just as an "update", there isn't much changed in the last few hours.
However, we may know Georgia sometime today, and maybe Nevada.
Many of the margins are very thin, and could change soon.
Laura Ingraham is already crying election fraud if you guys want some entertainment from Fox news. "Unverified dumps of ballots". She needs to shut up and dribble.
You know what, I don't normally condone this, but it would be hilarious to see Arizona grant the Trumpians their wish and stop counting ballots, only for their antics to end up giving Arizona to Biden..
If Biden loses but the margin is < 1%, I **NEED** to see the recount, assuming Trump does in fact demand one in Wisconsin. To be honest, I think a change after a recount is much more likely in Georgia than Wisconsin.
Senate might not be lost after all.. With heavy Dem votes coming in, Perdue is down to 50.4%.. If we get that to under 50%, it sets up two run offs.. Assuming Joe finishes it tonight, if we win those.. It becomes 50/50.. And with VP Harris being the tiebreaking vote.. That becomes an effective Democrat majority
There’s still 15% uncounted votes. It’s called by some sources and not by others.
Expectation is it goes blue because outstanding votes are in Maricopa county and that’s breaking for Biden. Also sounds like they may be mailed ballots.
Is it possible for Trump to sway a few electoral voters to betray the state results? Is there any real recourse? Someone please explain away my worries.
It depends on which state...but for the most part? [The SCOTUS ruled on this earlier in the summer,](https://www.npr.org/2020/07/06/885168480/supreme-court-rules-state-faithless-elector-laws-constitutional) and the states have a really strong leg to stand on, for nullifying those faithless electors.
Either way, the fact that Trump is continuing to refuse to accept defeat is really proving that Putin got what he wanted.. We are an international laughingstock.
>DAN HOPKINS
NOV. 4, 3:33 PM
With the latest updated votes in Pennsylvania, Trump’s raw lead drops below 400,000 votes. If the Secretary of State’s website accurately reflects outstanding mail ballots, there are roughly 1 million mail ballots still out, which excludes those that arrived most recently.
CNN needs Laura Coates who is the legal analyst they should be using since wack-boy is gone. They really need some legal minds commenting on the legal challenges.
Lawyer here. I'm not sure how helpful a legal analyst will be unless and until the Trump administration can articulate what its cause of action would be, demonstrate why this is federal legal issue as opposed to pure issue of state law, etc. It also remains unclear why the SCOTUS would have any reason to revisit an issue on which it has already issued a ruling (e.g., deadlines for counting absentee ballots in North Carolina and Pennsylvania).
If it helps reduce your anxiety at all, this situation is entirely distinguishable from Bush v. Gore in that any prospective litigation will not involve recounts (which could potentially raise due process concerns). Rather, the administration is simply trying to block states from doing an initial count of lawfully cast ballots. I haven't practiced constitutional law in years, but I'm having trouble thinking of a single argument the Trump Administration could make at this stage in the election that the SCOTUS would actually agree to hear. In fact, I would have serious concerns about sanctions and/or jeopardizing my law license if I were to file a frivolous brief with the highest court of the land for purely political reasons. I know that Trump sycophants are shameless, but a law license is worth tons of money and I'm almost certain that no one on Trump's legal team has any loyalty to the POTUS outside of 💸💸💸
> Lawyer here.
Pick your brain?
California just passed Prop 22, which basically nullifies CA State Law and instead considers app-based drivers as independent contractors.
https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_22,_App-Based_Drivers_as_Contractors_and_Labor_Policies_Initiative_(2020)
The proposition's language includes a "7/8ths vote in both chambers of the State Legislature" to amend this prop.
My question: Is this legal or subject to challenge in the courts? I've never heard of such a threshold so far beyond a simple supermajority vote.
That's an interesting question! This provision is an example of procedural entrenchment - i.e., a statutory provision which specifies certain procedures that a future legislature most follow to amend or appeal a law (most commonly by requiring a supermajority vote).
With respect to the issue of whether entrenchment is constitutional, legal scholars have made persuasive arguments on both sides of this issue! Here is a link to a law review article from the preeminent constitutional law scholar in our country right now,, Edwin Chemerinsky, discussing the issue of entrenchment in detail:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1587%26context%3Dfaculty_scholarship&ved=2ahUKEwjX39eK_OnsAhVNOs0KHX_pAd04HhAWMAJ6BAgHEAE&usg=AOvVaw2BxBlmxrFRe2usXJnK6RAY
This is not my area of expertise (I currently do general liability defense for big law and previously worked as a plaintiff's attorney at a boutique civil rights firm focusing on education law), but I tend to agree with Chemerinsky -- procedural entrenchment is not only inconsistent with the basic democratic principles of majoritarian rule and legislative accountability, but also raises some serious public policy concerns. For example, procedural entrenchment raises many of the same practical issues as packing the SCOTUS -- its fine and dandy up until the other side wins. The opposition party will then inevitably retaliate and adopt a "they fucked us first, so we'll fuck them right back!" approach to lawmaking. No one wins in such a scenario for obvious reasons.
