Election Day, Part Deux: Recap, Open Thread, and Latest News

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his writing website Yonder and Home. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast.

Related Post Roulette

235 Responses

  1. InMD says:

    A few probably way too early thoughts:

    -Beware feel good ‘demography is destiny’ takes on American politics. It isn’t and it won’t be.

    -The media still hasn’t learned anything from 2016. Talk of a landslide was never credible and regular people don’t think the way tv talking heads do. The responsibility to make the case for things never goes away. That is a feature of the system not a bug.

    -I’m liking the odds of my 280-258 map from August, though Georgia and its busted pipe could ruin it if it turns the state blue.Report

    • Aaron David in reply to InMD says:

      One, I f’in hate daylight savings.

      Two, whoever ends up pulling this out will take the reins of an even more divided country than before. And that sucks. I was hoping for some clarity from this election, but instead, we have gotten even muddier waters.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Aaron David says:

        I think we have a great deal of clarity.

        We are clear as a nation that a huge percentage of our fellow citizens are fine with 232K deaths from a pandemic due to a botched, bungled federal response to the national crisis that is Covid.

        We are clear that a huge percentage of our nation still expects someone else to clean up the mess their senators makes, in as much as Susan Collins and Mitch McConnell are headed back to the Senate.

        We are clear that Americans will be driven to the polls in extraordinary times, but that Democrats STILL think dynasty is destiny rather then inspiring voters (Which I worried a lot about in comments here during the primaries).

        And we are clear that there is no unethical thing – much any illegal thing – the President can do that would shake people off him. The Cult of Personality is strong.

        I’m not sure what other clarity you were expecting.Report

        • Aaron David in reply to Philip H says:

          The clarity I was hoping for would be one clear winner. One clear direction for the country.

          But, sure. Look at the whole thing solely through a partisan lens and you will see what you are seeing. I am seeing that half the country still cares about personal liberties such as freedom of speech, still abhors racism, and doesn’t believe there is some exception for covid under the FUTY clause in the Consitution, a clause I cannot find in my copy.Report

      • InMD in reply to Aaron David says:

        I don’t think it’s necessarily so bad.
        I’ve been making peace with the the muddle. You and I of course differ in our preferences on the executive but I think I could live with a narrow Biden win and split Senate. The excesses of Trump would be gone, hopefully we’d have (IMO) better covid leadership. At the same time team D would be very hesitant to spend capital on the more ideological wish list (new AWB, a tat of some kind related to the Supreme Court). Maybe we get the big infrastructure bill everyone could theoretically get behind. Time will tell.Report

        • Aaron David in reply to InMD says:

          Actually, all things considered, this isn’t too bad of a result, either if your take (Biden at 280) or mine hold. I am pretty cool with a divided gov’t and am very happy with originalist judges. There are a couple of things I would put on my wish list, but that is true with every president, no matter the party.Report

  2. George Turner says:

    Democrats are executing their plans for massive mail-in-voter fraud, and the photos documenting it keep getting wiped off places like Instagram and Twitter, probably more for the fraud comments than the pictures, but that will not last.

    Nobody on the right is playing pigeon this time, because after four years of the nonsense, they don’t believe a word the media says. Even Fox blew their reputation last night, which to the left might be the one shining light in the election. The downside is that there no is no voice that can calm rank-and-file Republicans and get them to accept blatant fraud. As Jaybird says, it’s divorce or war, and the divorce lawyers just got fired.

    The Republicans held the Senate, the Democrats held the house, Trump kept the White House, and Joe Biden is under criminal investigation and can’t even remember that his eldest son is dead. There isn’t a winnable outcome for Democrats, just a way to try an maintain the status quo, but now with Hunter Biden’s laptop and his business associates puling down the whole house of cards.Report

  3. Philip H says:

    For months in the primaries I said Biden was a neoliberal centerist who wouldn’t inspire. That seems to be the one prediction I got right.Report

    • Brandon Berg in reply to Philip H says:

      I would have been a much bigger fan of Biden if this were true. My main beef with him is that he was making too many concessions to the left wing of the party, running well to the left of Obama. If he wins and then throws the left under the bus where it belongs and actually governs like a neoliberal centrist, I’ll certainly be inspired.Report

    • Marchmaine in reply to Philip H says:

      One of the networks (forget which) put up a graphic *before* polls closed that showed voter motivation.

      Voting FOR Trump: 79%
      Voting AGAINST Biden: 21%

      Voting FOR Biden: 51%
      Voting AGAINST Trump: 49%

      That was my first, “huh” moment of many.Report

    • LeeEsq in reply to Philip H says:

      Trump managed to win Florida because Cubans and Venezuelans thought that Biden and Harris were socialists in the Castro and Chavez mold. Do you really think a self-described socialist would have done better? Biden managed to get seven million more votes than Trump. He is posed to win the popular and the Electoral Vote against the incumbent. The other times this happened in the 20th century, with Wilson and Clinton in their first terms, the incumbent was hurt by a popular third party challenger, Roosevelt and Perot respectively.

      There is no magic candidate that can motivate all the different groups in the Democratic Party and win the number of swing voters necessary to get the Electoral College victory. Biden did as well as possible under these conditions. He seems to have pulled it off. The real kicker is that many Hispanic men seem to like Trump’s machismo.Report

  4. North says:

    Yeah it’s too bad about North Carolina. That was my personal hope for early resolution. Now we have to trudge through the counting grind in the mid west. Ugh. And what the hell is going on with Maine?Report

  5. Marchmaine says:

    Whelp… this being 2020 I’m just going to stop fighting the fates and assume the results will be disappointing to everyone… Biden skulks into the White House and the Senate remains Republican. But at this point that’s based on nothing but pure augury, by which I mean 538.

    If that happens, looking forward the the love and gratitude that will be showered on White Men for saving the union.Report

    • Brandon Berg in reply to Marchmaine says:

      Whelp… this being 2020 I’m just going to stop fighting the fates and assume the results will be disappointing to everyone… Biden skulks into the White House and the Senate remains Republican.

      This is all I’ve ever wanted.Report

    • InMD in reply to Marchmaine says:

      Heh I’ve been pondering posting something about the gratitude owed to white dudes and big WTF (apparently) due to everyone else but I assume no one would appreciate the humor. In 5 minutes it would be Zuck’d.Report

    • superdestroyer in reply to Marchmaine says:

      Four more years of gridlock. At least the Speaker of the House and the President would be back on speaking terms. Biden was a lousy candidate. Harris was a mistake an own goal. The lack of any vision on the part of the Biden campaign indicated a strategy of trying not to lose and it looking like they may eke out a very narrow win with such a strategy. Of course, Biden had no coattails and the Republicans will not only retain control of the Senate but will pick up seats in the House.Report

      • Philip H in reply to superdestroyer says:

        Yeah Democrats biffed a no brainer. Though the margins by which Republicans retained the senate suggests several formerly solidly red states are now very purple.Report

        • superdestroyer in reply to Philip H says:

          What was shown is how money is not very important. The Democrats spent millions and got little for their money.Report

          • North in reply to superdestroyer says:

            That seems to be the case. This is the second Presidential election where a huge gap in monetary resources hasn’t seemed to translate into any advantage. I’d moderate your assertion slightly to say that money matters (you do need to fund your campaign) but over a relatively low threshold more money doesn’t marginally help much in high attention elections.Report

            • Jaybird in reply to North says:

              There are elections where money helps. (One thing I’d like to see is “how many republican re-elections took place in districts that Biden won?” 2016 had a number of these, if I recall correctly.)

