Posted on 11/14/2016 10:33:53 PM PST by RC one
Once again that "States don’t count their absentee ballots unless the number of outstanding absentee ballots is larger than the state margin of difference" is an oft-repeated assertion that is in dire need of documentation. I decided to research this myself issue and despite over 50 results all i can find are answers such as this:
I heard that Vote by Mail ballots are only counted if a contest is close. Is that true?
No;
All valid Vote by Mail ballots are counted. Because voters are
cautioned that Vote by Mail ballots returned to the polls on Election
Day will not be included in election night results, this has been
misunderstood to mean they are not counted at all. This rumor is likely
due to a misunderstanding of how Vote by Mail ballots must be processed.
Because signatures on Vote by Mail ballots must be verified before the
ballots can be counted, ballots received within 1-2 days prior to
Election Day may not be counted and included in semi-final results
reported election night. It may take up to one week to verify all
signatures on Vote by Mail ballots returned close to, or on, Election
Day before the votes cast can be counted and included in the final,
official results.
(http://vote.sonoma-county.org/...
I’ve heard that absentee ballots are only counted if they will affect the outcome of the election. Is this true?
No. All absentee ballots that are received on time are considered for
counting. Absentee ballots received by Election Day are counted on
Election Day. Ballots received after Election Day but before the
deadline are counted when the absentee and special voters’ precinct
board meets as long as they are postmarked the day before Election Day
or earlier. (https://sos.iowa.gov/elections...
Are special ballot counted even if they will not change the outcome of the election?
All qualified votes cast by special ballot are tabulated. (https://www.dcboee.org/faq/vot...
Myth: Absentee ballots only count in close elections.
Reality: False. Absentee ballots submitted in accordance with state laws are counted for every election. The difference is that in a close election the media reports that the outcome cannot be announced until after the absentee ballots are counted. However, all ballots are counted in the final totals for every election -- and every vote (absentee or in-person) counts the same. - https://www.army.mil/article/134530
It is not settled yet. Latest i see (CNN) is Clinton 61,324,576 and Trump at 60,526,852, a 797,724.00 difference.
However, the last count i saw Gary Johnson received 4,042,291, or 3.2 percent of the total vote, and . Jill Stein's total popular votes were approximately 1,200,000 as of Wednesday afternoon. Thus if most of Johnson's votes went to Trump and (if even) half of Stein's went to Clinton (as some say they would) then that would be more than Clinton's current 700,000 popular vote victory and have given Trump the popular vote victory.
And most other opinions i have read indicate that Johnson voters would have chosen Trump if their candidate was not running.
Polls show Gary Johnson taking more support from Clinton, not Trump http://hotair.com/archives/2016/08/02/polls-show-gary-johnson-taking-more-support-from-clinton-not-trump/
So for what it is worth, which is not much, this is an argument against the "most American wanted Clinton for President" assertion.
Until we can identify all the illegal votes from illegals, the dead, the disabled/elderly who were taken advantage of, etc; the popular vote means nothing other than Trump probably won it too.
2 weeks ago, Democrats were gloating about the “electoral advantage” that they held. Now all of a sudden they’re not so enthusiastic about the electoral college. shocker. Nobody likes to lose. We’re the big winners this week but the American people will turn on us eventually too and then we’ll be the ones bitching and moaning about how unfair life is. That’s America and that’s why we have to make the most of this victory, so that when they do win again, they’ll have a hell of a time undoing what we have wrought. That’s also why we need Donald Trump to, first and foremost, Make America Great Again. I do not want to give the American people a reason to fire us and I would rather we have 8 years than 4.
I agree. They have corrupted our Democratic processes long enough. time for them to go.
Yes
Agreed 100%. Like I just wrote, 2 weeks ago, the Democrats were bragging about the electoral advantage they held over us and now all of a sudden, the electoral college is so unfair. Boo Hoo. This is nothing but Democrats kicking and screaming because they didn't get their way. 200+ years of precedent isn't going to be replaced because the liberals didn't get their way no matter how much they kick and scream. Sorry, not sorry.
... and the fact that many states don’t bother to count their absentee ballots unless the number of those ballots exceeds the election differential. So there’s a pool of uncounted ballots out there.
Clinton lost; Trump won.
The End
See 41 above.
That’s a good point....And if you add the votes of Trump and the third party votes as popular votes against her, she still would not have won the popular vote over all...just about 47 to 53. Her husband won by 43 per cent in 1992...Bush got 37 and ross perot got 19....between Bush and Perot...they got 56 per cent of the popular vote. To use the logic of the “popular vote devotees”... since no person had over 50 per cent a coalition “sharing” power scheme should have been used...like some have been proposing for Hillary and Trump... believe it or not!(I’ve read it in several spots)!
I’m sure I saw and article indicating that as of Remembrance Day, she no longer holds the popular vote.
The electoral college provides the impetus for the 50 states to stay together(which is why it was used as the smaller former colonies protested against the “bullying” influences that the larger colonies would have in the new Union of states.) Take it away and you will see the nation split up as smaller states will form newer alliances with each other to counter balance the larger “city states”. You’d end up with the situation that was the Italian city states from 1100 all the way to the early 1848 or so when Italy finally took on it’s modern shape. There were frequent wars, regional alliances that came together then fell apart, frequent assassinations and lots of suffering for the poor!
If he truly believes this, and wasn't just saying it in an attempt to calm people down, then he needs an education as to why he is wrong.
He won both popular and electoral votes. It was the illegals who took Hillary down.
You cited the rules from a county in Arizona, from DC, and a us military site but I think the practice is much different in most states...I don’t think all mail in votes or absentees are counted unless we are talking about margins that may affect the outcome...then they are counted out. Witness the “sudden” discovery of absentee and mail in ballots that “suddenly” appeared that “helped” Al Franken in Minnesota or affected races in Oregon and Washington state. These were “claimed to be” legitimate votes not fraudulently manufactured(I think fraud)...but if not fraud then these were ballots not originally counted because it was thought at first that the numbers of left over ballots would not have affected the final outcome and like a lot of folks....sometimes election workers get tired and just take a few short cuts just to go home!
There was a controversy a couple of elections back here in Va where one municipality stated they didn’t count certain ballots because the numbers wouldn’t have affected the outcomes. Judges have sometimes ruled that way.(ie the quashing of investigations of Philly vote fraud where vote tallies in some precincts came in at 120 per cent of registered voters for Obama and 0 votes for McCain and Romney)
In a popular vote method for the presidency, every vote including mail in and absentee would have to be counted(they should any way ). It would take at least weeks to totally count them with all kinds of court challenges. Then the politics of the various coastal cities and Chicago would then hold undue sway over the entire continent!
Excellent historical perspective.
But, but, but...Aaron Blake wrote: Clinton's margin is likely to grow from here — to as much as two full points, according to some estimates.
Whose estimates? Major thinkers, or some moon-bat publication?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.