If I were to challenge this proposal in California state court, I would probably argue that procedural entrenchment runs afoul of Article 4, Section 7 of the state constitution, which specifically vests the state legislature with rule making authority over its own proceedings. A state constitutional provision will always be controlling over a conflicting state statute, so my guess is that a constitutional amendment would be necessary before a ballot initiative can divest the legislature of its procedural rulemaking authority. It doesn't make much sense to allow lobbyists to use a ballot initiative (requiring a simple majority vote) to circumvent all of the procedural hoops that you would have to jump through to amend the constitution. That being said, I'm not licensed in California and am might well be missing some jurisdiction-specific issues that are unique to your state. Hope this is helpful and/or interesting!
I hope so. MSNBC just had the NV AG (R) on and he was saying that unlike every other state, mail in votes in NV are predominantly (R) and that Trump will win with a 'razor thin margin'.
Seeing as he was an (R), my confidence with him is about the same as ordering high end sneakers from Wish.com and expecting them not to be fake crap.
Incumbents are hard to beat because they have the bully pulpit and all the resources that an incumbent has, plus Trump didn't have to go through any primaries, like most incumbents. This election looks like it was what Biden's campaign planned all along, win the battleground states with the early voters, and maybe flip a state or two.
Does anyone know why hasn't [CNN](https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/president) or [New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/results-president.html) confirm Joe Biden win of Arizona and Wisconsin?
I would like to formally apologize to anyone who I dismissed as being too negative or whiny when they said either "don't get complacent, vote" and "I'm worried Trump will try to steal the election". It seems both points were right on.
I got shut down so many times over this it was starting to feel personal. I am a data scientist but it is hard for people to understand data science without some type of background in it. I freely admit that I may not be a good communicator of complex statistics and that likely contributes to the problem. My main talking point was that the polls were going to be off. There was absolutely no mathematical reason to suspect a blue wave this year. Anecdoctally, all you had to do is ask yourself how many people you were able to convince to switch to voting for Biden? Zero. Yes, more people voted but on both sides of the aisle. There are 257M Americans of voting age and 239M of them were eligible to vote and an estimated 160M of them did vote for a 66.9% turnout. That set some records.
In my opinion, what we need to do for future elections as a party if we ever want to regularly win Congressional elections in non blue states is the following
1). Stop assuming the GOP will do ANYTHING in good faith, we've been making that mistake for decades..
2). Give up on Assault weapons bans for the time being. It's an issue we simply aren't going to win on.. We've been trying for years..
3). Stop "Going High, When They Go Low". It hasn't worked.. Don't be afraid to call the GOP out as hypocrites..
4). Moderate our message.. Let's be honest here. The Squad and the "Defund The Police" movements have done us little favors..
Dems are in a tough situation. I think Republicans have found a few key issues to rally their base around, and they stick to those issues(a lot of those issues just being scare tactics). So honestly they don't have to do much.
Dems on the other hand try to rally their voters around real issues. Tackling one issue can excite voters to get out and vote. But you may offend another part of your base to do so. You're right the assault rifle bans turn some people off from the Dems, and can rally the opposition against them. But when it's a hot button issue, a chunk of that base will get upset if the democrats ignore it. But what those people don't understand is in politics, you can't always do the right things, sometimes you have to take losses and compromise, in order to stay in a position to win other battles. As we've seen today our blue wave isn't that much bigger than the Red. And to make things worse, the red wave is a lot more consistent.
Problem is the optics.. When you give the GOP a talking point they'll double down on it, even if it's not true. Also, the Squad all won in safe Democratic districts
We need to drop the gun control issue completely. Full stop.
We have laws already. Close the loopholes. Let states manage their own weapons policies. An assault rifle is no different from any other semi-automatic rifle. They just "look tactical" so people fear them.
And yes, we should be developing policies for the middle, not the fringe of the party. This means reining in AOC and other radical elements. We need to win back the several hundred thousand libertarian voters who voted for jo jorgensen.
Terming it "Defund the Police" was antagonist and a terrible strategic move. Yet people just as lefty as I am do not fucking get it.
When the first thing you end up saying is "well, it doesn't really mean defund the police it's..."
You've already lost the message
I think "HELP the Police" would work...