              There are elections like McConnell’s where money does not seem to help. Or, if it would, maybe they should run someone other than the person who lost last time? Maybe?

              Flushing tens of millions on running against McConnell in Kentucky is a vanity thing. I can understand why Democratic leaders would advertise “WE’RE TAKING ON COCAINE MITCH!” but they should divert that money to help out in other, smaller, elections.Report

              • superdestroyer in reply to Jaybird says:

                South Carolina was an even bigger waste of Democratic dollars. Image if that $100 million would have been spent on state house races in Michigan and Wisconsin.

                Also, the idea of a front porch campaign has been destroyed. Maybe in four years when the Democrats can do grassroots campaigning they could go better. However, all of the Trumpist media made fun of how light Biden’s schedule was and they appear to be correct in that the light schedule did not help anyone.Report

            • Chip Daniels in reply to North says:

              What is amazing is how virtually nothing moved the needle from February onward.
              Money spent, crises encountered, gaffes, rallies, endorsement, scandals real or imagined…none of them changed the basic structure of the race.Report

      • LeeEsq in reply to superdestroyer says:

        Who was the magic candidate? Come on, tell me. Would the socialist Sanders get us Florida with its Cubans and Venezuelans? Would Warren get Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania like Biden is doing?Report

  6. DensityDuck says:

    It’s very interesting, remembering people telling me that Biden was far preferable to Sanders because “he’s more electable” and “he has stronger support with blacks”.

    So, yeah, 2004 all over again, where a popular populist movement was turfed in favor of a soft-liberal centrist because We Don’t Want To Rock The Boat and Winning Is More Important Than Progress Right Now and The President Is Historically Unpopular So We Don’t Need To Inspire Voters.Report

  7. Jaybird says:

    Remembering what Saul said the other day: Most people seem to make predictions that are indicative of their priors and prejudices and partisan leans. The polling for Biden right now is much, much better than it was for HRC at the same point in 2016.

    We should poll to gauge what’s going to happen. Not wishcast.



    • North in reply to Jaybird says:

      Overdetermined conclusion at the moment. The polls indicated a Biden edge of like 1-3% in the southeast which means a narrow Trump win there is within the margin of error. The polls suggested a Biden lead outside the margin of error in Arizona and currently it’s looking like Biden got Arizona.

      The proof in the pudding is the midwest. The polls showed strong leads for Biden in WI and MI. They also showed a Arizona like edge for Biden in PA. Those states are still counting. So it remains to be seen if this election is a 2016 polling error or just a 2018 slow counting election.Report

  8. Jaybird says:

    Okay. I’ve been up for 20 minutes now and drank some caffeine and I still have no idea what happened last night.

    It looks like the election hasn’t settled, Trump supporters are arguing that it’s in the bag, Biden supporters talking about different state combinations that could still have Biden win, and people are arguing that Nate Silver’s model was still good?Report

    • Marchmaine in reply to Jaybird says:


      If you go to NYT Biden’s path the victory is paved with 0.2% leads, while Trump’s undecideds are sitting at +6% and +11%… but you have to understand.Report

    • DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird says:

      I wish someone would go find that Elevator Lady who was very excited about Biden and ask her whether she remembered to vote.Report

    • Aaron David in reply to Jaybird says:

      Nate Silvers model was pure GIGO. And anyone who says the election is in the bag is a fool. Left or Right.

      I do think that what is going to happen next is that once again this will come down to SCOTUS. That is the extent of my predictions at this point.

      That said, I do think we as a nation are so divided that we are only reading our (for certain values of Our) news sources. We don’t spend enough time actually looking at the other as it is too scary, too uncertain. So we have retreated into two bubbles. I would like, er love to say that I as a Libertarian have better clarity, but that is just a different shade of rose on my glasses. And the problem isn’t really social media, that is just a convenient target for our criticism. We just bubble too much, which is a dangerous idea in a country that has too strong political traditions. And neither of which is bad.

      But the reality is that we cannot agree on what is totalitarian. What is racist. And that belies all of the central core tenants of our legal system. Because we cannot agree on what is evil.Report

  9. Chip Daniels says:

    A couple thoughts, regardless of how the count goes.

    We know the following facts:
    1. 2016 wasn’t a fluke. It wasn’t about a Uniquely Bad Candidate, or remarks about coal miners or campaigning in Wisconsin.
    The majority of American voters don’t want Trump or Trumpism, but a large enough plurality do and they want it very badly. They weren’t reluctantly forced to vote for him, they weren’t holding their nose, they weren’t driven to him by out of touch Democrats. They voted for him in 2016, and after 4 years of getting to know him in detail, they voted for him again.

    2. America is deeply and evenly divided and there is no center. The election wasn’t run on ideas or issues, it was run on identity which can’t be compromised on. Our democracy isn’t designed to handle perpetual gridlock so the endless Somme of trench warfare can only have a bad outcome.

    3. The role of America in the world is changed for the rest of our lifetimes. Europe and all our allies know these first two facts, and will adjust their thinking correspondingly. For the lifetime of everyone reading this, America was a superpower in all three areas- Economically, militarily, and politically. Today we are a superpower only economically and militarily. Our ability to shape world events has crumbled.Report

  10. Kazzy says:

    Van Jones made three interesting points late last night:
    1.) Hey GOP, don’t fear turnout. More voters can be good for you.
    2.) Hey Dems, don’t assume diversity is your friend. Don’t take anyone for granted.
    3.) Polls are broken.Report

    • Aaron David in reply to Kazzy says:

      I saw you post this last night, and while I may disagree with Jones’ policy preferences, I do think he is very correct here.

