Especially programmers. Obligatory xkcd:
Anyway, this nonsense won’t go away until the EC does. It would be tough to design a system better suited toward hinging the fate of a country on a few close races.
Attempted yesterday, did not work.
Problem is that so many of us think we are victims, wrongly, or, often rightly. Trump embodies victimhood, and a triumph over it, all in one. And if you have that sort of populist candidate, the election will be full of negative drama.
This is true, and is a problem that will lead to more Trumps, left or right:
What are we to make of 26 percent of black men, high school graduate or no diploma, having voted for Trump? It seems to be bigger than left-right.
If the Interstate Compact gets 270 votes, they can set the table for deals. If someone decides to fuck around like not releasing their vote totals, the IC can absolutely choose to ignore their voters. Voters in that state might want to elect different state legislators in that case.
I have a sneaking suspicion that we may find out about some hacking or other manipulation of the voting systems before it’s all said and done. It would explain the wild departure from polls and the nonsensical shifts in demographic breakouts. With that in mind, we need to pass some laws that harden the election mechanics. I don’t like the idea of having a uniform, federalized voting method but I do think that we need to establish a few baseline security laws that every system must meet in order to be certified as legal.
- Paper ballot backup
- Air-gapped voting and counting machines
- Tight voting and counting machine certification processes pre- and post- election
- Inaccessible ports which will prevent tampering
- Mandatory manual audits of random precincts
- Universal automatic voter registration
- Minimum standards for polling locations per population and maximum allowable wait times
- Online vote tracking for every ballot
There’s a bunch of other things like the Electoral College but I’d start at basic security which would ensure that we have high-confidence in the numbers, whatever they are.
That is BS, because Lucy and the football.
See the compact isnt legally binding so some state just decides “Nope sorry, ha ha ha, gonna vote Repub! Sucker!” and what you gonna do?
Unfortunately, we have learned just how much of a house of cards our “good faith” political systems really are, so yeah- I don’t know how much pull the compact would have.
Biden is, as of today, winning. It’s possible he may lose in the end but right now he’s winning and may be close to clinching victory. However, that wouldn’t really matter for the point here. We’d still be waiting for the final vote totals because we wouldn’t know who won until those are in anyway. Yes, Biden has a solid lead right now - but it’s definitely not a commanding one and Trump could conceivably claw back a popular vote edge.
I, personally, would find it hilarious is Trump did win the popular vote but lost the electoral vote. I’m not saying it’s likely, just that it’s possible and one can’t declare a Biden victory simply because it’s convenient for you with the reported votes at this particular moment. I wouldn’t tolerate Trump trying that nonsense, nor the actual nonsense he has been doing. Depending on whom you ask, there are six states outstanding and four of them lean Trump. That’s probably not enough to close the popular vote gap, but it’s well within the bounds of possibility.
this is interesting
As of now, joining the NPVIC is meaningless.
I encourage you to read this page of myths about the Interstate Compact. It may assuage some of your doubts. For example, the compact comprises a legally-binding contract between states with specific rules and timelines for withdrawals; a state law that violates this contract by withdrawing in a fashion forbidden by the contract would be unconstitutional. But I encourage you to read it yourself.
The main problem with the Interstate Compact is in getting Republican legislatures to agree to it. Given the fact that no Republican has entered the White House with the national popular vote since 1988, they’re understandably leery. But that’s going to be a problem with nearly any voting reform measure that counts more votes and gets a government that more accurately represents the will of the people.
There’s a lot of merit in this. We were all told umpteem times that early voting favoured Biden, and that these early votes would be counted last, so it would like Trump was winning when the first results started being reported but that would be skewed data that we, being clever, should ignore. Despite all knowing this, we all saw the early results and acted like we thought Trump was winning. And when I say “we” here I do mean almost all of us, me included, but I especially mean the media. Of course they’re going to run with a headline about Trump winning, and breathlessly ask each other what this means because they’ve got hours to fill and that’s their job. But it’s all bullshit. It doesn’t matter what a skewed selection of the votes say, it matters what all the votes say. And if the only effect of this reporting of bullshit useless non-news was that we all got elevated heart rates, it wouldn’t really matter. But one effect is that Trump gets to spew his poison about how the race is being stolen because he was ahead and “they” are somehow “finding” votes for Biden. A
Partial count reporting is bullshit. There is no reason partial numbers should be released at all. Count all the votes, do your tabulations and check, then report. Put out accurate, useable info. Everything before that is just nonsense to allow the media to fill air with horserace bullshit, and bad actors like Trump get to piggyback on that to push desparate conspiracy nonsense. Filling the air with horserace bullshit does not have sufficient benefits to outweigh that cost.