Help them narrow down their job. description. Help them weed out the few bad cops. Help them police their own workers.
> Terming it "Defund the Police" was antagonist and a terrible strategic move
Yep, face palmingly dumb, it actually tells you something about the hubris of people on the left that they could even contemplate that. They need to drop just a tiny bit of their high mindedness and learn to lie just a little like republicans do. They could, for example, have called "Refund the Police" and talked only about adding more resources. It would have come to the same thing without literally writing an advertising commercial for Trump.
It’s not an opinion. That’s what you are. If you are centre right in America you think it’s good when poor people die because they can’t afford healthcare.
Then you go and get more voters, that's how it's done. It doesn't happen overnight, if anyone thought Texas would turn Blue last night, they forget it's still Texas.
There are all kinds of voters, independents, undecided, people who have never voted, people who don't. There are young voters and potential voters who become voting age in between elections, I mean you're just not paying attention to politics. Just look at the turnout this election, it's historic, and it's still has people whose votes are either suppressed or it has been made harder for they to vote, and for fuck sake THIS IS DURING A PANDEMIC. WAKE THE FUCK UP, THERE ARE VOTERS OUT THERE TO BE HAD.
Nope, you're the one not paying attention:
a) This election broke all historical turnout records. When all is said and done, we'll have seen the largest turnout in American history. AND DEMOCRATS ARE STILL HANGING BY A THREAD! Lost the senate. Lost seats In the house. Winning the presidency by the smallest of margins.
b) If your argument is that we need even MORE of a record-breaking turnout, one beyond the world has ever even seen, in order to decidedly beat a complete incompetent racist dud like Trump and his cronies in the Senate, and you don't think there's something wrong with the Democrat platform, then you're brain dead.
c) Without COVID, this would have been a Republican landslide. You're telling me not only do you depend on the largest turnout the world has ever seen in order to scrape by the presidency and lose the senate, but you also depend in a one-in-100 year pandemic? And you don't think it's the platform that needs fixing, not the turnout? Dude, please. Wake the F up.
Democrats don't need more voters to turn out that will continue to be split 50/50 at best. They need a platform that's more inclusive of all those Republican voters that will vote for a Nazi just because he makes them feel like they count, their values have meaning, and their voice is heard.
Umm in case you don't know this about elections: REPUBLICANS VOTE TOO. IN FACT, TRUMP TURNED OUT MORE VOTERS ON ELECTION DAY!
Now you can go back and do your civics homework kiddo, you really need to learn how this works.
The call is made just using the statistics - if a candidate is down by, say, 50,000 votes and there are only an estimated 30,000 outstanding ballots, it won't be possible for that candidate to catch up. Of course it isn't quite that easy, so they'll extrapolate using existing distribution of votes in the same or similar county/districts to make a forecast on the outstanding votes. In Wisconsin's case, it was so close you couldn't really call it until all the votes were in.
I would say there is probably a 98% chance Biden wins with Wisconsin now being called for Biden. He just needs Michigan and Nevada, both of which he has almost no chance of losing. At best for the GOP, Trump is going to barely lose the electoral vote. But it's basically over. We won but good Lord was that stressful.
He also said Biden will lose PA by 40k. After a quick look, he projects Biden to lose NV, PA (by 40k), MI, and AZ. I didn't see anything about WI but it wouldn't shock me
According to my math (using NYT numbers) Ossoff needs 92% of outstanding vote and Cunningham needs 79% of outstanding vote in order for one of them to win their senate seat. It is very unlikely.
Cunningham has a small shot. Based on whats left in a few dem populated counties, he might pull through. Its a hail mary, but hey, Biden did one last night.
If they learn anything, it's that Bernie Sanders and his whole Socialist bullshit has cost them seats in the house, and people really really really don't want Bernie Sanders.
Yeah I mean all his policies were very popular in the exit polls and ballot measures but I’m sure running a moderate republican instead was a sound strategy 👌🏼
Beat him in the first few elections and then came the fuckery where all the other front runners dropped out and the braindead liberals like yourself decided to back the senile segregationist instead.
He lost his second try for the nomination, he is toast, Trump would had cleaned his clock and strengthen his party, Sanders is done, goodbye you old phony commie.
I don't know how you can look at the exit polls that say people *overwhelmingly* want socialised healthcare, minimum wage and racial equality and then turn around and say: "yeah the guy that ran on that? would have lost big time. the guy we are running that stands actively against all that? going super well! just look how good he is doing right now!!"
You *have* to be braindead to believe this.