      I think he is one of the good guys.Report

    • Pinky in reply to Kazzy says:

      The polls aren’t broken. As far as I’ve seen, all the definite R or L states went that way, nearly all of the “leaning” states (depending on who you were looking at) were close, and a handful of tossup states are still in the air. Guessing the actions of tens of millions of people within +/-5% is remarkable. You want more accurate polls, get a less divided populace.Report

    • Philip H in reply to Kazzy says:

      Terry Moran at ABC also made the very salient point that pollsters still don’t understand a post-Trump America. He didn’t expand on that but its worth looking at.Report

      • Pinky in reply to Philip H says:

        RealClearPolitics had Biden up in PA by 1.2%. It was based on 6 polls, three of them with Trump in the lead, three with Biden. Only one of those polls (Biden +5) was outside the margin of error (+/-4.4%). Why are people saying the polls are broken?Report

        • Philip H in reply to Pinky says:

          you got me . . . and I don’t think its “people” I think its pundits saying that.Report

          • Pinky in reply to Philip H says:

            I’m not trying to “get” anyone. I remember seeing analysis that if the state polls were exactly right, Trump would get something like 235 EV; if Trump got 3% more, he’d get 262, and if he got 4% more, he’d get 275. I haven’t studied the current results, and obviously the final results aren’t out yet, but I’m just not seeing an unfathomable gap between polling data and outcome.

            I’m also not sure if you mean “people” are more likely to be right than “pundits”, or less so. People seem to be repeating punditry. I think I’ve watched 15 minutes of coverage since the polls closed yesterday, and I’m hardly paying attention to updates. I did about the same thing in 2016. The press gets every emerging story wrong for the first 48 hours.Report

            • Philip H in reply to Pinky says:

              I meant I have no idea why “people” are claiming polling is broken when in fact it seems to have been reasonably accurate. I also meant that “people” was being conflated with pundits – who are all aghast that they screwed up again and want someone to blame.Report

          • Pinky in reply to Philip H says:

            Also, you know…Terry Moran. If you gathered together the top 10,000 journalists in one place, Terry Moran could cover the event from the outside steps with the front gate in shot.Report

  11. Kazzy says:

    To use some JB logic…

    One side is saying, “Count the votes.”

    One side is saying, “CHEATERS!”

    Losers blame the refs.Report

  12. North says:

    MI and WI have swung into a Biden lead and the majority of the votes left to be counted are from heavily Democratic urban areas. This really is going to hinge on fishing PA.
    My only consolation is that 538’s projections seem to be about correct so long as you move to the Republican side of the margin of error which suggests a narrow Biden win in PA.Report

  13. Jaybird says:

    Politico has a rant.

    Read the whole thing but it’s talking about how it’s disappointed that the Democrats didn’t do as well as they had hoped, even if Biden wins.

    “Disappointed” might be the wrong word. “Livid”.

    TUESDAY WAS AN ABJECT DISASTER for Democrats in Washington. To imagine the amount of soul searching and explaining the party will have to do after Tuesday is absolutely dizzying. The infighting will be bloody — as it should be. We fielded text after text from Hill Democrats Tuesday night and early Wednesday morning with existential questions about their leadership and the direction of their party.


    • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird says:

      To go back to Jones, he said they may get the political win but they lost the moral victory. Pretty damning assessment.Report

      • Aaron David in reply to Kazzy says:

        That I disagree with. The only person that can determine one’s own moral standing is oneself.

        Anything else is hubris of the highest order. And this isn’t predicated on who wins or loses. It only matters if you are true to your own moral code.Report

    • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird says:

      Do they have any ideas of what could have been done differently?Report

    • Shane in reply to Jaybird says:

      I’m not holding my breath concerning the talk about Democratic soul searching. I remember the Republican 2012 post mortem.

      I’ve seen a few mentions above about how the results, whatever they end up being, are just going to be taken as confirmation of each talking head’s prior assumptions. Unfortunately, unsurprisingly, I think that’s the way things are going to go. I can hope, revealing my own priors here, that the results are taken by the Democrats as a not so subtle hint that appealing to normalcy and a nostalgic view of what the Republican Party presented itself to be several decades ago isn’t the electoral key they seem to believe it is. Then again, these are people who have spent more time tacking right than I have been alive (Joe Biden being a prime example). And that concludes my vaguely lefty grumbling for now.Report

    • Reformed Republican in reply to Jaybird says:

      “IMAGINE IF BIDEN DOES WIN — and that’s a big, big if: Think about how he’ll get a Cabinet approved. Think about Democratic wishes– raising corporate taxes, capital gains, packing the Supreme Court, blowing up the filibuster — and those seem absolutely impossible. Gridlock is likely.”

      This is my hope with every election.Report

  14. Jaybird says:

    Let us discuss drugs.


  15. Jaybird says:

    For those of you who enjoy divination, here is our thread on The Superbowl from earlier this year.

    I don’t know which candidate would be the Chiefs and which would be the Niners, though.Report

  16. George Turner says:

    I think one thing that makes this election different from 2000 is that the right fully expected massive voter fraud from Democrats, and now we can take screenshots of highly suspicious events.

    Voter fraud Wisconsin – Massive dump of 100K ballots at 6:23 AM

    This puts the onus on the left to explain where the 100K votes came from, and why they didn’t arrive on time. People will ask “Were they being manufactured through the night based on the Republican lead? Whose names are on them?” And that gets into automatic re-counts where near-sighted people stare at signatures, where judges rule whether Daffy Duck can vote, and all sorts of other ugly things about Wisconsin’s prior failure to take action against election fraud in 2016. And this will get repeated in each toss-up state.

    And after that, should Biden prevail, we get Trump still running the DoJ till January, and the DoJ still investigating Biden for massive bribes, kickbacks from China and Russia, and Hunter Biden’s laptop. Should Biden survive that with any shred of support, we get Kamala signing off on his removal under the 25th Amendment. That will involve lots of screaming because Biden’s cabinet has to sign off on it, and the Republican congress has to approve his cabinet picks, which they will drag their feet on, so it might just be Kamala sealing his fate. But nobody wanted Harris as President, outside of perhaps Nancy and AOC’s squad.

    The majority of people, including a huge swath on the left, are going to be livid and feel like they’ve been conned. The government will be weak and unstable, and the US will become virtually ungovernable. Any remaining norms will go out the window. 2021 will be worse than 2020.Report

    • Citing Gateway Pundit is like citing the clumps in the litter boxReport

      • JoeSal in reply to Andrew Donaldson says:

        You have seen what Saul cites, yes?Report

      • Philip H in reply to Andrew Donaldson says:

        just let George run. Or ban him. Anything else is unproductive.Report

        • Koz in reply to Philip H says:

          I’m not involved in the George stuff here at the League, and I’m not much a buyer in George-style conservatism. But, given what’s happened yesterday, I think there’s a lot of libs who owe George an apology.

          If there’s anything we’ve learned from the Trump years, there’s a lot of stuff going on that sounds like ridiculous bullshit, that ends up being true.Report

      • George Turner in reply to Andrew Donaldson says:

        And yet there are those troubling screen shots that Twitter and Facebook won’t allow. We are at a point where vast swaths of America have, with good reason, decided that a guy posting under the handle “BigAsianBoobies237” is a more reliable news source than The New York Times, The Washington Post, or CNN. The breathtakingly pathetic behavior of our current crop of journalists is entirely responsible for that.

