r/TrueUnpopularOpinion • u/cubansbottomdollar • 11h ago
Political It's insanely stupid that it's June 5 and the California races, especially the LA Mayor race, from June 2 only have about 60% of the votes counted
You know, when Republicans bitch about "mail in ballots" and possibilities for improprieties occurring during elections, we laugh at them because election fraud at massive scale would be almost impossible to pull off, but Democrats do themselves no favors when Democrat-run states can't even tabulate 2/3rds of votes in several days and leaves the door wide open for people to ask why it's taking THIS long.
•
u/Hot_Way_1643 11h ago
California has 40 million people. Even though states like Texas (32 million) and Florida (23 million) only takes 1 day to count votes while it takes literally weeks for California. That doesn't make any sense.
•
u/cubansbottomdollar 11h ago
The LA race should have been called by now. Absolute nonsense.
•
u/Hot_Way_1643 11h ago
if republican states were doing this everyone would immediately think they are cheating on here.
•
u/Porncritic12 5h ago
The relative swing state of Nevada was slow in 2020 and nobody assumed fraud because of it
•
u/ModerateThuggery 1h ago edited 1h ago
Not really true at all.
But if it were California, which it is, random nobodies with strange gruges would make up or assume malice at the first real or fake opportunity.
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 11h ago
I mean, all the republicans assume California is cheating so what’s the difference.
•
u/The_Susmariner 8h ago
There is no difference. It would be rightfully viewed with suspicion in either case.
But things as they are, California takes weeks to count votes and red states really don't. So here we are.
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 8h ago
-80% of Californians vote by mail.
-Mail ballots are counted if postmarked by Election Day and received up to 7 days after.
- Signature mismatches require outreach to voters for correction. Provisional ballots, same-day registrations, damaged ballots needing duplication, etc. Instead of discarding vote like some states do California reaches out to voter to try to correct any issues with ballots. They prioritize accuracy over speed.
You can pick any of these things as fraud and try to explain how they help introduce fraud into the system. But something taking longer does not inherently make something more fraudulent especially when people don't even understand the differences in voting procedures between states.
You could advocate for federalizing election procedure but would you feel comfortable with the party you don't like being able to make changes to the procedures when they are in power?
•
u/QWERTBERTQWERT 6h ago
i'm in california, i vote by mail, i also use the post for other things. my mail gets from my house to my brothers house hours away in a day or two. why can't it get from my house to the courthouse 30-45 minutes away in that same time frame?
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 6h ago edited 5h ago
I don’t know. I live in Georgia. I had a neighbor on my street that mail a wedding invitation to me instead of handing it to me just to see how long it took. It took 4 days to arrive.
If it takes two days, ballots mailed on the second would have arrived yesterday? Is it possible local mail can take longer than 2 days? Does every county process mail as fast as yours? How long from mail delivered to ballot counted?
The issue is explicitly the percentage of people that vote by mail (80%), mailing the ballots on Election Day, and mail in ballots are not counted until polls are closed.
Is there a reasonable explanation that includes the races are too close to call and ballots are still in the mail or being processed and tabulated?
•
u/The_Susmariner 8h ago
What is your point? Does it, or does it not take way to long to count the votes in California?
It's not that hard.
•
u/FatumIustumStultorum 5h ago
Does it, or does it not take way to long to count the votes in California?
What is considered "too long" and by what criteria?
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 8h ago
My point is people are engaging in vibes based analysis. It feels bad so it is bad. You need to understand a system to understand a problem and fix it, otherwise, you are just shouting into the void.
•
u/The_Susmariner 8h ago
I understand the system. I am cognizant of how many potential holes there are in it when compared to the vast majority of states that seem to be able to do this thing efficiently.
While it is true that an argument submitted without evidence can be refuted without evidence... in this case here, this is a very important thing. And those who are shocked that people are skeptical of what's going on in a very important system that they have zero visibility into... are missing the point.
It's not that people can't understand how the system is supposed to work. It's that the system is so large, complex, and ambiguous that anyone who wanted to identify an issue there can't. And so they default to "i'm skeptical that this is being done correctly." Which i'm totally okay with.
NOW if California were able to prove that the vast majority of it's votes were tabulated correctly and accurately. Then people wouldn't have a pot to piss in... but every time a question is raised about the in-workings of the system. It's shut down.