Hit post and saw this is in the Guardian:
The president is elected by winning at least 270 electoral college votes, not the outcome of the popular vote. Because there is no centralised federal election system, it has become tradition in the US that “decision desks” at media organisations make a call that states have been won by one candidate or the other when enough votes have been counted. States that are too close to call – such as Nevada and Georgia at the moment – remain in the balance until a network “calls” them.
I mean this is in the nicest possible way, but this tradition is fucking nuts. How about a new tradition where states are called by duly appointed state official on the basis of every single last vote being counted? In what ways would that be worse than the current system?
It’s a tradition in the media, but it means nothing. The states have officers who officially certifies the election results, as you’d expect. The media calling the race is meaningless.
Delays in vote counting, behind closed doors, with the vote not being announced for days, is a standard tactic in pseudo-democracies.
Having party scrutineers and the media present through the vote-counting process is one of the best guarantees of honesty in the vote-count.
What’s the problem with states or counties announcing outcomes as soon as a particular precinct has finished its count? Citizens can follow the count in real time.
It doesn’t mean nothing though, does it? Trump’s lies about the election being stolen gain currency because the media told everyone he was ahead in hte key states. Gore conceded the election on the basis of Florida being called and had to retract that which was a circus no one needed. Everyone’s understanding of the state of the raise is primarily based on what the media “call”. The media should be reporting what the election officials say, not jumping the gun to fill people’s eyeballs with bad info based on their own analysis of partial information. They are not actors in the election, they are observers. Or should be.
What’s the upside of citizens following the count in real time? It doesn’t matter who’s ahead at halfway. It only matters who’s ahead at the end. There is no benefit to citizens in being told partial results and a considerable downside in terms of setting up a false narrative that can be exploited by bad actors:
“With only votes likely to skew towards one candidate counted, that candidate appears to be ahead.”
“What does that mean for the race, John?”
“Well, it’s early days but if this trend continues - and we’ve spent the last three days giving you all the good reasons why it won’t, but let’s ignore that just now - that would mean a devastating result for party B. They had been confident of doing well here, but it looks right now that those dreams are in tatters”
“Let me stop you there John, as we’re now getting reports from precincts where party B was expected to do well, and they are doing well.”
“Well, that’s a very dramatic turnaround. Can they win it back, and when I say back I am very much implying that right now the state has been won by party A simply to falsely inflate teh level of tension around this race and keep people watching.”
It’s all bullshit. And in service of media ratings which are, I would submit, less of a consideration than ensuring that elections are seen to be fair.
Well that’s the fault of the news media and the campaigns. They could report official results coming from the official sources as they arrive and bite their tongues about “calling” it since they are not the people in charge of officializing who won but they keep acting as if they were in the name of the “scoop”(*), propagating the myth that somehow it HAS to be called that same night. Dewey Defeats Truman, that was 72 years ago, and they’re still at it. It was not that long ago that the networks decided to not make result calls based on exit polling but wait for reported results – that was a good decision.
(* Though that does give us lovely images such as Karl Rove freaking out on the Fox newsroom about how Obama getting Ohio couldn’t be right)
The actual election commission in each precinct report their official preliminary tally as they get it done, and having that released to the public in real time was a measure to increase transparency. Hiding the results until you are completely finished would only trigger greater suspicion.
That’s why all the graphics say Projected Winner. The election isn’t over officially until the canvas is done and the results sent to the state’s Secretary of State, and that does not happen for a week or more after election day.
Returning to the OP which ISTM wasn’t about news media coverage, but rather about competent & clean election administration:
To that I’d answer with two adjacent posts I made a month ago on a larger topic of which clean competent elections is just one small piece:
In fact, T***p gained female, Hispanic, Black and LGBTQ voters over 2016. All groups toward whom he has displayed utter contempt. I don’t understand the US at all:
To respond to the OP:
Dump, or make irrelevant, the Electoral College
Redistricting to a national set of standards
Institute ranked choice voting: Ranked-choice voting (RCV) - Ballotpedia