        And even when someone in the press does produce a major scoop, such as Hunter’s e-mails, the rest of the press bans the story, and the big media companies ban it from the Internet, just as they’ve banned any reporting of election shenanigans. Only thieves would be so desperate to hide information, and theft is only violence free if the victim doesn’t realize what’s happening. The Conservatives are looking for a reckoning for the fake Russian collusion hoax, the suppression of the Hunter Biden scandal, and Democrat complicity in the waves of rioting, looting, and arson.

        If the left was aghast at what happened to the Biden bus in Texas, they’ll be really horrified by what’s likely to start happening. What it may come down to is that the right is willing to fight and die for Donald Trump, as evidenced by his massive crowds, whereas only hundreds of people would show up to see Joe Biden, and none of them give two figs about him. He was just an empty vessel, a doddering old man who was supposed to cleanse the world of Trump just by not falling over dead prior to inauguration.Report

    • Reformed Republican in reply to George Turner says:

      I would say that anybody that cannot think of a legitimate explanation for the sudden jump in votes other than fraud lacks imagination, but you are clearly very imaginative. For ballot dumping to be the explanation for the sudden jump, all 100K votes would have to be counted immediately when they arrived. Also, it looks like there is a (smaller) jump for Trump at the same time, hidden behind the Biden jump. A thoughtful analysis might think this has to do with how votes are reported, not how they are received.Report

      • George Turner in reply to Reformed Republican says:

        Much earlier in the night, Minnesota reportedly had 139K votes from Milwaukee that got delivered from the back of a police cruiser. That could be normal procedure, but for those unfamiliar with normal procedure, it can be easily spun as another instance of Ilhan Omar’s massive Somali vote-fraud operation, which was documented on camera by Project Veritas.

        And the problem caused by such video documentation is that the Democrats need to reassure the public, beyond all doubt, that massive voter fraud isn’t going on. That’s really hard when the public is looking at cases of massive voter fraud.

        This horrible state of affairs was predicted many months ago when states scrambled to “reinvent voting”, opening the systems up to all sorts of abuse and misbehavior that everybody knew was going to be widespread, and that we knew wasn’t required because of a virus. Tens of millions of people stood in line to vote, and in most states that part went without a hitch. Those votes were counted accurately and automatically, using all the improvements we made after the Florida 2000 debacle.

        But instead of everyone doing that, we’ve got tens of millions of mail-in ballots of unknown authenticity, with no signature verification, and millions of more as-yet-unreturned ballots just floating out there somewhere, perhaps waiting to arrive in the back of an unmarked van. We’ve got other mail-in-ballots found in dumpsters and ditches.

        There’s no way the losing side is going to accept the result. Somehow, 2020 managed to get worse, yet again.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to George Turner says:

      Stuff I don’t mind:

      “We’re still counting votes and now we’re doing the counts for Bagadonuts County which is very urban and has a large urban community and appears to have gone 93% for Biden.”

      Stuff I do mind:

      “We’re still counting votes and now we’re doing the counts for Bagadonuts County which is very urban and has a large urban community and appears to have gone 100% for Biden and the 93,481 votes we found for Biden didn’t contain a single vote for Trump nor a single vote for a 3rd Party nor a single error.”Report

  17. greginak says:

    I’ll just throw out that as of now Biden has just under 3 million more votes nationally than trump. That will grow as the late count from the left coast gets added. This will probably be a little more than hillary won the pop vote. Hold your keyboard horses, i know we elect on the EC which isn’t going anywhere. But for anyone doing a post mortem on the election or trying to divine what “the people” think/want or looking at the tenous state of democracy it matters a lot.

    Obviously i’m biased but if trump pulls it out having him( or any) prez win two elections with a minority of the vote is a flippin disaster for democracy and for people feeling they have a stake in elections. Don’t even come with the republic blah blah bs. It’s dumber than a box of exceptionally stupid rocks.

    It also bears on the narrative of what the D’s need to do. That they need to appeal in more places is somewhat less then a new idea. But it’s not just the dreaded D’s in D places that vote leading to winning the pop vote. D’s in Repub voting states count ( and vice versa of course).Report

    • JoeSal in reply to greginak says:

      The disaster for democracy is when the crafters of the construct decided that ‘a single ring to rule them all’ was a good idea. It’s been shooting galleries ever since.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to greginak says:

      The whole “Mandate!” issue is one that consistently bugs me.

      Winning an election does (and should) have consequences and yes, the guy who won the election ought to be able to push his agenda forward.

      That said, a 58-42 election is significantly different from a 50-49 election and pushing his agenda forward means something differently in a 58-42 election than in a 50-49 one.

      I don’t know how to read House and Senate results in light of the Biden election.

      It doesn’t seem to be a rebuke of the losers. It doesn’t seem to be a mandate for the winners.

      If Biden picked up seats in the House and flipped the Senate, I don’t see how I’d argue against packing the court, for example. I’d probably appeal to some ideal or something.

      But Biden doesn’t seem to have picked up seats in the House nor has he flipped the Senate. (Matter of fact, he seems to have lost seats in the House.)

      And if, as some theorize, Biden retires and hands over the reigns to Kamala in a year or so?

      For my part, I don’t see elections as saying “WE WANT THIS!”
      I see them as saying “WE DON’T WANT THAT!”

      And responding as if an election is a mandate for THIS rather than throwing THAT out is a good way to be thrown out next time.Report

      • greginak in reply to Jaybird says:

        Oh crimany. Biden isnt’ going to retire unless he has some major health problem.

        People want all sorts of stuff when they vote: more of some things, less of others. Trying to figure out what people really wanted or vote meant is a mugs game.

        Minority rule is bad. The person who gets more votes might or might not have some of mandatey thing. The one gets fewer votes sure as heck doesn’t and that leads to a lot of problems and rather negative results.Report

      • George Turner in reply to Jaybird says:

        Well, court packing is out the window.

        I did see an interesting legal argument against it, which is that the Supreme Court, in a decision regarding the Trump travel bans, opened the window to considering a politician’s prior statements for a sign of bad intent. Well, both Biden and Democrats in the Senate went on the record saying their reason for packing the court was to exercise political control. That’s not a valid governmental need. It’s merely an attempt by one branch to control another branch.

        To add justices to the Supreme Court would require a different path, one where Congress sits around considering their caseload, asks Justices if they’re overworked, asks whether the system is perhaps too clogged, asks all kinds of questions that were not asked.

        Fortunately, we won’t have to face such questions.Report

      • Mike Schilling in reply to Jaybird says:

        You have to do the whole scenario:

        A House seat opens up in New York.
        Hillary is appointed to fill it.
        Hillary is elected Speaker.
        Harris resigns.
        Biden retires.