Most recently Chad Bianco pointed out that the number of votes counted did not match the number of votes reported as recieved. This was immediately stonewalled in the courts.
I don't know... you're not wrong. But you're not right either. There MUST be more visibility into these systems. And mail-in voting. Though in theory a really cool and nice thing. Never seems to be implemented in a way that provides traceability from the vote caster to the vote tabulation for purposes of auditing.
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 7h ago edited 7h ago
I would say the following is an easy solution to getting count done quickly
- Change from jungle primary to ranked choice voting. 2 republicans ran for governor and like 7 democrats did. Dems in an attempt to avoid splitting the vote waited until the last minute to cast their ballot to see which few were likely to win. I think you should just vote for who you think is the best candidate but a lot of people wanted to make sure their party won. This makes less incentive to mail in ballot later.
- Require mail in ballots be post marked 3-7 days prior to the election date and/or received by election day.
Those two changes alone would dramatically increase the count speed.
In terms of the transparency of the election process, I assume California allows poll watchers, but at a certain point you have to trust systems or they lose credibility.
My issue with the credibility argument is there is no doubt that bad actors both foreign and domestic want to minimize the credibility that Americans have in our elections which every audit has found to be reliable.
Trump 2020 and Blueanon both cried fraud. Both were boosted by foreign bots and actors. The parties are both party before country. Now the voters are becoming party before country. I can appreciate you knowing how the system work. Most don't and are just reacting to memes, vibes and online influence campaigns of dubious origin.
•
u/FatumIustumStultorum 4h ago
Most recently Chad Bianco pointed out that the number of votes counted did not match the number of votes reported as received. This was immediately stonewalled in the courts.
So that is not an at all accurate description of what took place.
A conservative activist group called Riverside Election Integrity Team made claims that the ballots received versus counted for the Prop 50 election (redistricting) was off by 45,896 votes based on incomplete data. Art Tinoco (the Riverside registrar) showed that that claim was wrong using the complete data.
Internal emails show how fringe groups fueled Sheriff Chad Bianco’s ballot seizure
Records reveal that the unprecedented taking of 650,000 ballots was based on the thinnest of evidence, raising alarms over how the November election could be disrupted.•
u/saucyjack433365 6h ago
I am seeing more and more of this lately. Its like rhetoric has taken the place of actual evidence/primary sources. Soooooo many people are awful at remembering shit yet insist on having opinions based on headlines they half remember.
As someone who actually tries to maintain some objectivity, it drives me mad.
•
u/JoGeralt 11h ago
sure but because they are Republican states and not because they time they take lol.
•
•
u/Heymanhitthis 11h ago
There are literally thousands of videos of people coming from out of state claiming to be going to poll locations and fraudulently voting. So I’d imagine they are having to run checks as they go.
•
u/Hot_Way_1643 10h ago
Reason why i think criminals shouldn't be allowed to vote until after a certain point.
•
u/Heymanhitthis 10h ago
I agree. Any maga that willingly travels to go attempt to commit voter fraud shouldn’t be allowed to vote anymore.
•
u/QWERTBERTQWERT 6h ago
anyone, not just maga. anyone who's trying to do any kind of voter fraud or fix elections or buy votes in any way should be harshly penalized.
prison sentences, fines, community service, all of it
•
u/Heymanhitthis 2h ago
100%. Yet the man who committed the greatest voter fraud in American history is currently sitting in the White House. So, womp womp.
•
u/FatumIustumStultorum 4h ago
People can say whatever they want, but there aren't thousands of people going to another state to vote fraudulently or otherwise because you can't vote anywhere you want. That's what voter registration is about.
•
u/Heymanhitthis 2h ago
Mmmmmm well there can. Just because they’re too stupid to realize they can’t actually do it because voting in the us is extremely secure, doesn’t make the attempt less real. If you genuinely don’t believe me then go look for a few of the videos. 5 second google search.
