Congressional Special Election (last call! unstickied after NY-27 final results)

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

And the people of the 9th chose Harris.

These disingenuous posts, with their repetition, are crossing the line into trolling. I suggest you reconsider.

If people see trolling behavior on these threads, please report to the mods.

Since when is stating a fact trolling. Even if you invalidate every single absentee ballot from Bladen County Harris still wins. The people of the ninth clearly chose Harris lol, that’s not trolling.

Of course, this should still be investigated and if someone committed fraud they should be thrown in jail. But the county is just too small to have had an impact on this race’s outcome.

Not true in the primary. Harris may not even be a legitimate nominee.

[UncleSam]

And the people of the 9th chose Harris.

These disingenuous posts, with their repetition, are crossing the line into trolling. I suggest you reconsider.

If people see trolling behavior on these threads, please report to the mods.

Since when is stating a fact trolling. Even if you invalidate every single absentee ballot from Bladen County Harris still wins. The people of the ninth clearly chose Harris lol, that’s not trolling.

Of course, this should still be investigated and if someone committed fraud they should be thrown in jail. But the county is just too small to have had an impact on this race’s outcome.

Not true in the primary. Harris may not even be a legitimate nominee.

The primary was decided by 800 votes. Again, if you entirely invalidate the votes they are investigating Harris still would’ve won. It’s just simple math.

[GeorgiaModerate]

And the people of the 9th chose Harris.

These disingenuous posts, with their repetition, are crossing the line into trolling. I suggest you reconsider.

If people see trolling behavior on these threads, please report to the mods.

Since when is stating a fact trolling. Even if you invalidate every single absentee ballot from Bladen County Harris still wins. The people of the ninth clearly chose Harris lol, that’s not trolling.

Of course, this should still be investigated and if someone committed fraud they should be thrown in jail. But the county is just too small to have had an impact on this race’s outcome.

It has also been claimed in one article that the absentee ballot harvesting operation may have simply destroyed many ballots that were cast for McCready (don't have the citation handy, sorry).  There is no way to adjust for this.  If these allegations of massive ballot harvesting do pan out, this election is hopelessly tainted, and the only fair course of action is to call a new election, hopefully with tighter controls.  If Harris wins that, I will be the first to say he is the rightful Representative for this district.

[jimrtex]

Are there enough votes in the precincts where the results look fudged that McCready could have won the election?

Vosem,

That's a very good question, and unfortunately NC is not as transparent in posting precinct level election results at a Statewide level.

So, in States or Counties where it is difficult to obtain public official election results, such as Bladen County NC, it becomes a bit more challenging....

Go to:

NC State Board of Election

Click on 2018 Election Results in Lower Middle.
Select the election of interest: 11/8/2016 and Office: Council of State.

Then click on Display Large Map at lower left, then click on Bladen County, and then under Governor's race, click on Display Vote Details. You can just scroll over the precincts or select Display by Precinct.

Four of the anomalous precincts for 2018 are on the western edge of the county. P30 in the southeast is also anomalous, but it is in the other CD.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You want P60 instead of P201.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There are results for both CD's for P25. So perhaps even if a district splits a precinct, they simply provide different ballot styles. The Bladen precincts appear to match the townships.

There was an effort to not split precincts in the re-redistricting, since that was used as an indicia of racial gerrymandering.

The precinct results do not include the early voting in-person or by-mail. Since more than half the votes were cast early, this is a problem. The official canvass may include this information.

There was only one early voting location, at Elizabethtown, the county seat. It is about 15 miles from places like Bladenboro or Tar Heel. A 40-minute round trip might be OK to vote for president, senator, and governor, but less so when the top race is a congressional race where you are a rural county on the extreme end of the district away from Charlotte.

***OK I found it. In 2016 there were four early voting locations, including ones in Bladenboro, Dublin, and East Arcadia. The one in Bladenboro was 74% for Burr(R), The one in Dublin was 67% for Burr, and the one in East Arcadia was 9% for Burr.

Election day voting was up in all these areas relative to 2016 (P60 North of Dublin), P15 (Dublin), P202 (Bladenboro), P201 (Bladenboro), and P30 (East Arcadia)). That is, the absence of local early voting, pushed voters into election day voting and perhaps vote-by-mail.

