2020 Absentee/Early Voting thread

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

So with Arizona, Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina counting early we should have an idea of who won on Election Night?

Maybe, maybe not. I'm not sure if any of the non-GA states had these policies as SOP prior to 2020, or if they were implemented precisely because of this year's situation.

In the case of AZ, it has usually taken days to get most/all of the mail ballots counted, so if the procedure hasn't changed since 2018, then there may still be a delay.

With FL, I'm guessing there was at least some semblance of this policy in effect prior, as the state generally gets the vast majority of its mail and non-mail vote alike counted on Election Night.

In GA and as far as I understand, it permits counties to begin 15 days prior but does not require them: with 159 counties, some may (and probably will) choose not to begin counting early, and others (particularly larger counties with notorious difficulties in counting) may still not work through the bulk by Election Night even if they begin 15 days in advance.

But generally, I'd say we'll know a lot about the nature of the evening from TX, GA, NC, FL & AZ much sooner than from WI, PA & MI.

I'd add that we'll also likely get a clear-ish picture of the situation in WI and MI much earlier (relatively speaking) than we will of the situation in PA. 

[kph14]

New data from North Carolina

Total Ballots returned: 1,373 (0.2% of requested ballots)
Total Ballots accepted: 1,287 (93.7% of returned ballots)

Acceptance rate by party identification:
DEM: 96.3%
REP: 88.4%
UNA: 94.0%

Accepted ballots by party identification:

DEM: 791 (61.5%)
UNA: 363 (28.2%)
REP: 129 (10.0%)

They have added a new category "Witness info incomplete". 17 ballots so far (15 DEM, 2 UNA). Mostly older African-American voters seem to have issues here. The Democratic party is suing to allow voter to cure those ballots (https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/09/2020.09.08-NC-Cure-Guidance-Complaint.pdf), like they can cure a missing a signature of themselves. According to the lawsuit though those voters will get send a new one. 

[kph14]

Ballot requests in North Carolina

Total 710,798 (+ 21,818 in a day)

DEM: 368,171 (51.8%) (-0.3%)
UNA: 223,278 (31.4%) (+0.1%)
REP: 116,852 (16.4%) (+0.1%)

Source: https://dl.ncsbe.gov/?prefix=ENRS/2020_11_03/

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/srl/status/1303528295762481155

[Crumpets]

https://twitter.com/srl/status/1303528295762481155

Before anybody gets all up in a tizzy over how this will destroy the integrity of elections, let me explain what this looks like in the real world. I once had a ballot rejected because my signature had changed too much since when I first registered when I was 18. Signing hundreds of receipts can do that. The elections office wrote me to tell me my ballot would be rejected unless I sent in three new signatures for them to match against. After I sent that in, they counted my ballot.

[Virginiá]

I don't understand how anyone could possibly be against allowing voters to fix issues before tossing their ballot. There are plenty of reasons why a mismatch could be declared. Perhaps the person checking doesn't know what they are doing, or the voter signed in a hurry, or signed under the assumption it didn't really matter, just like signing receipts after using a credit card.

For as much as conservatives think voting is being made too easy and "vulnerable" by the left, this is the polar opposite - making it too exclusionary for no good reason.

[Ferguson97]

I don't understand how anyone could possibly be against allowing voters to fix issues before tossing their ballot. There are plenty of reasons why a mismatch could be declared. Perhaps the person checking doesn't know what they are doing, or the voter signed in a hurry, or signed under the assumption it didn't really matter, just like signing receipts after using a credit card.

For as much as conservatives think voting is being made too easy and "vulnerable" by the left, this is the polar opposite - making it too exclusionary for no good reason.

Oh there is a "reason" - the fewer people that vote, the better chance that Republicans win.

[Non Swing Voter]

I don't understand how anyone could possibly be against allowing voters to fix issues before tossing their ballot. There are plenty of reasons why a mismatch could be declared. Perhaps the person checking doesn't know what they are doing, or the voter signed in a hurry, or signed under the assumption it didn't really matter, just like signing receipts after using a credit card.

For as much as conservatives think voting is being made too easy and "vulnerable" by the left, this is the polar opposite - making it too exclusionary for no good reason.

Oh there is a "reason" - the fewer people that vote, the better chance that Republicans win.

That's the conventional wisdom but Republicans are playing with fire this time.  They are set to lose college educated voters by a wide margin and are not doing as well among older voters.  I'm no longer sure that low turnout helps the GOP anymore.  Really high turnout doesn't help them either because: young voters.  I think we might be at the point where the GOP is too small a party to survive in its current form.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I don't understand how anyone could possibly be against allowing voters to fix issues before tossing their ballot. There are plenty of reasons why a mismatch could be declared. Perhaps the person checking doesn't know what they are doing, or the voter signed in a hurry, or signed under the assumption it didn't really matter, just like signing receipts after using a credit card.