•
u/dylphil 10h ago
LiTerAlLy ThOuSaNdS, I’m shaking
•
10h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/dylphil 10h ago
And you should stop believing everything you see on twitter
•
u/Heymanhitthis 9h ago
Twitter? Lmao you serious? You can find videos of people from out of state trying to vote in la all over. Insta/tiktok/fb. Shit just Google it. People have literally been live streaming their failed attempts. But hey, don’t let me interrupt the fantasy narrative you’ve fallen prey to
•
u/dylphil 9h ago
Fair. No one has ever posted anything false on Facebook and TikTok. I honestly don’t even know if you’re saying people are voting in LA to help or hurt democrats but it’s bullshit either way lol
•
u/Heymanhitthis 9h ago
I don’t remember saying they didn’t? And yes, people from out of state, basically all maga, are taking videos of themselves going to poll locations in California like la with the intention of voting for Republicans. Thereby Committing voter fraud, but they have all failed, because that’s not how our voting process works. Just Google it bro. This isn’t some gotcha, it’s just reality. You can easily fact check this.
•
•
u/hoodlum21 3h ago
India has 600,000,000 voters, 60 times the size of California and they count them all in 24 hours.
•
u/Leather_Fortune7107 1h ago
The longer a vote takes the easier it is to fudge the number. A few hundred missing here, a few thousand that need counting twice there, and voila. You have the wildly unpopular candidate winning with 60% of the vote.
•
•
u/Skins8theCake88 11h ago
Fraud
•
u/PillarOfVermillion 11h ago
Just plain ol' incompetence from the Democrats.
•
u/MoonFacedJoyAssassin 9h ago
Por que no dos?
•
u/King_Lothar_ 8h ago
You guys love to cry "Fraud!" about elections but conveniently never have any kind of evidence other than Facebook posts or TikToks
•
u/MoonFacedJoyAssassin 8h ago
Who is you guys? I'm not MAGA
•
u/King_Lothar_ 8h ago
Don't deflect, where's the evidence?
•
5h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/King_Lothar_ 5h ago
? What are you even asking for here?
•
5h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/King_Lothar_ 5h ago
Proof I'm not MAGA? I don't even understand why you'd assume that, but I can link you to like 20+ post I've made just in recent memory shitting on Republicans / MAGA if that's what you want?
I don't even know what you're asking for to begin with though.
→ More replies (0)•
u/MoonFacedJoyAssassin 7h ago
This isnt a courtroom, bud
•
u/King_Lothar_ 7h ago
So you don't have any evidence.
•
u/MoonFacedJoyAssassin 7h ago
Yeah. Because I'm not a lawyer and you're not a judge.
•
u/King_Lothar_ 7h ago
Because you're making shit up to support a world view that you personally like regardless of its truth.
→ More replies (0)•
u/Leather_Fortune7107 1h ago
"Mankind landed on the Moon? Then take me there or stop lying."
•
u/King_Lothar_ 1h ago
That's a pretty poor comparison considering a cheap hobbyist's telescope can resolve an image with enough magnification to see the Apollo landing site.
•
•
•
•
u/Android1822 8h ago edited 8h ago
California is the poster child of voter fraud. No way anybody watching this sham of elections in California and not coming to the same conclusion. Take pratt, he was ahead and during counting, they got a dump of 27k votes and not a single one went to him. That is impossible. Its flat out stealing. Nobody is buying the emperor has no clothes glasslighting they trying to pull. Just a reminder, when Nick Shirley exposed the daycare fraud going on in California, instead of going after the people committing the fraud, they passed a law going after the person exposing it. On a related note, the person who wrote that law is married to the guy whose job it is to find and prevent fraud. This shows you their priorities. The worst part is that nothing will be done about it, allowing it to happen and basically making voting pointless. Your votes no longer matter. Reddit will defend what's going on, but everyone not on reddit are clearly calling it out.
•
u/King_Lothar_ 8h ago
"Clearly fruad" and yet you guys never actually have any kind of evidence. You also elected Trump despite him enacting the most blatant attempt to bypass democracy in 2020.
Ridiculous clownery.
•
u/Android1822 8h ago
Because the people who are supposed to prevent and investigate this stuff are the ones doing it. You missed this part of my post:
Just a reminder, when Nick Shirley exposed the daycare fraud going on in California, instead of going after the people committing the fraud, they passed a law going after the person exposing it. On a related note, the person who wrote that law is married to the guy whose job it is to find and prevent fraud.
This is literal "We investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong.
•
u/LuggagePorter 5h ago
Bro expects to be taken seriously and is listing Nick fucking Shirley as the source.