      • Aaron David in reply to Jaybird says:

        If I had to read a single rebuke into this vote thingy, I would say the only message is “STOP!!”

        And to me, this works from both ends of the spectrum.Report

    • Koz in reply to greginak says:

      It also bears on the narrative of what the D’s need to do. That they need to appeal in more places is somewhat less then a new idea. But it’s not just the dreaded D’s in D places that vote leading to winning the pop vote. D’s in Repub voting states count ( and vice versa of course).

      The bigger point for me is how the Demos think of themselves and where they want to go from here. It’s not at all obvious for me.

      The one thing that held the party together was antagonism to Trump and Red State America in general. Well, Trump is gone now, and antagonism for us doesn’t have a lot of juice left, especially since such a big percentage of Red State America votes Demo (or has recently).

      It’s also pretty clear that there’s very large chunks of the party who do not want to be associated with anything too radical, whether it’s 1970s era socialism or contemporary woke identity politics. And they have proven they will jump ship and start playing for the other team as soon as they see something they don’t like, and that goes both for primaries and general elections.

      So, I guess what’s left is generic postwar American liberalism running on autopilot. And in this case it’s personified by Joe Biden, who is pretty dim even in the best case. Are the other factions of the party really going to sit still for that? I dunno, but it’s also kinda hard to see where they should go.Report

  18. LeeEsq says:

    According to current Poll calculators, Biden seems posed to win at least Georgia or North Carolina. If this happens than by definition Biden isn’t a weak candidate. The truth is we have a Democratic majority but the American electoral system gives Republicans some key advantages because of how voters are geographically distributed.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to LeeEsq says:

      Biden wasn’t a weak candidate. He’s a pretty good one and he looks like he’s fixing to win the election with both an electoral college win and a popular vote win!

      But expectations were high.

      Check out the prediction thread again.Report

      • North in reply to Jaybird says:

        Actually I’m not feeling too bad about my prediction other than North Carolina. That one stings. ‘Fishin Cunningham. WTF did he think it was still the 90’s??Report

  19. Jaybird says:

    Alex Tabarrok confirms my priors:


    • North in reply to Jaybird says:

      I mean, on one hand I’m sympathetic. The extremis of woke left wing culture that rages on the internet and gets splashed all over the media has a lot to recommend against it. I’m not a supporter myself even if I am deeply sympathetic to the underlying liberal causes that the woke left straps itself and its baggage to.

      On the other hand, that puts the Dems in a bind because, as has been observed ad nauseum, Biden is not a woke candidate, he didn’t run as a woke candidate and he got nominated over the woke preferred candidates. The Democratic Party, as an institution, isn’t (currently) in thrall to the left wing woke brigades the way its counterpart is to social conservative forces. It just isn’t. So, then the quandary presents itself. The Dems may not be enthralled to the left wing woke brigade but you don’t really do well in elections by campaigning against your own winger fringe. You didn’t see Republicans campaigning against lunatic right wingers even before the party succumbed to what it is now. So there’s definitely the annoyance of Dems being expected to jump through hoops that Republicans aren’t. Then again maybe nobody expects anything more of the GOP and politics ain’t fair.

      Personally, I’d like to think a younger nimbler moderate candidate might have a hope of squaring this circle (But then I’m a moderate so I would) but it’s a pretty dicey proposition- telling off your extremes while not pissing them off too much. Obviously, the historical example is Clinton and Sistah Souljah springs to mind but that was, mind, an entirely different media ecosystem.

      Ah well, it’s not like we didn’t already know that new blood was needed. I suppose this is a problem for future politicians to tackle. Damned if I know how they will do it. I still would rather have the Dems problems than then Republicans ones.Report

      • greginak in reply to North says:

        I think a less moderate ( policy wise) candidate could make it work. If the fringes of the party felt like they were getting more they might get on board the bus. The prominent bernie sore losers on twitters didn’t help but they pretty much hate D’s so they were never going to cooperate.

        I’m looking forward to the D’s getting younger right about Now O’Clock which could help a lot. But we’ll see on that.Report

      • InMD in reply to North says:

        I think the Democratic Party is better defined by what it isn’t than what it is. That isn’t the worst thing in the world for a big political party to be but it means you have to offer goodie bags to all kinds of interests that aren’t always consistent or particularly well aligned with each other. I think this was easier to fudge as recently as 10 years ago but now everyone has the view from 40,000 feet in their pockets at all times. The cracks are way easier to spot.

        And none of this is to say the GOP doesn’t have serious problems itself but there’s work to do. Potentially a lot of it.Report

      • DensityDuck in reply to North says:

        I think that everyone was waiting for the Sistah Souljah moment from Biden, and it kinda said something that he never did that.Report

        • North in reply to DensityDuck says:

          I think to do a Sistah Souljah moment you need either for the candidate to believe in it strongly or for the campaign to perceive that one is needed and thus is worth the risk.

          I don’t think his campaign thought he needed one and I don’t think ol’ Biden felt any particular way on the matter of wokeness strongly enough to push for it.Report

        • Pinky in reply to DensityDuck says:

          You could argue that he pivoted away from the center in the general, which may be a first.Report

    • LeeEsq in reply to Jaybird says:

      There is no way that Sanders would have not run as a cultural left candidate. He knows that this his biggest weak point with reliable Democratic voters and did a lot in the primaries to sure up his bonafides.Report

    • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird says:

      Tabarrok is confirming my priors, just from a different angle.

      That the Republican Party concerns itself primarily with culture war issues and signaling.Report

    • Marchmaine in reply to Jaybird says:

      Keep telling y’all… first party to the Upper Left wins.

      Could be Dems, could be Republicans, could be other.Report

    • DavidTC in reply to Jaybird says:

      This is true, but by ‘cultural left’, they actually mean ‘non-white people’.Report

  20. LeeEsq says:

    On the Democratic side of the aisle, activists need to give up the idea that there is a monolithic group of Americans known as people of color that always support the Democratic candidate. African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, and Asian-Americans are very different groups. The later to are also compromised of different subgroups. One way these groups are different is that Cold War politics works a lot better on the Hispanic American electorate than it does on the Asian-American electorate. Very few Asian-Americans seemed to believe that the Democratic Party are Communist lines of the Republicans but Cuban and Venezuelans Americans brought it up. Trump’s machismo also played well with Hispanic American voters.Report

    • North in reply to LeeEsq says:

      I suspect Cuba and Venezuela are a bit fresher in those voters minds than Vietnam is.Report

    • Chip Daniels in reply to LeeEsq says:

      Its like no one noticed that Batista, Somoza, Pinochet, and Rios Montt were also Hispanic, or how much Trump resembles them.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Chip Daniels says:

        few Americans actually know about them. Those of us who do made these allusions for years to deaf audiences. Castro is still a right side boogey man – and he’s dead.Report