For as much as conservatives think voting is being made too easy and "vulnerable" by the left, this is the polar opposite - making it too exclusionary for no good reason.

Oh there is a "reason" - the fewer people that vote, the better chance that Republicans win.

That's the conventional wisdom but Republicans are playing with fire this time.  They are set to lose college educated voters by a wide margin and are not doing as well among older voters.  I'm no longer sure that low turnout helps the GOP anymore.  Really high turnout doesn't help them either because: young voters.  I think we might be at the point where the GOP is too small a party to survive in its current form.

Nah, there’s still plenty of bottom left to fall out in rural areas, especially in the Midwest.

[Gass3268]

https://twitter.com/JZTessler/status/1304080846505349120?s=20

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/JZTessler/status/1304080846505349120?s=20

A judge has extended Georgia's deadline to Nov. 6, although the state has appealed this.

[Non Swing Voter]

Democrats seem to be returning ballots quicker than Republicans (in the small sample available).  I'm not buying the Trump enthusiasm edge.  This is starting to look more like a repeat of 2018 than anything.  Because Biden is a generic and non-offensive Democrat, I think the most likely scenario is that he wins by 7 points (or whatever the exact 2018 margin was) nationally and probably picks off the battleground states Dems won in 2018: PA, MI, WI, AZ, which would be enough to win.  In Florida, Republicans technically won but that's basically a tie.  If this pattern keeps up it seems like the outcome is going to be a small Biden win.

[Tender Branson]

A ballot postmarked on election day and received after election day is not a good idea, because  it might be cast after polls close.

On the other hand, is the US postal service even emptying boxes and postmarking ballots after 6-9pm on election day ? Or does it depend on the region ? I guess some post offices are open until 7pm or so, while polls close at 6pm in some areas ?

[bilaps]

Democrats seem to be returning ballots quicker than Republicans (in the small sample available).  I'm not buying the Trump enthusiasm edge.  This is starting to look more like a repeat of 2018 than anything.  Because Biden is a generic and non-offensive Democrat, I think the most likely scenario is that he wins by 7 points (or whatever the exact 2018 margin was) nationally and probably picks off the battleground states Dems won in 2018: PA, MI, WI, AZ, which would be enough to win.  In Florida, Republicans technically won but that's basically a tie.  If this pattern keeps up it seems like the outcome is going to be a small Biden win.

This is just the sort of takes you should avoid out of like 4k ballots returned from NC

[Crumpets]

As I satiate my need to put election data on maps, here's a map of Democratic ballot requests as a percent of Hillary's final vote count in 2016. Doesn't seem to tell us too much at this point except that the heavily black rural areas in the northeast seem to be behind in requests and college areas are ahead.



Lightest color = 0-10% of Clinton's final vote share
Middle color = 10-20% of Clinton's final vote share
Darker color = 20-30% of Clinton's final vote share

[kph14]

As I satiate my need to put election data on maps, here's a map of Democratic ballot requests as a percent of Hillary's final vote count in 2016. Doesn't seem to tell us too much at this point except that the heavily black rural areas in the northeast seem to be behind in requests and college areas are ahead.



Lightest color = 0-10% of Clinton's final vote share
Middle color = 10-20% of Clinton's final vote share
Darker color = 20-30% of Clinton's final vote share

I would expect most black voters (especially from rural areas) to vote early in person.

[Virginiá]

Seems possible Michigan might be able to start processing (not counting) absentee ballots before election day, so maybe we won't have to wait too long for results in the end:

https://www.myjournalcourier.com/news/article/Senate-leader-Absentee-ballot-processing-bill-15550399.php

LANSING, Mich. (AP) — A bill that would allow Michigan clerks to start processing absentee ballots before Election Day is not dead, and the August primary legitimized concerns that some officials will not be able to quickly handle a surge of mailed-in ballots during the coronavirus pandemic, a legislative leader said.

Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey, a Republican, said the Senate continues to “finesse” the bipartisan proposal that has been on hold in the chamber since May. It is sponsored by Republican Sen. Ruth Johnson, a former secretary of state. Similar legislation, backed by Democrats, is pending in the House.

“It wouldn't surprise me that we get enough support to do something before the general election and then evaluate it afterward,” Shirkey, who previously opposed the measure, told The Associated Press last week. Allowing clerks to begin processing, but not counting, ballots the day before the election would not necessarily be a permanent change, he said.

Temporarily revising the law, Shirkey said, would enable the state to take “controlled steps, acknowledging that things have changed but not putting the integrity of the election in jeopardy." He said he could not predict if or when the Senate would act but said it is “being very seriously considered.”

