-in-ollie-the-trolley-everybody-will/article_740190ba-a5d9-11e6-887c-b36bc9b4fb2c.html

I think this quote from the above by the Mexican-American man who Buffett was helping get to his polling place on "Ollie the Trolley" sums up why Hispanics are voting in higher numbers this year:

Pedro said he has been a citizen for 20 years but this is the first election he has voted in, compelled by his admiration of Hillary Clinton and objection to Donald Trump.

He referred to rhetoric about Mexican immigrants stealing and bringing drugs into the country.

“I live here for 50 years,” he told reporters. “I live in Texas, Arizona, California and here and never steal nothing from nobody. Never bring drugs.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My totally pessimistic prediction. Clinton loses everything save Nevada. We're up all night trying to figure out who won. 

Rationale behind this is that while Clinton's numbers are pretty good nationally they aren't as good in the states that seem to really matter - Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, Ohio, North Carolina. NC is doing an excellent job of suppressing voting. Florida is as well. Ohio is rust belt bullshit. New Hampshire is I don't even. 

Nevada appears to be pretty set for Clinton though.

I think she'll have an incredibly high lead in the popular vote by comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

I voted this morning. 

I did not have much of an issue with lines or waiting when I went.  My sister had to vote later for she stated there was a line when she tried before work.

Who did ya vote for. It seems like trumps pretty unpopular here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also did election observing for the Democrats last night, mostly looking at people adjudicating ballots. That happens when the ballot has unclear marks, or a write-in, or a mistake which was crossed out. 

About a hundred ballots were observed. The vast majority was for Clinton and largely straight Dem tickets. (not surprising, as this was for King County, which is the bluest part of Washington State). There were quite a few Trump/straight Rep tickets too. The write-ins were amusing - one Sanders, one Ryan, one Romney, one crossing out all the candidates. And there were as many votes for Johnson (2) as there were the Coalition Party, which...I don't even. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I also did election observing for the Democrats last night, mostly looking at people adjudicating ballots. That happens when the ballot has unclear marks, or a write-in, or a mistake which was crossed out. 

About a hundred ballots were observed. The vast majority was for Clinton and largely straight Dem tickets. (not surprising, as this was for King County, which is the bluest part of Washington State). There were quite a few Trump/straight Rep tickets too. The write-ins were amusing - one Sanders, one Ryan, one Romney, one crossing out all the candidates. And there were as many votes for Johnson (2) as there were the Coalition Party, which...I don't even. 

What do you mean that you observed the democrats? Do you mean you looked in the booths of democrats and saw who they voted for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

My totally pessimistic prediction. Clinton loses everything save Nevada. We're up all night trying to figure out who won. 

Rationale behind this is that while Clinton's numbers are pretty good nationally they aren't as good in the states that seem to really matter - Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, Ohio, North Carolina. NC is doing an excellent job of suppressing voting. Florida is as well. Ohio is rust belt bullshit. New Hampshire is I don't even. 

Nevada appears to be pretty set for Clinton though.

I think she'll have an incredibly high lead in the popular vote by comparison.

I just don't think that Clinton's advantage in GOTV could possibly let her down so badly that Trump sweeps every swing state save NV and PA.  Obviously effective voter suppression works, but ineffective voter suppression can backfire and motivate minority voters.  I think there's a good chance it will this year (as I believe it did in 2012).  I'm feeling relatively confident about Florida.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Wrl6199 said:

What do you mean that you observed the democrats? Do you mean you looked in the booths of democrats and saw who they voted for.

No. It means that as a member of the Democratic party, I was given training and then requested to take shifts observing the ballot processing system in Washington, specifically in King County.

This is something that anyone can do in a limited way, by the way - anyone can take a tour of the facility, and you can even watch it live via webcam. What I do is I take shifts and observe the processing of the ballots within the facility. I am responsible for raising any concerns with supervisors for any potential issues or mistakes that need to be caught, as well as to get a better understanding of the overall process.

There is zero way for me to determine who voted for what. The ballots are separated from the person who submitted them. By the time I get to look at them they are just dots. 

Washingon State does not have booths (with the exception of accessible booths at the station). All voting is done by mail. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

No. It means that as a member of the Democratic party, I was given training and then requested to take shifts observing the ballot processing system in Washington, specifically in King County.

This is, by the way, something that anyone can do in a limited way, by the way - anyone can take a tour of the facility, and you can even watch it live via webcam. What I do is I take shifts and observe the processing of the ballots within the facility. I am responsible for raising any concerns with supervisors for any potential issues or mistakes that need to be caught, as well as to get a better understanding of the overall process.

There is zero way for me to determine who voted for what. The ballots are separated from the person who submitted them. By the time I get to look at them they are just dots. 

Washingon State does not have booths (with the exception of accessible booths at the station). All voting is done by mail. 

Ah OK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I just don't think that Clinton's advantage in GOTV could possibly let her down so badly that Trump sweeps every swing state save NV and PA.  Obviously effective voter suppression works, but ineffective voter suppression can backfire and motivate minority voters.  I think there's a good chance it will this year (as I believe it did in 2012).  I'm feeling relatively confident about Florida.

The reason for my pessimism is that the group that traditionally votes the least - white men - are the group that supports Trump the most. And it doesn't take much of a shift in their turnout to majorly affect the election. Furthermore, while the GOTV systems are good they aren't totally foolproof, and we've already seen voter repression and voter malaise affect turnout in North Carolina. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...