In 2016, election-day turnout was down in most of those precincts, even though more votes overall were cast. This means they likely shifted to early voting when there were convenient early voting sites. 2016 election day turnout was also down in P501 and P502 (both in Elizabethtown). But it did not rebound in 2018, likely because there continued to be convenient in-town early voting.

[Brittain33]

And the people of the 9th chose Harris.

These disingenuous posts, with their repetition, are crossing the line into trolling. I suggest you reconsider.

If people see trolling behavior on these threads, please report to the mods.

Since when is stating a fact trolling. Even if you invalidate every single absentee ballot from Bladen County Harris still wins. The people of the ninth clearly chose Harris lol, that’s not trolling.

Of course, this should still be investigated and if someone committed fraud they should be thrown in jail. But the county is just too small to have had an impact on this race’s outcome.

When it’s false AND it’s posted disingenuously ignoring the facts posted and quoted AND it’s posted multiple times in a row. That’s when it crosses the line into trolling. Bagel knows what he’s doing.

[jimrtex]

If nothing else, I want a reporter to visit the precinct which doubled (!) turnout between 2016 and 2018 while the county as a whole saw turnout go down 12%. Must be a fascinating place.

Likely has something to do with the early voting location in Bladenboro being closed in 2018.

In 2016 early voting at that location was 74% for Burr(R) in the US Senate race.

I would be fascinated if your reporter, would mention that.

[RogueBeaver]

https://twitter.com/RaleighReporter/status/1068567145431400449

[justfollowingtheelections]

And the people of the 9th chose Harris.

These disingenuous posts, with their repetition, are crossing the line into trolling. I suggest you reconsider.

If people see trolling behavior on these threads, please report to the mods.

Since when is stating a fact trolling. Even if you invalidate every single absentee ballot from Bladen County Harris still wins. The people of the ninth clearly chose Harris lol, that’s not trolling.

Of course, this should still be investigated and if someone committed fraud they should be thrown in jail. But the county is just too small to have had an impact on this race’s outcome.

Not true in the primary. Harris may not even be a legitimate nominee.

The primary was decided by 800 votes. Again, if you entirely invalidate the votes they are investigating Harris still would’ve won. It’s just simple math.

That's not how math works my friend.  Sure, if you don't count the votes from that county the Republican may be winning, but what if the Democrat won more votes than the Republican in that county?  So invalidating votes from the county isn't a fair solution.

[UncleSam]

And the people of the 9th chose Harris.

These disingenuous posts, with their repetition, are crossing the line into trolling. I suggest you reconsider.

If people see trolling behavior on these threads, please report to the mods.

Since when is stating a fact trolling. Even if you invalidate every single absentee ballot from Bladen County Harris still wins. The people of the ninth clearly chose Harris lol, that’s not trolling.

Of course, this should still be investigated and if someone committed fraud they should be thrown in jail. But the county is just too small to have had an impact on this race’s outcome.

Not true in the primary. Harris may not even be a legitimate nominee.

The primary was decided by 800 votes. Again, if you entirely invalidate the votes they are investigating Harris still would’ve won. It’s just simple math.

That's not how math works my friend.  Sure, if you don't count the votes from that county the Republican may be winning, but what if the Democrat won more votes than the Republican in that county?  So invalidating votes from the county isn't a fair solution.

It is literally impossible for the Democrat to have won enough votes in the absentee vote in that county to have won the election. The Democrat would’ve had to win 300% as many votes as there were total absentees to win the election. That is how math works.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Like Nate Silver said, "yeah, there was rampant election fraud but it didn't determine the winner" isn't exactly a winning argument.

[GeorgiaModerate]

And the people of the 9th chose Harris.

These disingenuous posts, with their repetition, are crossing the line into trolling. I suggest you reconsider.

If people see trolling behavior on these threads, please report to the mods.

Since when is stating a fact trolling. Even if you invalidate every single absentee ballot from Bladen County Harris still wins. The people of the ninth clearly chose Harris lol, that’s not trolling.

Of course, this should still be investigated and if someone committed fraud they should be thrown in jail. But the county is just too small to have had an impact on this race’s outcome.

Not true in the primary. Harris may not even be a legitimate nominee.

The primary was decided by 800 votes. Again, if you entirely invalidate the votes they are investigating Harris still would’ve won. It’s just simple math.

That's not how math works my friend.  Sure, if you don't count the votes from that county the Republican may be winning, but what if the Democrat won more votes than the Republican in that county?  So invalidating votes from the county isn't a fair solution.