        • LeeEsq in reply to Philip H says:

          What I think Chip meant is that there is a big political market for somebody like Trump among Hispanic voters.Report

          • Philip H in reply to LeeEsq says:

            true. Its also hard for non-Hispanic Americans to understand that because we generally don’t know about that history south of the border. Its also why the Hitler comparisons are woefully inadequate.Report

    • Brandon Berg in reply to LeeEsq says:

      Very few Asian-Americans seemed to believe that the Democratic Party are Communist lines of the Republicans

      It doesn’t help that Bernie Sanders (admittedly not officially a Democrat, but effectively acts as one and was a serious [electorally, not intellectually] candidate in the primary) and Ocasio-Cortez are self-described socialists, as are a significant minority of the Democratic base. The Democratic Party is not socialist, but it has a growing socialist problem that it needs to address.Report

  21. Philip H says:

    CNN has called Wisconsin for Biden, and still has Michigan, Arizona and Nevada leaning to him.Report

  22. Trump’s proclaiming that he’s already won and any further vote counting is fraud:

    1. Is exactly as expected.
    2. Demonstrates once again that he’s completely unfit.Report

    • Philip H in reply to Mike Schilling says:

      Lots of Republican Secretaries of State should be railing against him in as much as he’s insulting them.Report

    • George Turner in reply to Mike Schilling says:

      The problem is that 100% of Republicans know that Biden is unfit, and is an agent of hostile foreign powers who should be in prison for massive bribery, corruption, money laundering, influence pedaling, and possibly treason. It’s all laid out in the e-mails and testimony that the FBI and the Senate are collecting, and will continue to collect. You won’t get a Republican buy-in on Biden. They’ve all been reading the information that Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey wouldn’t let you see.Report

      • Philip H in reply to George Turner says:

        And yet 100% of Republican Secretaries of State are counting all the ballot for both candidates according to their own state’s laws regardless of what their Fearless Cheeto says. I guess they didn’t see the emails or video as anything they should do something about.Report

        • George Turner in reply to Philip H says:

          And that counting is going Republican. ABC just retracted their call for Arizona. Trump is expected to win it by 30,000 votes. And that’s aside from the investigation into a major R undercount in Arizona due to poll workers in some heavily Republican areas giving out Sharpies instead of the required marker, so that the votes didn’t register with the scanners. As happened in Florida, if the intent of the voter is clear, the vote gets counted.

          Trump is expected to win Pennsylvania by 40K votes. And R votes are still arriving in Wisconsin, Nevada, and Michigan. They’d quit counting in the Republican areas.

          Strangely, a Biden loss is probably a much better outcome for Democrats than a Biden squeaker, given that if he gets in, he’s going to be an albatross that may doom them for a generation. The evidence piling up from the Hunter scandal will be unavoidable, as will his Alzheimer’s (Yesterday he forgot that his eldest son was dead, and he got the names and parentage of his granddaughter’s wrong). They’d end up with Kamala, and even Democrats can’t stand Kamala. That’s why they kept her nearly invisible throughout the campaign. She was toxic.Report

  23. DeJoy’s refusal to check for and deliver stalled ballots will be without consequence to him and will be rewarded in the election results, exactly like Katharine Harris’s stalling the Florida recount in 2000.Report

  24. North says:

    Whelp, looks like Senator Collins deeply concerned face will be with us for another cycle. On the bright side looks like WI is being called for Biden which means Trumps odds of winning are collapsing. It ain’t no landslide but I’ll still take it.Report

    • Philip H in reply to North says:

      AP, CNNC, ABC and Fox all have Michigan leaning Biden with 99% reporting.

      Wisconsin is called for Biden with 99% reporting

      Arizona is either called for or leaning Biden at 84% reporting

      Nevada is leaning Biden with 75% reporting.Report

      • 2000: Republican operatives riot to stop the vote counting while their guy is ahead.

        2020: Regular guy Republicans riot to stop the vote counting while their guy is behind.Report

        • DavidTC in reply to Mike Schilling says:

          Yeah, I just noticed that. And Trump has a lawsuit in for that, also.

          Like…you guys know they won’t _uncount_ votes back to where they were when you filed the lawsuit, right?

          Actually…you guys know there is literally no possible justification for stopping the original counting of ballots, right? The Brooks Brother riot was about a _recount_.

          No court in America, I don’t care how conservative, is going to say ‘You have counted 80,000 of 100,000 ballots, now you should stop’.Report

  25. Marchmaine says:

    I want to imagine that Biden upon reaching his final tally of 270 EC votes pumps his fist and yells, “Nailed it!” while his aides politely look at their shoes.

    At least that’s how I imagine Sorkin would’ve written it.Report

  26. Koz says:

    At this point, you gotta figure the GOP chances of taking the House in 2022 are somewhere north of 80%Report

    • North in reply to Koz says:

      My hangover and I see double at the very idea of trying to game 2022 out. But the news desks have formally projected Biden has won MI and I just don’t see any way Trump gets enough votes in NV to snatch it back. That means Trump is a one term President. Congrats Koz, I know you were rootin for it as much as us libs were.Report

      • Koz in reply to North says:

        Yeah, this election came in better than I could have legitimately hoped for. One guy on twitter I respect wrote that John James winning in Michigan while Trump loses is better than the country deserves and I gotta admit that’s basically where I am as well.Report

      • Koz in reply to North says:

        As far as 2022 goes, at least the logic isn’t complicated. The Trump years have shown the GOP where the votes are, but now we don’t actually have to have Trump with his gale-force negative approval headwind.Report

  27. Kazzy says:

    Remember when I said GOPers would wake up from their Trump fever dream if he loses? Welp, it’s happening…


    • Philip H in reply to Kazzy says:

      I see at least 5 2024 contenders in this list:

      Mitch McConnell
      – Marco Rubio
      – Rob Portman
      – Mike Lee
      – Gov.-elect of Utah
      – Chris Christie
      – Rick Santorum
      – AZ Gov. Ducey
      – Mike Huckabee
      – John BoltonReport

  28. Jaybird says:

    Here’s the vibe I’m getting:

    Most “respectable” variants of Republicans weren’t crazy about Trump. They didn’t like him at all. But they *HATED* Hillary Clinton. Trump winning allowed them the less distasteful option of the two.

    Biden versus Trump was going to be a problem because they didn’t want Trump to lose, but, if you’re going to lose, you’d want to lose to someone like Biden. The problem is that there wasn’t a clear path to losing to Biden without also losing Senate seats and losing House seats (and the various State-level stuff).

    If there were a way to lose to Biden but make gains in the house, hold the line in the Senate, and get rid of Trump (AND GOOD RIDDANCE!), they’d have taken that deal in a heartbeat.

