Election 2018 Open Thread v2 - Mia, Mimi, Gil, and T.J.

[justfollowingtheelections]

[Xing]

R+2 in the Senate sounds more impressive when you realize that means Democrats won 24 out of 35 Senate seats, 7 or which were in states Trump won. For reference, they won 24 out of 33 in 2006, Republicans won 23 out of 35 in 2010, and 24 out of 36 in 2014. I'd say not calling it a Democratic wave is setting the bar for a wave very high.

[Virginiá]

It's not like Republicans won everything they had going into 2018 Governors-wise in a single election either. They built that up over 2 back-to-back midterm waves. Blue / swing states they lost in 2010 they got another crack at in 2014, and some worked out, some didn't. And they didn't win some states whose PVI might suggest they should have, just like Democrats this time around too. No one really disputes 2010 was a wave but it's not like it was a total decimation there either (govs-wise). They netted 6, one less than Democrats this cycle. And some, such as, New Mexico, was hardly a triumph in deeply hostile territory. The govs office had been consistently swinging back and forth since the 80s, depending on which way the winds were blowing.

All I'm saying is that the expectations here don't fit how waves usually work. You don't just win everything in one go. Govs offices are harder to flip and more so with incumbents.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Congrats TJ, our new Unbeatable Titan! A stunning and hard-fought win. I've gotta admit I feel proud about contributing to it.

[Landslide Lyndon]

https://twitter.com/sarahdwire/status/1037072322967027713

[Dr. Arch]

The hilarity of it all

https://twitter.com/WendyRedFox/status/1037496860745691137

[wbrocks67]

Anyone who's saying that this still isn't a blue wave (as we are approaching possibly *41* seats in the end with a +8.3 GCB) is kidding themselves. Losing a few seats in the senate doesn't nullify everything else. And considering there were *10* states that Trump won that Dems could've lost (and that they overperformed in many of them, like PA, WI, MI, etc.) shows that it *was* a wave.

These days, with things so polarized, even a massive wave can't topple some predetermined destinies.

[Person Man]

Hey, after 2010 the senate margin as it will be in 2019.

[Torrain]

The hilarity of it all

https://twitter.com/WendyRedFox/status/1037496860745691137

H U B R I S

[Politician]

Congratulations Congressman-Elect Cox!

[GeorgiaModerate]

Paul Ryan whines about late Democratic wins in California

[Landslide Lyndon]

Paul Ryan whines about late Democratic wins in California

Going out in style.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

If Ryan is insinuating something about any sort of fraud, he's totally out line.

But CA really does need to find a better way to count their ballots.  If the absentee ballots need to be received by the Friday after the election, they should be counted by the Friday after the election, not three weeks later.  

Most states count their votes the day they are cast, CA should be able to do this as well.  I could literally count all of the absentee ballots in one of these congressional races by myself by hand in a fraction of the time that they process them.

[lfromnj]

If Ryan is insinuating something about any sort of fraud, he's totally out line.

But CA really does need to find a better way to count their ballots.  If the absentee ballots need to be received by the Friday after the election, they should be counted by the Friday after the election, not three weeks later.  

Most states count their votes the day they are cast, CA should be able to do this as well.  I could literally count all of the absentee ballots in one of these congressional races by myself by hand in a fraction of the time that they process them.

yeah I generally do trust the system in California but no other first world country takes this long afaik. Why tf does it take so long? Can someone explain?

[Xing]

Paul Ryan whines about late Democratic wins in California

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Ryan!

It's harder for California to count their votes quickly because there are so many votes cast by mail, and so often they arrive after Election Day (but are valid as long as they are postmarked on or before Election Day.) Also, no other state has anywhere near as many votes to count in general. It can be frustrating for California to take a while, but better that they count their votes accurately than to rush the count.

[lfromnj]

Paul Ryan whines about late Democratic wins in California

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Ryan!

It's harder for California to count their votes quickly because there are so many votes cast by mail, and so often they arrive after Election Day (but are valid as long as they are postmarked on or before Election Day.) Also, no other state has anywhere near as many votes to count in general. It can be frustrating for California to take a while, but better that they count their votes accurately than to rush the count.

more votes is a bad excuse. Why does it take longer for one district to be counted than another district. Also all votes must arive by Friday after the election so why are they still counting till after Thanksgiving.

[ag]

If Ryan is insinuating something about any sort of fraud, he's totally out line.

But CA really does need to find a better way to count their ballots.  If the absentee ballots need to be received by the Friday after the election, they should be counted by the Friday after the election, not three weeks later.  

Most states count their votes the day they are cast, CA should be able to do this as well.  I could literally count all of the absentee ballots in one of these congressional races by myself by hand in a fraction of the time that they process them.

I agree, CA system is too slow. However, I doubt you would be able yourself to count 150,000 votes by hand in reasonable time I was in charge of vote counting this year in my precinct in the Mexican election. We had under 500 registered voters, and under 400 showed up (if my memory serves me right, there were 374 voters in total). There were 6 races, but there  were 7 of us on the commission, so 4 of us were counting the three federal races, just over 1000 extremely simple ballots in total. We were all well-educated people (it is a wealthy precinct, near a bunch of universities). We did not have to check any signatures or the like: everybody had voted with paper ballots and all ballots were in the ballot box. The voting was over at 6 PM sharp (closed the doors myself on the clock, there was nobody in the line). The counting process, with all the safeguards and mandatory recounts, took us till around 10 PM, after which we were filling out forms till past midnight, after which I still had to deliver everything to the district - I was home around 3 AM. Properly done vote counting takes time.

[The Mikado]

Also, provisional ballots need to be individually examined to determine if they're valid, and CA always gets a lot of provisionals.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Also, provisional ballots need to be individually examined to determine if they're valid, and CA always gets a lot of provisionals.

Also, doesn't the signature have to be checked on every absentee ballot?  That takes a certain amount of time for each one, and for millions of mailed ballots it's obviously going to take a long time.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I mean, tbf, a lot of this could go faster if California (and many other States) just hired more poll workers. But if the choice is between fast but sloppy *coughfloridacough* or slow but careful, the choice is pretty obvious.

[Alabama_Indy10]

Honestly, it is kinda ridiculous that we’re over 3 weeks from Election Day and votes are still being counted.

[Young Conservative]

Honestly, it is kinda ridiculous that we’re over 3 weeks from Election Day and votes are still being counted.

[Virginiá]

Also:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1068190105347792898


(#1 was Cook/Wasserman)

[Gass3268]

Honestly, it is kinda ridiculous that we’re over 3 weeks from Election Day and votes are still being counted.

I really don't see what the big deal is. Making voting as easy as possible is more important than counting quick.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Also, provisional ballots need to be individually examined to determine if they're valid, and CA always gets a lot of provisionals.

For the very small number of provisional ballots, it's fine if they take a while to count.  For the handful of races that are within 0.1% where the provisionals will actually matter, everything should be carefully counted and recounted and I have no problem expecting the outcome to taking a few weeks to decide.

But in California, you have cases where the race couldn't be called even when one candidate ended up winning by 7-10% because literally millions of mailed ballots that had already been received were just sitting there for a week or two.  If it costs a few million dollars to invest in a technology that will read these immediately, that seems well worth it. 

Or seriously let's just vote over the internet.