Seriously - how would you know?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
One week later
- Thread starter Shaul
- Start date
Or they could, ya know. Follow what the law dictates and allows.
It should be understood it's not all of California. And it should be understood that moving to universal mailed ballots is seriously contributory.
But I basically agree that something should be done. My list is
- Adequately fund those responsible for counting.
- Set tighter deadlines for results.
- Fund next day (or 3 day) expedited return of mailed ballots.
How do you count mail in ballots you haven't received in the mail yet?
We're also the most populous state in the nation. And our number of mail in ballots has skyrocketed since COVID. That Wyoming counts their ballots more quickly does not impress me.
Though I do like @sun rise 's idea of making mail in ballots priority mail so they'd be returned faster. That might help speed things up. None of this is "incompetence," though. It makes no difference how quickly the ballots are counted as long as they're certified within, what, a month? It's just something we like to know because we're accustomed to instant information now.
Last edited:
tytlyf
Not Religious
There is no fraud. You shouldn't believe there is.
Nobody has said anything about fraud.
I guess you didn't bother to read the posts in this thread. I haven't suggested counting unreceived ballots. What I have written is that ballot verification of those turned in on election day can reduce post election day tally times. Try to keep up.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Those are?
What prior post of yours in this thread are you referencing? I've read them all. In none of them did you say what you just said here.
You can't verify ballots you haven't received in the mail yet. Getting cocky when you don't have your facts straight is not a wise strategy.
I do not see what is the hurry about. The new House and Senate will come only after the new year correct? Why should the counting process be dictated by the needs of instant gratification promoted by the 24-7 news cycle?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Rats! Beat me to it.
But I was wondering the same thing. It is pretty much a done deal that the Republicans will win the House. They only need one more seat and the Democrats are about ten seats behind.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Notice that he didn't answer. Maybe because he's just venting because his Pubs didn't do as well as expected?
IMO, as long as a state does it legally and carefully, they can take all the time they need. Our constitution leaves this up to the states, thus there's no "one size fits all" approach.
Some energetically violate the Law of Holes as if it were some despicable piece of left wing legislation introduced by the Squad.
Which state would you accept as having a comparable population? Every other of the ten most populous states, Texas, Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina and Michigan, have all completed their results days ago.
And States' responsibilities.State rights!!! You are an authoritarian federalist, who trample on state rights.
You mean States like Alaska, Colorado, and Maine?And States' responsibilities.
Nobody is saying there has to be instantaneous results. Nor does the reason for wanting prompt results depend on the 24/7 news cycle. But your mentioning the 24/7 cycles raises the fact that we aren't living in the Dark Ages. In this day and age we have the capabilities to tally votes quickly and accurately. There is no logistical reason vote counting couldn't be done faster. We have proof of this since many other elections are done both accurately and promptly. So the question is not why should the results be done faster. Since there is no good reason for them being done slower, the better question is; "Why should we accept them taking longer than necessary?" The answer is we should not.
So you don't think the vote tally needs to be done promptly but you think I must respond instantaneously to questions. That is hilarious!