It is literally impossible for the Democrat to have won enough votes in the absentee vote in that county to have won the election. The Democrat would’ve had to win 300% as many votes as there were total absentees to win the election. That is how math works.

Oh, stop being disingenuous.  You're completely ignoring the possibilty (which has been alleged in at least one article) that the absentee harvesters -- an illegal practice in NC -- destroyed ballots marked for McCready.  There's obviously no way to know how many such (if any) were destroyed, so the whole concept of trying to adjust the absentee numbers is ludicrous.  If the absentee harvesting is substantiated, the election needs to be thrown out.  And the perpetrators thrown into jail.

[Virginiá]

I think this situation was actually mentioned as part of the reason why they can call a new election - because regardless if the actual fraudulent votes discovered are enough to flip the result, it creates enough doubt in the result that a new one must be held, given that election results must be trusted to some degree.

Point being that if there were hundreds of fraudulent votes cast in an organized scheme to change the result, there could be more votes they didn't find or other legitimate votes destroyed. So whether or not the votes discovered can change the results is irrelevant.

[The Mikado]

https://twitter.com/JoeBrunoWSOC9/status/1068567465565831168

[Badger]

Lets wait before calling it GOP voter fraud. It does seem to look like it but can we all just wait?

When the Republican majority On The Board of Elections unanimously refuse to certify the elections based on obvious fraud that would have in their opinion changed the results, the extreme, and I mean extreme, statistical anomalies of several Bladen County precincts going for Harris, the rather obvious TwoPlusTwo conclusion to be drawn from the similar facts in these various affidavits, the individual identified in these photographs being referred to as a republican operative, for gosh sakes why?

There's jumping to conclusions, and then there's reaching a reasonable conclusion based on the facts. This is clearly the ladder. The only issue here is whether or not it is determined to be sufficient enough to Warrant ordering a new election. However, Mason the extremely close nature of his election and the numbers of most this appears to have changed, I can only see one realistic remedy here.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Its also possible the Democratic House just refuses to seat Harris and calls for special election.

[lfromnj]

Its also possible the Democratic House just refuses to seat Harris and calls for special election.

absolutely disgusting
Let this bipartisan board do it together. If scotus rules that the board is unconstitutional but the board says for SE id be fine them refusing to seat Harris but the house should not be able to do this.

[Virginiá]

Its also possible the Democratic House just refuses to seat Harris and calls for special election.

absolutely disgusting
Let this bipartisan board do it together. If scotus rules that the board is unconstitutional but the board says for SE id be fine them refusing to seat Harris but the house should not be able to do this.

I mean there are instances where the House refusing to seat someone would be legitimate, such as where the state refuses to investigate and take action on rather blatant fraud. Not that North Carolina is an instance of this (so far, though case looks strong), but the House being able to refuse to seat is a good backstop in a country where states hold a lot of power over elections to Congress.

Also, if the NCGOP tries to short-circuit this investigation in any way, then yes, it would make sense to refuse to seat him. I think the state party is already suing to force them to certify it, so that is one step towards trying to sweep this under the rug.

-

Overall I think it wouldn't be wise to refuse to seat Harris though, unless it becomes clear that there are more fraudulent votes for him that put him over the top. Democrats have to remember that just because you can do something, does not mean you should. It's also something I really wish Republicans would learn as well (no hope there tho). Otherwise, it'd be better to just dismantle the group responsible for these fraudulent ballots and put them in prison, along with anyone who supported them.

[ajc0918]

Madam Speaker Pelosi must take a stand and refuse to seat Harris under any condition. 

[GeorgiaModerate]

Here's more on the allegations:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[lfromnj]

Its also possible the Democratic House just refuses to seat Harris and calls for special election.

absolutely disgusting
Let this bipartisan board do it together. If scotus rules that the board is unconstitutional but the board says for SE id be fine them refusing to seat Harris but the house should not be able to do this.

I mean there are instances where the House refusing to seat someone would be legitimate, such as where the state refuses to investigate and take action on rather blatant fraud. Not that North Carolina is an instance of this (so far, though case looks strong), but the House being able to refuse to seat is a good backstop in a country where states hold a lot of power over elections to Congress.

Also, if the NCGOP tries to short-circuit this investigation in any way, then yes, it would make sense to refuse to seat him. I think the state party is already suing to force them to certify it, so that is one step towards trying to sweep this under the rug.