    And that’s what they got.Report

    • Marchmaine in reply to Jaybird says:

      Yeah, from my perspective it’s not a horrible outcome. I’m a little concerned that the tightness of the race will keep Trump viable as a sort of “Shadow President” that will retard the reckoning/rebuild/realign. But the work must continue either way… probably better with these results for the next 4 years… but I do think it delays real improvements in a weird hanged state.Report

      • Marchmaine in reply to Marchmaine says:

        Although, if I’m reading the Senate races correctly… it’s at least a little bit of a pause to think everything will hinge on Kelly Loeffler in the run-off. That kinda has Greek Tragedy (or Comedy) written all over it.Report

        • North in reply to Marchmaine says:

          I have doubts that the GOP will start doing a r/r/r if they don’t suffer more grevious losses than this. Change is painful. They’ll have Trump and his aligned media carping from the sidelines and they’ll have the Senate. Why would they embark on the three r’s?Report

          • Marchmaine in reply to North says:

            Well, right… I thought that’s how I arranged the words above. 🙂

            But seriously, I don’t think any of us have fully contemplated what life with two Presidents will be like.Report

            • When has Trump ever acted like a president? He’ll tweet, of course, but what else?Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to Mike Schilling says:

                I could see a few networks paying him a bajillion dollars to be their expert analyst… I mean, he is, technically, the ex-President… and he’s not afraid to make up stories about stuff he heard/said/did and comment on whatever damn thing is up for commenting in our 24hr news cycle.Report

              • North in reply to Mike Schilling says:

                He will potentially plague* the Republican party. He’ll be able to do the things he likes to do: shit stir, posture, make dumb off the cuff remarks with none of the stuff that he dislikes doing: govern, think, bargain.
                The big question is what the Trump supporters do. If he continues to hold considerable sway with them then he’ll be a nightmare for the GOP dragging their politicians around by the nose.
                My own money, however, is that most Trump voter loyalty is partisan and they’ll mostly forget him.

                *All this presumes that his debts don’t catch up to him once he doesn’t have an entire national party and media apparatus running cover for him and it presumes he doesn’t end up bankrupt or in jail.Report

        • Don’t sell her short.Report

        • DavidTC in reply to Marchmaine says:

          Yeah, that’s going to be weird as hell.

          Doug Collins, Republican runner-up, (I’ve mentioned him before here, he used to be my Rep, and I’ve run across him) is a conservative ‘family values’ type guy. Just…bog standard religious conservative. As much as I didn’t like the guy’s politics, I have to admit he reflected his district fine. And he didn’t seem to be any sort of hypocrite, or asshole, just…wanted things I don’t like, politically.

          Raphael Warnock is _also_ fairly religous, he’s the pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, most famous for Martin Luther King Jr. being a member and co-pastor.

          Kelly Loeffler is a millionaire q-anon lunatic from Illinois. In fact, she’s worth _half a billion_. She didn’t run in 2014 because her company was in the middle of being aquired by the NYSE.

          And she just beat Collins, and her and Warnock are in the runoff.

          So the question is…did the people that vote for Collins vote for him because of…well, religion? Or does the party label mean more?

          She is…not the sort of person we tend to elect in Georgia. She’s not one of us. And I say that as a liberal, but…I mean, this is the state that voted for Jimmy Carter, he might be a Democrat, but he was one of us. So on one hand, we’ve got a Black Baptist pastor from a historic church in Altanta, who grew up in Savannah, very clearly in the mold of MLKj…or we’ve got a half-billionaire carpetbagger who is married to the Chairman of the New York Stock Exchange?

          Um…I honestly don’t how that works out. I’m not saying that because I’m hopeful about Warnock…I am, but…I really don’t know how that comes down, if partisanship is now more important than being a local.

          Before anyone asks…I have no idea what political ads ran. I have no idea how Collins (Who is also a local) framed this. I do know, in the runoff, it will be different.

          On top of that…the ballot was absurdly large, and other Democrats got at least 500,000 votes…and Republicans did not.

          I’d like to see the math on how this plays out if we just assume every Democratic vote goes to Warnock and every Republican vote goes to Loeffler. Obviously, that isn’t how it would actually work out…there were like three independents and a Libertarian, and on top of that obviously the runoff won’t have the same turnout as a presidental election, but…I’m not actually sure more Republican votes were cast than Democratic votes there.

          Georgia’s _other_ Senate election (The normal one, the other one is to fill a partial term.), which had a normal primary and thus one of each party ran…might go to a runoff. You have to get 50%+ and David Perdue is at 50.3%, Jon Ossoff at 47.4%, and Shane Hazel, the Libertarian, has run off with 2.3%.

          Even if it does go to runoff, Perdue is probably going to win, but…it’s interesting how close that one was.Report

          • DavidTC in reply to DavidTC says:

            Here’s a fun thing I just realized: If the GA Senate elections both go to runoff, they go _at the same time_, logically. Which…will improve turnout.

            Alternately, let’s say Perdue squeaks in this round…and when that happens, there’s always the people who regret not voting. And they can fix their regret for not helping elect a Democratic Senator by electing a different one.

            So, either way, turnout should be slightly higher than normal…and, plus, if it really does swing the Senate…Report

    • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird says:

      Do you see them employing a strategy that got them there? Or things broke just so and it happened? I wasn’t tuned into Senate/House races enough to know what they might have done there that upped those odds without carrying over to Trump.Report

  29. Remember the 2012 presidential election? A real squeaker, right?

    By the time all the votes were counted, Obama had won by 5 million votes and 332-206, but it’s the early impressions that last.Report

  30. Jaybird says:

    Thinking about this on the drive home. Biden won the presidency, but he doesn’t really seem to *WANT* it. He’d rather be home and enjoying his retirement. He’d have preferred Clinton to have won in 2016 so he wouldn’t *HAVE* to run this time around… but, like Maximus, it had to be him.

    He won, but he doesn’t want it.


    I am on board with Biden.Report

    • George Turner in reply to Jaybird says:

      Except that Biden is a foreign agent, to the tune of a billion Chinese dollars and several hundred million Kremlin dollars. That is 100% unacceptable, and the Democrats won’t stop the signal from getting through. The Senate has already been having hearings on it, and taking testimony.

      Big big things have been happening that the media was desperately ignoring. Those things are soon coming due, and of course if Trump loses, he’s got till January to basically nuke Washington, perhaps getting some payback for having Obama illegally spy on his campaign and try to overthrow his administration.

      2021 is going to be much worse than 2020.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to George Turner says:

        I imagine we’ll want to put a pin in this and come back to it later.

        (For the record, the only thing I really expect to see happen is Radical Islamic Terror to start making a major comeback. We’ll need to fight it, of course.)Report

        • George Turner in reply to Jaybird says:

          It will definitely come up again. The Senate Republicans are still in hot pursuit, and they have a very fresh trail to follow. The argument the Democrats keep making is “You’ve already investigated this and found no evidence!” The Republican reply is “We just found it. Giant piles of evidence, which we have verified.”