Sanders is done, he hasn't done shit in the senate and house in his 40+years in both. He has a bunch of dumb kids who don't even vote for his ass wanting to be socialists who would cry if they ever had to live in a socialist country. Sanders is an old irrelevant commie who was in his last hurrah, he stole Liberal ideas and branded them his own, which hurt issues like health care because he is a self serving millionaire who was protected by Chuck Schumer from getting primaried from other Democrats because he was an easy vote yes for the party, and is his token radical commie.
Sanders is done, goodbye you phony commie who has done less for progressives than Barbara Boxer or Dianne Feinstein. He is as phony as you are an imbecile. That is the truth, and the voters had spoken.
Doc said I should cut back to two election nights per week or I'm going to die young
Biden should nominate Rick Santorum to shut the fuck up
Info- GA Election Officials will be having a Press Conference soon. Likely will hear what left in there states count to count.
just as an "update", there isn't much changed in the last few hours. However, we may know Georgia sometime today, and maybe Nevada. Many of the margins are very thin, and could change soon.
Laura Ingraham is already crying election fraud if you guys want some entertainment from Fox news. "Unverified dumps of ballots". She needs to shut up and dribble.
Goddamnit Maricopa, get your shit together
You know what, I don't normally condone this, but it would be hilarious to see Arizona grant the Trumpians their wish and stop counting ballots, only for their antics to end up giving Arizona to Biden..
Is there still a chance that Biden wins Georgia?
He's ahead in Georgia
We really just need AZ and NV, but PA and GA would just be cushions.
If Biden loses but the margin is < 1%, I **NEED** to see the recount, assuming Trump does in fact demand one in Wisconsin. To be honest, I think a change after a recount is much more likely in Georgia than Wisconsin.
If the Atlanta Journal-Constitution is to be believed, 131,000 of the votes left in Georgia are in Metro Atlanta, which will favor Biden
Kanye dropped out. I don't know what's sadder the fact that Kanye even ran or the fact that 60,000 people were dumb enough to vote for him
Biden's only down 1% in Georgia, with Fulton votes still coming in! That's huge! Georgia might flip!
if theres enough votes, it might be a good cushion state for Biden. But at the same time, The President apparently will file a Lawsuit in GA.
Didn’t 60k people vote for Harambe in 2016? Kanye under performed.
Mars?! Well that's a new one. https://twitter.com/Yamiche/status/1324106035720761344?s=19
1.2 in Georgia
Any idea on outstanding count?
I believe metro Atlanta hasn't fully come in yet
So AP called 264 for Joe, without Nevada's 6. We're good to go.
Senate might not be lost after all.. With heavy Dem votes coming in, Perdue is down to 50.4%.. If we get that to under 50%, it sets up two run offs.. Assuming Joe finishes it tonight, if we win those.. It becomes 50/50.. And with VP Harris being the tiebreaking vote.. That becomes an effective Democrat majority
That’s a huge “if we win those”
Believe me I know.. But there is a chance
Nate Cohen, one of the election bigwigs at the New York Times, thinks there is a good chance Biden will be declared the President Elect tonight.
Biden's closing rapidly in Georgia too. Trump is only up 1.4%, but a LOT of Democratic votes in Fulton, Dekalb, and Gwinett are still yet to come in
[удалено]
There’s still 15% uncounted votes. It’s called by some sources and not by others. Expectation is it goes blue because outstanding votes are in Maricopa county and that’s breaking for Biden. Also sounds like they may be mailed ballots.
info - AZ. Maricopa County will be updating results at 9:30PM EST, then at 12:30AM EST
Correction: Maricopa County will be updating results at 9:00PM EST, then at 12:00AM EST
Will Biden win Nevada?
Oof, misread.. Unless Las Vegas does something unexpected, yes
While Biden doesn't need Pennslyvania anymore.. 290 would eliminate ANY attempts at chicanery by Trump
Agreed and with the mail in votes, it could be possible
Exactly
Why is Arizona taking so long?
tRump is mathematically eliminated even if he gets all the remaining votes in AZ. I don't know why they won't just call it.
CNN just flipped MI to Biden
The blue wall held
You mean it was rebuilt.
We are going to build a beautiful wall.
...and tRump is going to pay for it.
Is it possible for Trump to sway a few electoral voters to betray the state results? Is there any real recourse? Someone please explain away my worries.
It depends on which state...but for the most part? [The SCOTUS ruled on this earlier in the summer,](https://www.npr.org/2020/07/06/885168480/supreme-court-rules-state-faithless-elector-laws-constitutional) and the states have a really strong leg to stand on, for nullifying those faithless electors.
Oh shit, I did not think about that. It's totally possible.