Still, it's truly astounding that there is any serious resistance to this, particularly for a state that rapidly went from limited absentee ballot use (excuse only), to full no-excuse usage + a pandemic causing a significant portion of the electorate to use this previously unavailable service. The rational thing to do is to give election workers as much time to prepare as possible.

[Non Swing Voter]

Seems possible Michigan might be able to start processing (not counting) absentee ballots before election day, so maybe we won't have to wait too long for results in the end:

https://www.myjournalcourier.com/news/article/Senate-leader-Absentee-ballot-processing-bill-15550399.php

LANSING, Mich. (AP) — A bill that would allow Michigan clerks to start processing absentee ballots before Election Day is not dead, and the August primary legitimized concerns that some officials will not be able to quickly handle a surge of mailed-in ballots during the coronavirus pandemic, a legislative leader said.

Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey, a Republican, said the Senate continues to “finesse” the bipartisan proposal that has been on hold in the chamber since May. It is sponsored by Republican Sen. Ruth Johnson, a former secretary of state. Similar legislation, backed by Democrats, is pending in the House.

“It wouldn't surprise me that we get enough support to do something before the general election and then evaluate it afterward,” Shirkey, who previously opposed the measure, told The Associated Press last week. Allowing clerks to begin processing, but not counting, ballots the day before the election would not necessarily be a permanent change, he said.

Temporarily revising the law, Shirkey said, would enable the state to take “controlled steps, acknowledging that things have changed but not putting the integrity of the election in jeopardy." He said he could not predict if or when the Senate would act but said it is “being very seriously considered.”

Still, it's truly astounding that there is any serious resistance to this, particularly for a state that rapidly went from limited absentee ballot use (excuse only), to full no-excuse usage + a pandemic causing a significant portion of the electorate to use this previously unavailable service. The rational thing to do is to give election workers as much time to prepare as possible.

While the GOP in general seems to be using "voter fraud" and "election integrity" as a way to suppress the vote, there is a slice of the GOP that I believe is genuinely paranoid about voter fraud and cheating in big cities.  So to them, I think waiting a week for results is a totally fine tradeoff for even totally marginal election integrity.  The opportunists are also fine with this because it will make Trump look like he's ahead on election night.

[kph14]

Michigan has over 2.2 million requests for absentee ballots, which is around 46% of 2016's total electorate

https://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/1304133829968277505

[Virginiá]

While the GOP in general seems to be using "voter fraud" and "election integrity" as a way to suppress the vote, there is a slice of the GOP that I believe is genuinely paranoid about voter fraud and cheating in big cities.  So to them, I think waiting a week for results is a totally fine tradeoff for even totally marginal election integrity.  The opportunists are also fine with this because it will make Trump look like he's ahead on election night.

Yeah, that's true. Still, it bothers me how little thought goes into this. Whenever the fraud angle is raised by paranoid activists, rarely does anyone actually mention how it's going to happen. The expectation from their point of view is that they yell fraud, and everyone is just supposed to concede. If you have a building full of Republican and Democrat poll workers/lawyers who are pre-processing absentee ballots so they can be quickly counted, then there isn't a whole lot of room for shenanigans. Even for people who are so irrationally afraid, you can mandate cameras, observers, whatever - the works. It is supremely irritating for these people to act like it's an unfixable "problem."

It's just like opposition to same-day voter registration. Most if not all these states require an ID to register same-day, probably proof of residency too. What more could you want? It's not all that different than just registering at the DMV, and the requirements are really too steep for any serious effort to cheat. But people still whine about it.

The whole debate on election law from Republicans has become nothing but an endless stream of bad faith agitators and bona fide morons who have no business weighing in at all. Even long-time Republican lawyer who litigated the 2000 FL debacle has come out against his people:

https://twitter.com/katyetc/status/1303501896196526080

/rant

[Non Swing Voter]

While the GOP in general seems to be using "voter fraud" and "election integrity" as a way to suppress the vote, there is a slice of the GOP that I believe is genuinely paranoid about voter fraud and cheating in big cities.  So to them, I think waiting a week for results is a totally fine tradeoff for even totally marginal election integrity.  The opportunists are also fine with this because it will make Trump look like he's ahead on election night.

Yeah, that's true. Still, it bothers me how little thought goes into this. Whenever the fraud angle is raised by paranoid activists, rarely does anyone actually mention how it's going to happen. The expectation from their point of view is that they yell fraud, and everyone is just supposed to concede. If you have a building full of Republican and Democrat poll workers/lawyers who are pre-processing absentee ballots so they can be quickly counted, then there isn't a whole lot of room for shenanigans. Even for people who are so irrationally afraid, you can mandate cameras, observers, whatever - the works. It is supremely irritating for these people to act like it's an unfixable "problem."