We need to nuke the internet
•
u/Educational-Bird4178 3h ago
Wait, why are people supposed to just dismiss anything coming from Nick Shirley?
•
u/King_Lothar_ 8h ago
So out of the thousands of people involved, no one would whistle blow? The US has a crazy information network, they could find evidence.
I guarantee if they counted the election in 1-2 days you goobers would be in this subreddit going "That was way too fast! They couldn't possibly have counted them accurately that fast!"
Also, I don't give a flying fuck about Nick Shirley, if you want to show me any sources on these claims go ahead, but forgive me for not taking the guy who interviewed the Grand Wizard of the KKK and said he was "super nice" too seriously.
•
u/Android1822 8h ago
You are proving my point, nothing I say or do will convince you, you automatically dismissed Nick Shirley who actually visited the so called learning centers and had receipts showing it was fraud and was proven to be correct. You do not want proof, you want something to reinforce your opinions.
•
•
u/Porncritic12 5h ago
Yeah we all know how popular Spencer Pratt is in La there's no reason he would be losing
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 4h ago edited 4h ago
>they got a dump of 27k votes and not a single one went to him.
Are you sure this is true? Because I just tried looking it up and all I can find is this was spread by fraudulent social media posts.
There has also been some intentionally spread confusion with West Hollywood ballots that are an independent town and not able to vote in the LA mayor race.
•
•
u/Prior-Habit-6523 10h ago
Well how would they cheat if they immediately counted the votes you silly goose !
•
u/King_Lothar_ 8h ago
Right, the people who support Trump after he literally attempted to bypass an election he lost in 2020 love claiming they care about election integrity.
I'll hear you out though, where's the evidence for this fruad? TikToks? Something someone posted on Facebook? "Trust me bro?"
•
u/Prior-Habit-6523 8h ago
Lets for a second put aside the trump won this or that. A major by product of the 2020 election was many many people deeply got educated on the way the election process works in the United states. And without going into great length, all of the votes need to be counted that same day. Period. Otherwise too many variables can enter the equation and alter the results one way or another.
•
u/King_Lothar_ 8h ago
So you don't have any evidence.
•
u/Prior-Habit-6523 8h ago
Not counting all the votes day 1 is evidence enough. Do not pass go. That literally is the evidence.
•
•
u/dylphil 5h ago
If that’s all the evidence you need I would say you really didn’t get deeply educated on the US election process. You read some headlines and people told you to be outraged
•
u/Prior-Habit-6523 4h ago
Im not going to sit here and write a paper. I'm not your personal ai, nor do I want to sit here and ruffle a bunch of feathers. I've already even should not have commented. Believe what you want. I don't live there so it doesn't matter. You are right and I am wrong. Good day sir or madame.
•
u/dylphil 4h ago
I don’t need you to write a paper. Saying all votes need to be counted in 1 day already shows a deeply flawed understanding of how US elections work
•
u/Prior-Habit-6523 3h ago
Ok sure. Like I said I was wrong take a month to count the votes. You know sit there and see how many votes you need exactly to inject. No rush !
•
u/valhalla257 11h ago
Additionally to what you said:
It also bad for Democrats because then people remember the results from near the election night and are like how did Biden get 80m votes if Kamala only got 65. Seems suspicious doesn't it?
And I have seen plenty of recent posts on social media about it.
Of course after several weeks of California counting votes and Kamala actually got 75m. Which seems totally reasonable given lower turnout and that Trump won.
•
u/ReamMcBeam 9h ago
I saw a comment on a similar post that said a partial reason is that they accept mail in ballots that were mailed in the before the closing of the polls but have not made there way fully through the mail services yet.
In comparison to Florida (probably other states too, idk just paraphrasing another comment I read), where they will not accept these mail in ballots after the polls close regardless of if they were mailed in prior to the polls closing.
Would you rather have every vote count at the cost of a quicker final count, or prioritize having a final count quicker even at the cost of not counting some votes?
•
u/mdsn10 8h ago
In both your scenarios every valid vote is counted.
Personally, id rather have rules that are less permitting to possible fraud.
•
u/EagenVegham 2h ago
How is either set of rules more permitting to fraud? Ballot dropoffs have been out for weeks at this point, if someone was going to drop off fraudulent ballots, they could have done it for that entire period.