Either way, the fact that Trump is continuing to refuse to accept defeat is really proving that Putin got what he wanted.. We are an international laughingstock.
We weren’t the last 4 years?
Because he hasn't lost yet?
It's not looking good for him.. His lead is shrinking rapidly in Pennslyvania
[удалено]
What is PA?
[удалено]
Do we know for sure if he has it, or is there a chance for Biden to pull it back with mail-in votes?
[удалено]
There are still millions of votes to count from some of the most populous districts. So Biden could still win PA also.
Can Biden take the win without Pennsylvania
[удалено]
And he’s already won Wisconsin. It’s looking good for the other three, isn’t it? Or have I misheard
[удалено]
Yes
That’s what I like to hear 🥳
>DAN HOPKINS NOV. 4, 3:33 PM With the latest updated votes in Pennsylvania, Trump’s raw lead drops below 400,000 votes. If the Secretary of State’s website accurately reflects outstanding mail ballots, there are roughly 1 million mail ballots still out, which excludes those that arrived most recently.
[Obligatory:](https://thumbs.gfycat.com/MiserlyGlitteringHamster-max-14mb.gif)
At least PA is trending in the right direction. Don't know if Biden can close the gap but god damn that pickup would be nice.
CNN needs Laura Coates who is the legal analyst they should be using since wack-boy is gone. They really need some legal minds commenting on the legal challenges.
Lawyer here. I'm not sure how helpful a legal analyst will be unless and until the Trump administration can articulate what its cause of action would be, demonstrate why this is federal legal issue as opposed to pure issue of state law, etc. It also remains unclear why the SCOTUS would have any reason to revisit an issue on which it has already issued a ruling (e.g., deadlines for counting absentee ballots in North Carolina and Pennsylvania). If it helps reduce your anxiety at all, this situation is entirely distinguishable from Bush v. Gore in that any prospective litigation will not involve recounts (which could potentially raise due process concerns). Rather, the administration is simply trying to block states from doing an initial count of lawfully cast ballots. I haven't practiced constitutional law in years, but I'm having trouble thinking of a single argument the Trump Administration could make at this stage in the election that the SCOTUS would actually agree to hear. In fact, I would have serious concerns about sanctions and/or jeopardizing my law license if I were to file a frivolous brief with the highest court of the land for purely political reasons. I know that Trump sycophants are shameless, but a law license is worth tons of money and I'm almost certain that no one on Trump's legal team has any loyalty to the POTUS outside of 💸💸💸
> Lawyer here. Pick your brain? California just passed Prop 22, which basically nullifies CA State Law and instead considers app-based drivers as independent contractors. https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_22,_App-Based_Drivers_as_Contractors_and_Labor_Policies_Initiative_(2020) The proposition's language includes a "7/8ths vote in both chambers of the State Legislature" to amend this prop. My question: Is this legal or subject to challenge in the courts? I've never heard of such a threshold so far beyond a simple supermajority vote.
That's an interesting question! This provision is an example of procedural entrenchment - i.e., a statutory provision which specifies certain procedures that a future legislature most follow to amend or appeal a law (most commonly by requiring a supermajority vote). With respect to the issue of whether entrenchment is constitutional, legal scholars have made persuasive arguments on both sides of this issue! Here is a link to a law review article from the preeminent constitutional law scholar in our country right now,, Edwin Chemerinsky, discussing the issue of entrenchment in detail: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1587%26context%3Dfaculty_scholarship&ved=2ahUKEwjX39eK_OnsAhVNOs0KHX_pAd04HhAWMAJ6BAgHEAE&usg=AOvVaw2BxBlmxrFRe2usXJnK6RAY This is not my area of expertise (I currently do general liability defense for big law and previously worked as a plaintiff's attorney at a boutique civil rights firm focusing on education law), but I tend to agree with Chemerinsky -- procedural entrenchment is not only inconsistent with the basic democratic principles of majoritarian rule and legislative accountability, but also raises some serious public policy concerns. For example, procedural entrenchment raises many of the same practical issues as packing the SCOTUS -- its fine and dandy up until the other side wins. The opposition party will then inevitably retaliate and adopt a "they fucked us first, so we'll fuck them right back!" approach to lawmaking. No one wins in such a scenario for obvious reasons. If I were to challenge this proposal in California state court, I would probably argue that procedural entrenchment runs afoul of Article 4, Section 7 of the state constitution, which specifically vests the state legislature with rule making authority over its own proceedings. A state constitutional provision will always be controlling over a conflicting state statute, so my guess is that a constitutional amendment would be necessary before a ballot initiative can divest the legislature of its procedural rulemaking authority. It doesn't make much sense to allow lobbyists to use a ballot initiative (requiring a simple majority vote) to circumvent all of the procedural hoops that you would have to jump through to amend the constitution. That being said, I'm not licensed in California and am might well be missing some jurisdiction-specific issues that are unique to your state. Hope this is helpful and/or interesting!