It's just like opposition to same-day voter registration. Most if not all these states require an ID to register same-day, probably proof of residency too. What more could you want? It's not all that different than just registering at the DMV, and the requirements are really too steep for any serious effort to cheat. But people still whine about it.

The whole debate on election law from Republicans has become nothing but an endless stream of bad faith agitators and bona fide morons who have no business weighing in at all. Even long-time Republican lawyer who litigated the 2000 FL debacle has come out against his people:

https://twitter.com/katyetc/status/1303501896196526080

/rant

I think the GOP has learned from Trump's ability to market.  You don't have to go deep on any train of thought, you just market the same few words over and over and people start to believe it, or at least enough do to promulgate the idea to the population.  Great for low information voters but this is a huge factor in why the suburbs are trending Democrat, I think.

[Progressive Pessimist]

While the GOP in general seems to be using "voter fraud" and "election integrity" as a way to suppress the vote, there is a slice of the GOP that I believe is genuinely paranoid about voter fraud and cheating in big cities.  So to them, I think waiting a week for results is a totally fine tradeoff for even totally marginal election integrity.  The opportunists are also fine with this because it will make Trump look like he's ahead on election night.

Yeah, that's true. Still, it bothers me how little thought goes into this. Whenever the fraud angle is raised by paranoid activists, rarely does anyone actually mention how it's going to happen. The expectation from their point of view is that they yell fraud, and everyone is just supposed to concede. If you have a building full of Republican and Democrat poll workers/lawyers who are pre-processing absentee ballots so they can be quickly counted, then there isn't a whole lot of room for shenanigans. Even for people who are so irrationally afraid, you can mandate cameras, observers, whatever - the works. It is supremely irritating for these people to act like it's an unfixable "problem."

It's just like opposition to same-day voter registration. Most if not all these states require an ID to register same-day, probably proof of residency too. What more could you want? It's not all that different than just registering at the DMV, and the requirements are really too steep for any serious effort to cheat. But people still whine about it.

The whole debate on election law from Republicans has become nothing but an endless stream of bad faith agitators and bona fide morons who have no business weighing in at all. Even long-time Republican lawyer who litigated the 2000 FL debacle has come out against his people:

https://twitter.com/katyetc/status/1303501896196526080

/rant

I think the GOP has learned from Trump's ability to market.  You don't have to go deep on any train of thought, you just market the same few words over and over and people start to believe it, or at least enough do to promulgate the idea to the population.  Great for low information voters but this is a huge factor in why the suburbs are trending Democrat, I think.

I've noticed that as well. The Republican Party is basically the political equivalent to a message board where people do nothing but share memes.

[Gass3268]

Wisconsin's Supreme Court sucks again

https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley/status/1304194282631372800?s=20

https://twitter.com/patrickdmarley/status/1304195150692978694?s=20

[Non Swing Voter]

While the GOP in general seems to be using "voter fraud" and "election integrity" as a way to suppress the vote, there is a slice of the GOP that I believe is genuinely paranoid about voter fraud and cheating in big cities.  So to them, I think waiting a week for results is a totally fine tradeoff for even totally marginal election integrity.  The opportunists are also fine with this because it will make Trump look like he's ahead on election night.

Yeah, that's true. Still, it bothers me how little thought goes into this. Whenever the fraud angle is raised by paranoid activists, rarely does anyone actually mention how it's going to happen. The expectation from their point of view is that they yell fraud, and everyone is just supposed to concede. If you have a building full of Republican and Democrat poll workers/lawyers who are pre-processing absentee ballots so they can be quickly counted, then there isn't a whole lot of room for shenanigans. Even for people who are so irrationally afraid, you can mandate cameras, observers, whatever - the works. It is supremely irritating for these people to act like it's an unfixable "problem."

It's just like opposition to same-day voter registration. Most if not all these states require an ID to register same-day, probably proof of residency too. What more could you want? It's not all that different than just registering at the DMV, and the requirements are really too steep for any serious effort to cheat. But people still whine about it.

The whole debate on election law from Republicans has become nothing but an endless stream of bad faith agitators and bona fide morons who have no business weighing in at all. Even long-time Republican lawyer who litigated the 2000 FL debacle has come out against his people:

https://twitter.com/katyetc/status/1303501896196526080

/rant

I think the GOP has learned from Trump's ability to market.  You don't have to go deep on any train of thought, you just market the same few words over and over and people start to believe it, or at least enough do to promulgate the idea to the population.  Great for low information voters but this is a huge factor in why the suburbs are trending Democrat, I think.

I've noticed that as well. The Republican Party is basically the political equivalent to a message board where people do nothing but share memes.

Yup.  At the Michigan rally on tv today I saw signs reading "PEACEFUL PROTESTOR" - what is that about?  they're not even a party of ideas anymore, just pwning libs.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

https://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/1304397586267283456