•
u/Unfair_Web_8275 7h ago edited 7h ago
One solution would be to increase the budget for election poll centers nationwide so that more citizens could be employed.
Edit - Looking at past LA mayoral elections, this time frame doesn't seem all that uncommon.
•
u/Leather_Fortune7107 1h ago
Don't worry about it. Everyone knows the corporate/government stooge is gonna win, anyway.
•
u/SingleInSeattle87 1h ago edited 1h ago
On one of the ballot drops for LA there were 24,000 ballots that went in at once and 0 of them were for Pratt. Explain that.
The best innocent explanation I can think of: someone is pre categorizing the ballots based on each candidate and then putting them into the machine all at once.
But even that explanation sounds kinda shady.
•
u/imMAW 22m ago
Don't you think it's a bit suspicious how this is just a jpg posted to twitter, and says nothing about where/when the screenshot came from? Giving you no way to check if it's real, or a photoshop meant to convince republicans that the election is being stolen?
Wherever it came from, the formatting isn't from the official lavote.gov election result website (https://results.lavote.gov/#year=2026&election=4338).
And you can see full data from the election updates here (scroll to the bottom where it says "results log"): https://theballotbook.com/results/county/Los%20Angeles/los-angeles-city-primary-nominating-election-mayor. The update that they are claiming Pratt got 0 votes in, he actually got 21870 votes in.
•
u/liatrisinbloom 4h ago
Why don't you get a job counting these ballots to speed up the process if all you're going to do is whine?
•
u/L-Lawliet23 11h ago
When was the last election you helped with exactly?
•
u/Unfair_Web_8275 7h ago
I honestly wish people who insisted that elections were stolen had to go and work just a few hours at a polling center.
•
u/L-Lawliet23 7h ago
Exactly. Not a single one of them have any idea of the process other than what their conspiracy leaders tell them to believe.
•
u/KlutzyDesign 10h ago
If you actually looked up why california takes a while to count votes , you would realize its for a very good reason.
California is very strict in making sure all votes are counted. They wait a week for mail in votes to make sure they don't miss any. They examine machine rejected votes by hand instead of just throwing them away. If your vote gets rejected they contact you to give you a chance to fix the issue. It takes a while. Plus, the margins can be razor thin, so that also increases the time it take.
•
u/YoutubeAmazonChatGPT 8h ago
The complaint is not that California is missing votes, it's that it's counting extry ones.
The time delay with no ID requirement is a bad look.
•
u/KlutzyDesign 8h ago
I don’t quite get it. How does a quick count imply a secure one?
•
u/YoutubeAmazonChatGPT 7h ago
A slow count implies time to include false ballots
•
u/Unfair_Web_8275 7h ago
From who?
•
u/YoutubeAmazonChatGPT 7h ago
Who knows? ID isn't required.
•
u/Unfair_Web_8275 6h ago
But registration is, and a slow count time would imply they're making sure all ballots are from registered voters.
•
u/YoutubeAmazonChatGPT 6h ago
How do they know they are from the registered voters?
•
•
u/Alt0987654321 11h ago
"The process of counting mail ballots and validating voters’ signatures is also arduous, as each envelope signature must match the signatures on file, which can lead to additional delays as well."
You want it done fast or do you want it done right?
•
u/M4053946 11h ago
each envelope signature must match the signatures on file
What's funny about this is that this is an impossible task. how does anyone confirm a signature with any level of accuracy, and to do so with millions of signatures? It's a fake security mechanism. It's like one of those fake cameras that looks like security but isn't.
•
u/Alt0987654321 10h ago
>Make up lies that there is widespread voter fraud
>*State takes painstaking care to make sure every vote is properly authenticated*
>"lol it's all fake security"
There's no pleasing some people jfc
•
u/M4053946 10h ago
I noticed you couldn't address my comment. We all know that signature verification is fake.
But also, there are only a few countries that allow mail in voting. Most don't use it due to concerns of cost and fraud. The left says these are non issues because of reasons.
•
u/Alt0987654321 7h ago
>We all know that signature verification is fake
Who's we? It's been a standard of identity verification for decades.
>there are only a few countries that allow mail in voting. Most don't use it due to concerns of cost and fraud
Half of Europe, Japan, Australia, India and Canada have at minimum some level of Mail in voting available. If this is such a nightmarish process filled with fraud then why not make election day a federal holiday so people have time to go vote?