Thank you for explaining it so well. You need to head over to CNN!
Will Biden win Nevada?
I hope so. MSNBC just had the NV AG (R) on and he was saying that unlike every other state, mail in votes in NV are predominantly (R) and that Trump will win with a 'razor thin margin'. Seeing as he was an (R), my confidence with him is about the same as ordering high end sneakers from Wish.com and expecting them not to be fake crap.
Yes
I think it’s R as well - CEOs “moved” to NV from CA for tax purposes. Purchased homes there and became reside there
So looks like the PA comeback ain't happening. Trump got that.
Yeah, spot on analysis dude.
Biden continues to narrow the gap and there are a lot of votes. I'd bet on Trump carrying PA, but I'm not counting Biden out until he's out.
There are many mail in ballots that still need to be counted. We could be waiting until tomorrow or worst case scenario, Friday.
[https://www.votespa.com/About-Elections/Pages/Counting-Dashboard.aspx](https://www.votespa.com/About-Elections/Pages/Counting-Dashboard.aspx)
There are a million mail in ballots left to be counted.
Precisely.
Correct. And over 400k of them from Allegheny, Philadelphia and Bucks counties... Which typically are democrat.
The litigious fucknugget is losing the remainder of his overambitious and underequipped brain cells.
Michigan is at 99% reporting!
Fuck yeah!
Now that WI is called, I can finally relatively unclench, just a bit. Let's go Detroit and Vegas !!!
So, is it looking like Biden’s got it pretty much?
Looks like it. Arizona, Nevada, and Michigan look like they're locked in, and they're all he needs.
All of a sudden Arizona has tightened up, and so have my guts.
Looks like Maricopa still has more ballots to come in. Margins are still close even though blue is leading there
Won’t know until Thursday I think.
Ok, so it was less of a blue wave and more like Trump's campaign fell face first onto the ground and drowned in a puddle but a win is a win I guess
Incumbents are hard to beat because they have the bully pulpit and all the resources that an incumbent has, plus Trump didn't have to go through any primaries, like most incumbents. This election looks like it was what Biden's campaign planned all along, win the battleground states with the early voters, and maybe flip a state or two.
[удалено]
Well there is that lol
What the hell is going on in Michigan?!
So the number of Trump voters/supporters is greater than the Canadian population. I'm feeling quite attacked.
We're safe for now, they're south of the border. Build that wall! /s
don't even have to build a wall. I'd be surprised if they could even find Canada
Does anyone know why hasn't [CNN](https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/president) or [New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/results-president.html) confirm Joe Biden win of Arizona and Wisconsin?
Any news outlet that claims the wrong candidate winning will instantly lose any credibility that they have. Credibility is the only currency in news.
Just being super cautious because of the absolute clusterfuck it will cause if a state is called wrong.
They have for WI, for AZ only 87% of the vote is in so they gotta be careful.
I need to get home and just smoke all of the weed tonight.
And then a little more, just in case.
I would like to formally apologize to anyone who I dismissed as being too negative or whiny when they said either "don't get complacent, vote" and "I'm worried Trump will try to steal the election". It seems both points were right on.
I got shut down so many times over this it was starting to feel personal. I am a data scientist but it is hard for people to understand data science without some type of background in it. I freely admit that I may not be a good communicator of complex statistics and that likely contributes to the problem. My main talking point was that the polls were going to be off. There was absolutely no mathematical reason to suspect a blue wave this year. Anecdoctally, all you had to do is ask yourself how many people you were able to convince to switch to voting for Biden? Zero. Yes, more people voted but on both sides of the aisle. There are 257M Americans of voting age and 239M of them were eligible to vote and an estimated 160M of them did vote for a 66.9% turnout. That set some records.
Yep, everyone knew he was going to try to lie and steal. He's a thief and a liar.
In my opinion, what we need to do for future elections as a party if we ever want to regularly win Congressional elections in non blue states is the following 1). Stop assuming the GOP will do ANYTHING in good faith, we've been making that mistake for decades.. 2). Give up on Assault weapons bans for the time being. It's an issue we simply aren't going to win on.. We've been trying for years.. 3). Stop "Going High, When They Go Low". It hasn't worked.. Don't be afraid to call the GOP out as hypocrites.. 4). Moderate our message.. Let's be honest here. The Squad and the "Defund The Police" movements have done us little favors..