          The FBI is also investigating Joe Biden for money laundering and tax evasion. The money laundering might be the worst, because Hunter and his partner accepted $2.5 million from the wife of the Mayor of Moscow to launder money for Kremlin officials who were under US sanctions. The deal was that they would get the money into the US and, well, launder it. However, the wording on one of the e-mails is a vague as to whether they laundered $200 million in Kremlin money or whether they made $200 million laundering perhaps a billion or more in Kremlin money. And of course Joe likely got 10% as his cut.Report

        • InMD in reply to Jaybird says:

          We have had a few incidents in Europe recently. Someone has to exploit them for something right? Right?Report

      • North in reply to George Turner says:

        Uh, George, hate to bring this up again but I was made several assurances by you including that Hillary would have orchestrated a coup by now. With Biden poised to take the presidency this would be an ideal time to deliver. Where’s my President Hilldawg?Report

        • greginak in reply to North says:

          The Qberts out there are sorely aggrieved and want some arrests now. It’s all supposed to have happened by now. What has happened to the plan???Report

          • InMD in reply to greginak says:

            Clearly you haven’t been paying attention to the signs. It’s all coming to fruition, any day now.Report

          • DavidTC in reply to greginak says:

            Trust The Plan.

            The Plan needs Trump to be in prison, to impliment the next stage of The Plan.

            The only way for him to infiltrate prisons is to pretend to lose the election. He already tried to get impeached, and failed, so he had to pretend to lose. Most of the States are in on it…Trump actually won by quite a lot, obviously, but the state government are pretending he didn’t. There will be a secret ‘real’ EC vote in addition to the show vote they’re going to do .

            Once he is in prison, The Plan can continue. Don’t worry.Report

  31. DavidTC says:

    Man, I take my eyes of Georgia for a second and it’s now 49.9% Trump, 48.9 Biden. 50,000 vote difference. Which can be gained in the Altanta area alone, and that’s _not_ the only Democratic area still out.

    If Georgia is what pushes Biden over, my mind will be blown.Report

    • George Turner in reply to DavidTC says:

      Well, as Biden himself bragged, “We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.” He was not wrong.

      Election officials in Democrat cities are busily creating new ballots, altering existing ballots, and transcribing ballots, all of which is illegal. They won’t allow Republicans to monitor their fraud operations, which is also illegal. The Republicans have a solid case in rejecting ALL ballots that were handled in secret, until those ballots can be individually verified for their authenticity.

      Remember, you have to get Republicans to buy in to the idea that they actually lost the election. If they think it’s straight up fraud, things get really ugly.Report

      • DavidTC in reply to George Turner says:

        It sure was weird how the GA Republican Secretary of State barred poll watchers. Um…I mean, he hasn’t, but we’re pretending here.

        But he sure is complaining about…fraud…probably? Or…not?

        But it’s good to see you know more about the Georgia election process and how the Democrats are cheating than the actual Georgia Secretary of State who is, again, a Republican.

        38,143 vote difference now, 97.2% counted.Report

  32. Kazzy says:

    Weird thing I’m noticing…

    I haven’t tried VERY hard but I’ve seen almost no mention of the popular vote totals.Report

  33. Chip Daniels says:

    George Packer in the Atlantic:

    “We don’t yet know the outcome of the election, but its meaning is already clear. We are two countries, and neither of them is going to be conquered or disappear anytime soon. The outcome of the 2016 election was not a historical fluke or result of foreign subversion, but a pretty accurate reflection of the American electorate. The much-discussed Democratic majority that’s been emerging since the turn of the millennium is still in a state of emergence and probably will keep on emerging for years to come. The will of the majority is indeed blocked by undemocratic rules and unscrupulous politicians, but it’s a bare majority without enough numbers to govern. When America finally becomes the promised land dominated by tech-savvy Millennials, its political values will be far from certain.”


  34. George Turner says:

    *comment in moderation – that also became a “wall of text”. Not sure what happened to the paragraph breaks. Very weird.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to George Turner says:

      (I don’t see anything in Limbo.)Report

      • George Turner in reply to Jaybird says:

        I’ll eventually figure it out. Meanwhile.


        Trump has taken a commanding lead in Michigan, 51.44%.

        Does that mean anything? Not really. I just gives the fake-vote generators something to strive for.

        Meanwhile, in Wisconsin, O’Keefe has struck again. He’s got a postal worker explaining that they were told, by the Post Office, to segregate all newly arriving ballots so they could be back-dated to November 3rd.Report

        • George Turner in reply to George Turner says:

          Ignore those Michigan results. Those are probably ballots that have been “certified” as counted, or some such thing. Other totals are much much higher, and have Biden in the lead.Report

  35. DavidTC says:

    Guys, here in Georgia, David Perdue is at 50.1% and if he falls behind by another 6857 votes he gets forced to runoff.

    Meanwhile, Trump’s lead is _plummetting_. Mail-in ballots are way, way more Democratic than people thought. It turns out that with everyone out of work, and Biden saying ‘Using absentee ballots’, the Georgia electorate has basically just wandered straight past all the voter supression and voted what the demographics say they should.

    A reminder: Georgia is 30% Black and 9% Hispanic.

    And…this election, it started to vote like that. People sitting at home had time to jump through the stupid hurdle for registration and requesting abesentee ballots and everything that Georgia had set up to help middle-glass white voters vote. There never was a huge threshold to this, it’s not particular hard once you decide to do it, it just wasn’t really presented as an option people should use…until this election.


    I honestly don’t know if Biden is going to cross the line. The numbers are completely insane, Trump has a mere 0.5% lead now, 23,000 votes. The absentee ballots are _wildly_ pro-Biden, like five to one. Even from _Republican_ areas, they are disproportionally Biden. The question is…will Biden manage to close the gap before the ballots run out. 97.7% of precincts are supposedly in.

    Oh, and fun fact: Georgia voters can fix rejected absentee ballots until Friday. And that’s probably 2000 ballots. So…there’s going to be a fair amount of panic tomorrow as abesntee voters figure out they need to and look themselves up to see if their ballot was accepted, because it may literally decide the race.

    I’m going to bed. I might wake up to a blue Georgia.Report

    • DensityDuck in reply to DavidTC says:

      are you sure that you aren’t George posting as a sockpuppetReport

      • DavidTC in reply to DensityDuck says:

        I have no idea what that means.

        The Perdue/Ossoff race has, at this point, been forced to a runoff.

        The counted precincts are now at 97.9%. So…they have changed by 0.2%

        Trump now only leads by 18,146.

        He’s somehow lost 5000 of his lead by only another 0.2% precincts reporting in, which shows just how tilted towards Biden these mail-in ballots are.

        This is completely insane.Report

  36. Jaybird says:

    Clinton *WAS* bad at this, I guess.