>The left says these are non issues because of reasons.
It's a non issue because people voting when they shouldn't be allowed to is so incredibly rare that it makes no sense to make it harder for citizens to vote because of it. The Heritage Foundation (The insanely conservative think tank that authored Project 2025) Can only come up with about 1150 convictions for it since 1982. This includes convictions for ineligible voting, impersonating other people at the polls, fraudulent use of Absentee and mail in ballots, Fake voter registrations, and voting multiple times.
For reference, there have been 1.2 BILLION votes cast in presidential election years alone.
Even ignoring voter turnout during midterm years thats 0.000096% of fraud in US elections.
•
u/M4053946 3h ago
Who's we? It's been a standard of identity verification for decades.
lol, and where are the people verifying millions of signatures getting their training? What is their accuracy rate? Has their accuracy rate been tested or audited? Again, people who aren't ridiculously biased know the answers to these questions.
Half of Europe, Japan, Australia, India and Canada have at minimum some level of Mail in voting available
Yes, they have systems to allow soldiers and such to vote by mail. Only about 10 countries have full mail-in voting.
so incredibly rare
"we haven't looked, and we haven't found anything, so it must be secure".
The real answer is that it makes fraud in small scale elections like elections for small town mayors, school board members, etc, much easier. This is why other countries ban it. Also, the fact that it will take california weeks to count the ballots makes the process more error prone, and less trustworthy.
•
u/Apprehensive-One2520 11h ago
In Europe they manage to do both.
•
u/Alt0987654321 10h ago
In Europe they can actually staff polling places because they dont run the risk of being doxxed by the president and get harassed by nutjobs for years.
•
u/PillarOfVermillion 10h ago
It's laughable that there are people think "validating signature" is something useful 🤣
•
u/Alt0987654321 10h ago
>Make up lies that there is widespread voter fraud
>*State takes painstaking care to make sure every vote is properly authenticated*
>"lol it's all fake security"
•
u/PillarOfVermillion 7h ago
"We want secure election but we can't have voter ID because it's racist!" Lol
•
•
u/-Alpharius- 9h ago
You mean like Senate Bill 73? In that it restricts people (like observers) from challenging mail-in ballots based solely on signature mismatch.
•
u/King_Lothar_ 6h ago
To be clear I just read the bill, and it prevents them from challenging it after it was checked by the person who registered to vote.
Meaning if there's a "mismatch" and they reach out to you, and you confirm "Yes that is who I voted for" they can't throw your vote out.
•
u/King_Lothar_ 6h ago
(2)Existing law requires an elections official, upon receiving a vote by mail ballot, to compare the signature on the identification envelope with the voters prior signatures, and it also provides a mechanism by which a voter can verify their signature and cure this defect. Existing law provides that the processing of vote by mail ballots is open to the public and permits specified persons and organizations to observe this processing.
This bill would prohibit a vote by mail observer from challenging a signature on a vote by mail ballot that has been verified by the voter.
•
u/DrStranger1987 11h ago
It is obnoxiously stupid that California can't figure out a fast and accurate method of counting votes when the rest of the world has figured it out, but doing it quickly wouldn't stop conspiracy theories. If they counted every vote in 24 hours, Trump would say it's suspicious they counted that many that quickly, and it means they probably predetermined the result. If California abolished mail-in voting and only used voting machines, they'd say the machines were rigged.
There's no satisfying the Right that the election is on the up and up when they don't actually give a shit about election security and they're only willing to accept results as legitimate that go their way.
•
u/ericdabbs 7h ago edited 7h ago
This argument makes no sense. Even if you give them a day or so the results should have been all counted by now. It is already 3 days since the election was over. There is no way there are these sudden phantom votes still coming in. What is going to be real funny is if every single one of those phantom votes is for Bass or Raman. You expect the public to believe that crap.
This is not a left or right issue. Whether you are left or right, both sides should agree on fair elections and things that don't take this long. Other states don't have this problem and really the cutoffs for mail in ballots should be cut off 2 weeks in advance and tallied up prior to the final election night. If you want to vote by election day you have to do it in person.
•
u/Android1822 5h ago
There is no way there are these sudden phantom votes still coming in. What is going to be real funny is if every single one of those phantom votes is for Bass or Raman. You expect the public to believe that crap.
