The only actual time requirement is that the votes are tallied up before the next step in the process. As long as you stay within that window, a longer counting process would generally be more thorough—all else remaining the same.
I believe the “smug self-righteousness” you are seeing is in response to outsiders coming in and making something out of a purely aesthetic issue. The entire argument is based on how some people might feel, not any practical problem. It can make people defensive.
The idea that institutions should change because of conspiracy theorists is a bad one. It is legitimizing them, making them into someone who are worth listening to. It’s something to only do as a last result, if the public at large cares.
It does not seem the Californian public cares. It took a week because determining second place mattered. No candidate was deprived of time to campaign or anything.
Personally, I very much support letting everyone get their vote in on the same day, and not having it be different for those whose votes might take longer to come in. Everyone has one date to remember, and you don’t have less time to vote due to other circumstances.
From there, how ever long it takes is how long it takes.
I’m perfectly happy with the incomplete data we get while the vote is still ongoing. But if people are worried about the appearance of shenanigans, that early information would be what you’d want to stop.
Exactly. I think people are looking at this the wrong way. Trump is complaining about fraud and people are saying “why does it take so long? Is it because of fraud?” But when you look at it the other way around and question Trump’s motivation, it becomes very clear what is going on. Why does Donald Trump want the counting to stop at the time of his choosing? Because he can win every time if he is allowed to say when the remaining votes fall into the fraud category. That is all that is going on. It is just like the one and only law he respects, the statute of limitations. You took too long therefore I win. It’s a child’s argument and I have no idea why anybody dignifies it. Things take time. Can California improve their process for counting votes? Probably, but it’s also probably not that simple.
The problem with making reductio ad absurdum arguments is that sometimes you find yourself arguing absurd things. If you think the rural vs urban abilities or abled vs disabled abilities is comparable to how far you live from a mailbox, this isn’t a conversation worth having.
Your entire argument shows you still don’t even understand the issue. Distance to a mailbox has nothing to do with it. It’s the difference between those with access to a drop box (who can vote on the last day) versus those with only mail access (who must vote a week in advance under your solution).
Perhaps a better solution would be following South Korea’s (and apparently Israel’s) policy of having voting day as a National Holiday.
Require employers to make it a paid holiday and for “essential” business, keep open at least a four hour block open during voting hours so that persons have the time to vote comfortably, and be able to manage some of economic challenges that can be a bar to voting.
After all, lots of people (probably more than ever in the current economy) can’t afford to take several hours unpaid or even burn their PTO to do so.
Some states have legislation requiring employers to approve PTO for employees wishing to vote, but again, there’s generally a lot of pre-planning, loss of wages, or loss of PTO as a trade off.
This would allow higher participation, and faster counting, as the OP requests, but reduce (not eliminate - not much help for self-employed or “essential” staff) the burdens and consequences of our current system.
And hey, if Trump or his cronies want faster voting, they should be happy to subsidize it on the Federal level if they’re not happy with the current process!
Or an even better solution, vote by mail like we already do in forward-thinking states. Why should we have to go backwards because of conspiracy theories?
I was trying NOT to fight the hypothetical of finding “better” ways to vote nationwide while keeping the burden off the actual voters. I for one (living in Colorado) have a fine time with all-by-mail voting, complete with updates on ballots mailed, processed, and counted.
Not all states (exactly as you and @TroutMan mention) are as forward thinking. By offering a federal mandate to facilitate in-person voting, and removing some of the financial burden of doing so, we could improve participation on a national level, AND speed up returns to a degree.
States that DON’T have any protection (24 states by my earlier link) for time off to vote would see a benefit as well.
That’s a fine idea, but it has nothing to do with how fast the votes are counted. Several States with all-mail in voting consistently produce quick results.
So your claim is that other, less “careful”, States which produce results in a much shorter time must make a lot of mistakes in their vote counting? Cite?
But we know that, whether the mail-in voters have to mail their ballots a week early or not, the fraction that will miss their deadline is the same. So why bother with the delay and expense of extending the deadline?
Yes, and almost every other State in this country also manages to count much quicker than California does. But when I pointed that out, someone said that it’s because California is bigger than other States. So I said that many countries larger than California also get their votes counted quickly. And now you’re saying that doesn’t count because they’re other countries. This is like playing whack-a-mole.
You made a purely theoretical argument that not counting votes received after Election Day makes it harder for disabled and/or rural people to vote. But obviously, it doesn’t do so to any significant degree, because the same percentage of people miss the deadline no matter when the deadline is. Just like me having to walk two blocks to the polls, the theoretical difference in access is, for all practical purposes, trivial.
It’s like if the mail took three times as long to get packages delivered in California as it did in any other State and people were saying “Well, that’s how we do it here! We want to be careful and make sure everything gets delivered properly. What’s the problem, as long as it gets there eventually?”
I guess if you take pride in having lower expectations than anyone else, more power to you.
Actually, mail delivery is a good example. There are differing rules for 3rd class versus 1st class mail. 3rd class isn’t time sensitive, so it can be delivered later.
Now explain why voting results are so time sensitive, without using conspiracy theories or impatience as the reason.
I don’t know how the rest of the state works, but I receive my ballot by email, mark it online, and then print it, including a QR code which presumably encodes the whole thing. Upon receipt, it is scanned, and I receive an email informing me of this fact. The longest and least accurate part of that process has to be physically opening the envelope.
If one county can do this, why can’t the whole state?
I apologize. To be clear, “you” in that sentence referred to the people of California, not to TroutMan personally.
And fine, I give up. There is no compelling reason to need election results in less than a couple weeks. California is very smart to realize this, and every other democratic jurisdiction in the world is silly.
No, it’s as if someone came in and started arguing that how people vote needs to change. When asked why, they are told that it’s because conspiracy theorists might think their is fraud. So people ask you for evidence of said fraud, and you can provide none.
Voter IDFaster vote counting is an attempt to fix a problem that doesn’t exist.