-

Overall I think it wouldn't be wise to refuse to seat Harris though, unless it becomes clear that there are more fraudulent votes for him that put him over the top. Democrats have to remember that just because you can do something, does not mean you should. It's also something I really wish Republicans would learn as well (no hope there tho). Otherwise, it'd be better to just dismantle the group responsible for these fraudulent ballots and put them in prison, along with anyone who supported them.

The bipartisan board is already left leaning with the indie . The board should have the final decision unless it's obvious

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'm not the one to normally defend MUH NORMS but the House refusing to seat a Congressman whose election has been duly certified would be a terrible precedent that Republicans would probably run with, with disastrous consequences.

[wesmoorenerd]

Madam Speaker Pelosi must take a stand and refuse to seat Harris under any condition. 

I certainly think this situation is incredibly suspect and needs a thorough investigation, maybe even a whole new election. Still, though, I can't condone refusing to seat him if everything somehow comes up clean.

[Badger]

Its also possible the Democratic House just refuses to seat Harris and calls for special election.

absolutely disgusting
Let this bipartisan board do it together. If scotus rules that the board is unconstitutional but the board says for SE id be fine them refusing to seat Harris but the house should not be able to do this.

I mean there are instances where the House refusing to seat someone would be legitimate, such as where the state refuses to investigate and take action on rather blatant fraud. Not that North Carolina is an instance of this (so far, though case looks strong), but the House being able to refuse to seat is a good backstop in a country where states hold a lot of power over elections to Congress.

Also, if the NCGOP tries to short-circuit this investigation in any way, then yes, it would make sense to refuse to seat him. I think the state party is already suing to force them to certify it, so that is one step towards trying to sweep this under the rug.

-

Overall I think it wouldn't be wise to refuse to seat Harris though, unless it becomes clear that there are more fraudulent votes for him that put him over the top. Democrats have to remember that just because you can do something, does not mean you should. It's also something I really wish Republicans would learn as well (no hope there tho). Otherwise, it'd be better to just dismantle the group responsible for these fraudulent ballots and put them in prison, along with anyone who supported them.

The bipartisan board is already left leaning with the indie . The board should have the final decision unless it's obvious

Oh for Pete's sake...

"Left leaning"?!? The board voted unanimously, repeat unanimously, including every single Republican on the board, not to certify the election due to blatant fraud.

What is with you? You've rarely been so hackish to my recollection.

[ajc0918]

Madam Speaker Pelosi must take a stand and refuse to seat Harris under any condition. 

I certainly think this situation is incredibly suspect and needs a thorough investigation, maybe even a whole new election. Still, though, I can't condone refusing to seat him if everything somehow comes up clean.

I was just trolling tbh

[lfromnj]

Its also possible the Democratic House just refuses to seat Harris and calls for special election.

absolutely disgusting
Let this bipartisan board do it together. If scotus rules that the board is unconstitutional but the board says for SE id be fine them refusing to seat Harris but the house should not be able to do this.

I mean there are instances where the House refusing to seat someone would be legitimate, such as where the state refuses to investigate and take action on rather blatant fraud. Not that North Carolina is an instance of this (so far, though case looks strong), but the House being able to refuse to seat is a good backstop in a country where states hold a lot of power over elections to Congress.

Also, if the NCGOP tries to short-circuit this investigation in any way, then yes, it would make sense to refuse to seat him. I think the state party is already suing to force them to certify it, so that is one step towards trying to sweep this under the rug.

-

Overall I think it wouldn't be wise to refuse to seat Harris though, unless it becomes clear that there are more fraudulent votes for him that put him over the top. Democrats have to remember that just because you can do something, does not mean you should. It's also something I really wish Republicans would learn as well (no hope there tho). Otherwise, it'd be better to just dismantle the group responsible for these fraudulent ballots and put them in prison, along with anyone who supported them.

The bipartisan board is already left leaning with the indie . The board should have the final decision unless it's obvious

Oh for Pete's sake...

"Left leaning"?!? The board voted unanimously, repeat unanimously, including every single Republican on the board, not to certify the election due to blatant fraud.

What is with you? You've rarely been so hackish to my recollection.

I don't have a problem with the board atm but from my research the indie is left leaning I saw somewhere on tiwtter. Anyway I will continue to trust the board as long as the decisions are 6-3 or higher. I am just against the idea of the house deciding this election unless it's user obvious