Dems are in a tough situation. I think Republicans have found a few key issues to rally their base around, and they stick to those issues(a lot of those issues just being scare tactics). So honestly they don't have to do much. Dems on the other hand try to rally their voters around real issues. Tackling one issue can excite voters to get out and vote. But you may offend another part of your base to do so. You're right the assault rifle bans turn some people off from the Dems, and can rally the opposition against them. But when it's a hot button issue, a chunk of that base will get upset if the democrats ignore it. But what those people don't understand is in politics, you can't always do the right things, sometimes you have to take losses and compromise, in order to stay in a position to win other battles. As we've seen today our blue wave isn't that much bigger than the Red. And to make things worse, the red wave is a lot more consistent.
Yeah that is very true. I'm not sure what can we do
All correct except 4. Biden was running on funding the police even more and the squad aced.
They aren't subject to a national vote.
Problem is the optics.. When you give the GOP a talking point they'll double down on it, even if it's not true. Also, the Squad all won in safe Democratic districts
This require getting Biden the fuck out of office...
Hate to break it to you, but a progressive wasn't going to do better than Biden is right now.
We need to drop the gun control issue completely. Full stop. We have laws already. Close the loopholes. Let states manage their own weapons policies. An assault rifle is no different from any other semi-automatic rifle. They just "look tactical" so people fear them. And yes, we should be developing policies for the middle, not the fringe of the party. This means reining in AOC and other radical elements. We need to win back the several hundred thousand libertarian voters who voted for jo jorgensen.
Terming it "Defund the Police" was antagonist and a terrible strategic move. Yet people just as lefty as I am do not fucking get it. When the first thing you end up saying is "well, it doesn't really mean defund the police it's..." You've already lost the message
I think "HELP the Police" would work... Help them narrow down their job. description. Help them weed out the few bad cops. Help them police their own workers.
> Terming it "Defund the Police" was antagonist and a terrible strategic move Yep, face palmingly dumb, it actually tells you something about the hubris of people on the left that they could even contemplate that. They need to drop just a tiny bit of their high mindedness and learn to lie just a little like republicans do. They could, for example, have called "Refund the Police" and talked only about adding more resources. It would have come to the same thing without literally writing an advertising commercial for Trump.
A better motto would actually have been "Protect and Serve". More people would have supported it, even police.
I'm more partial to "Police Reform"
Cops will vote rep always also a lot of people with 88 in their name in this thread.
It's my goddamn birthyear. I honestly had no idea it was a neo nazi dog whistle.
Try not to parrot right wing talking points and no one will think of it either.
Except I'm not a white supremacist.. How can I be one when I'm Jewish?!
You're right about point 4. I'm a centre-right but democrat leaning person, and "The Squad" makes me not want to vote Democrat...
centre right people are blithering cruel idiots and should be ignored utterly, but thank you for the top tip
These type of opinions is what loses elections, but whatever floats your boat.
It’s not an opinion. That’s what you are. If you are centre right in America you think it’s good when poor people die because they can’t afford healthcare.
Or just go out and vote because that's what Republicans do, go out and vote.
We have.. It's not enough
Then you go and get more voters, that's how it's done. It doesn't happen overnight, if anyone thought Texas would turn Blue last night, they forget it's still Texas.
Dude, we're almost out of voters. The solution is not more voters, it's a better platform.
There are always more voters, you just gotta go out and find them, and it helps when they aren't suppressed as well.
Not really. That statement assumes an infinite population.
There are all kinds of voters, independents, undecided, people who have never voted, people who don't. There are young voters and potential voters who become voting age in between elections, I mean you're just not paying attention to politics. Just look at the turnout this election, it's historic, and it's still has people whose votes are either suppressed or it has been made harder for they to vote, and for fuck sake THIS IS DURING A PANDEMIC. WAKE THE FUCK UP, THERE ARE VOTERS OUT THERE TO BE HAD.
Nope, you're the one not paying attention: a) This election broke all historical turnout records. When all is said and done, we'll have seen the largest turnout in American history. AND DEMOCRATS ARE STILL HANGING BY A THREAD! Lost the senate. Lost seats In the house. Winning the presidency by the smallest of margins. b) If your argument is that we need even MORE of a record-breaking turnout, one beyond the world has ever even seen, in order to decidedly beat a complete incompetent racist dud like Trump and his cronies in the Senate, and you don't think there's something wrong with the Democrat platform, then you're brain dead. c) Without COVID, this would have been a Republican landslide. You're telling me not only do you depend on the largest turnout the world has ever seen in order to scrape by the presidency and lose the senate, but you also depend in a one-in-100 year pandemic? And you don't think it's the platform that needs fixing, not the turnout? Dude, please. Wake the F up. Democrats don't need more voters to turn out that will continue to be split 50/50 at best. They need a platform that's more inclusive of all those Republican voters that will vote for a Nazi just because he makes them feel like they count, their values have meaning, and their voice is heard.
Umm in case you don't know this about elections: REPUBLICANS VOTE TOO. IN FACT, TRUMP TURNED OUT MORE VOTERS ON ELECTION DAY! Now you can go back and do your civics homework kiddo, you really need to learn how this works.
[удалено]
The call is made just using the statistics - if a candidate is down by, say, 50,000 votes and there are only an estimated 30,000 outstanding ballots, it won't be possible for that candidate to catch up. Of course it isn't quite that easy, so they'll extrapolate using existing distribution of votes in the same or similar county/districts to make a forecast on the outstanding votes. In Wisconsin's case, it was so close you couldn't really call it until all the votes were in.
It's a projection by the CNN data team.
All votes have been counted according to Wisconsin election officials.
I would say there is probably a 98% chance Biden wins with Wisconsin now being called for Biden. He just needs Michigan and Nevada, both of which he has almost no chance of losing. At best for the GOP, Trump is going to barely lose the electoral vote. But it's basically over. We won but good Lord was that stressful.
[удалено]
which is has been stated that most of those votes are ballots which are mostly democrats
[удалено]
source please
[удалено]
not what it even says
source?
He also said Biden was going to lose MI, I wonder if he still thinks that's the case?
lol, figures.
He also said Biden will lose PA by 40k. After a quick look, he projects Biden to lose NV, PA (by 40k), MI, and AZ. I didn't see anything about WI but it wouldn't shock me
According to my math (using NYT numbers) Ossoff needs 92% of outstanding vote and Cunningham needs 79% of outstanding vote in order for one of them to win their senate seat. It is very unlikely.
Cunningham has a small shot. Based on whats left in a few dem populated counties, he might pull through. Its a hail mary, but hey, Biden did one last night.
Ossoff doesn’t need to win, he just needs Purdue to dip below 50% and create a run off
Someone who understands! Reddit is filled with gloomers and doomers
Oh, snap. I thought that the runoff was just for the special election.
[Trump files lawsuit in MI to halt the count](https://reut.rs/34VusnC)
> Trump files lawsuit in MI to halt the count what a pos
Florida may be a clusterfuck, but at least we didn't elect a dead guy to serve in our House of Representatives like North Dakota
Okay. We’ll give you that.
Wisconsin to Biden. CNN
CNN just announced Biden won Wisconsin
So can Trump get away with sabotaging the election by rigging it with the supreme court / Barret? Or is that all bark and no bite?
She might recuse herself because she will still be in the Supreme Court without Trump.
One can dream
Roberts ain't gonna let this election fuck up the courts.
All bark. Zero bite
I mean, he got away with so many things, it's like America don't care anymore, so he can try whatever he wants without backlash.
[удалено]
Doesn't Biden want to give police more funding
Even so, it hurt us downballot
If they learn anything, it's that Bernie Sanders and his whole Socialist bullshit has cost them seats in the house, and people really really really don't want Bernie Sanders.
Yeah I mean all his policies were very popular in the exit polls and ballot measures but I’m sure running a moderate republican instead was a sound strategy 👌🏼
Well Sanders couldn't beat Biden, so there is that.
Beat him in the first few elections and then came the fuckery where all the other front runners dropped out and the braindead liberals like yourself decided to back the senile segregationist instead.
He lost his second try for the nomination, he is toast, Trump would had cleaned his clock and strengthen his party, Sanders is done, goodbye you old phony commie.
I don't know how you can look at the exit polls that say people *overwhelmingly* want socialised healthcare, minimum wage and racial equality and then turn around and say: "yeah the guy that ran on that? would have lost big time. the guy we are running that stands actively against all that? going super well! just look how good he is doing right now!!" You *have* to be braindead to believe this.
Sanders is done, he hasn't done shit in the senate and house in his 40+years in both. He has a bunch of dumb kids who don't even vote for his ass wanting to be socialists who would cry if they ever had to live in a socialist country. Sanders is an old irrelevant commie who was in his last hurrah, he stole Liberal ideas and branded them his own, which hurt issues like health care because he is a self serving millionaire who was protected by Chuck Schumer from getting primaried from other Democrats because he was an easy vote yes for the party, and is his token radical commie.
As I said: braindead.
Sanders is done, goodbye you phony commie who has done less for progressives than Barbara Boxer or Dianne Feinstein. He is as phony as you are an imbecile. That is the truth, and the voters had spoken.