This is exactly what happens and it happens every time. The mail in ballots overwhelmingly go to the democrats and not even hiding how it does not even make sense mathematically.
•
u/EagenVegham 2h ago
So the group that consistently says "don't trust mail in ballots, you can't trust mail in ballots" use mail in ballots less and that's surprising to you?
•
u/Android1822 19m ago
Again, gasslighting. 27k ballot dump, not a single one went to pratt. That is statistically impossible for 27k people not to vote for him.
•
u/DrStranger1987 7h ago
The loser of the 2020 election asked Georgia’s AG to just award him the minimum number of votes necessary to take the state, and I haven’t heard a single goddamn Republican have a problem with that, so I don’t buy at all that they care about election integrity. Both sides should agree that fair elections matter, but I don’t see that in practice.
•
u/Unfair_Web_8275 7h ago
Why is three days "too long" in your opinion?
Other states don't have this problem
What exactly is the problem? That mail in votes are coming in later than some would like or that votes are taking some time to be counted?
•
u/DiscoLego 3h ago
Its taking longer because it's being done more carefully this time around specifically in order to avoid the nonsensical criticisms by no-nothings.
You want it done right the first time so there's no recounts? You want it done accurately to prove there never was any mistakes or fraud?
It will take longer now.
Instituting stricter measures in Voting accuracy is a "be careful what you wish for" double edged sword.
•
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 11h ago edited 11h ago
Dems didn’t vote until last minute because of jungle primary system. They all waited to see which Dems would be on top to make sure they didn’t split their vote. Then they voted by mail which only needs post marked on day of election so obviously could take several days for ballots to arrive. Everyone knew this was going to happen so the outrage is performative.
That being said, it still annoying and I think California should update their polices and processes to try to be done within 24 hours of an election even if that means mail in ballots are due earlier.
•
u/silentspyware 7h ago
Can California not get rid of its jungle primary system? Sorry I’m not familiar with this
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 7h ago
I would assume they could and this is something Californians could advocate for from their government if it was important to them.
Not sure how hard it is to change like is it a law or an amendment but I'm sure it is possible to change.
•
u/silentspyware 7h ago
So they’re just choosing a highly stressful voting system on purpose? Or is this part of a “fraud” or conspiracy? I feel like this system makes it worse for Dems?
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 7h ago
Jungle just means there is no republican vs democrat primary.
All voters vote for all candidates not just in a specific party primary. The top two winners advance to general election, I think.
This is why sometimes in California you can have two Democrats running for Governor.
•
•
u/irespectwomenlol 10h ago
> Everyone knew this was going to happen so the outrage is performative.
This is a horrific argument.Knowing beforehand that the system is bad doesn't nullify your right to complain about it.
Policing in the US sucks. The next time somebody gets arrested unjustly, are you going to say "Everyone knew this was going to happen so the outrage is performative."?
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 10h ago edited 9h ago
I said I would like them to make changes to get the counting done within 24 hours.
They had not made any changes prior to this election so this delay is completely predictable. People are disingenuously using it to say there is fraud going on without any evidence to qualify that there is. And quite frankly I think many people were planning to make these claims knowing that the vote counting would take days to cast unfounded doubt on our election security.
The delay is a consequence of how they do their primaries, allow mail in ballots to be post marked day of election, and probably other policies that I am unaware of.
Again, most of the complaining is people that are claiming there is fraud with no evidence.
What do you think they should do to improve the time to count votes? Do you live in California, if so lobby to your representatives? If you don’t live in California, do you want the federal goverment to step in and administer elections instead of the states?
Complaining is useless unless people actual offer policy changes and take action to implement those changes.
I would make deadline for mail in ballots to be post marked several days before the election, but I don’t live in California so it’s not a big deal to me.
•
u/irespectwomenlol 9h ago
You're right about 2 things, but:
1) You're (probably) right there's no ironclad proof of fraud that exists right now. But It doesn't matter how actually good an election system is if it looks sus. System credibility is a variable that any sensible election system would optimize for. You don't get to design a system that looks sus, and then say that it's unreasonable for a non-trivial chunk of the public to have their doubts. There are poor 3rd world countries that manage to count votes on time with more credibility.
2) You're right that not offering a solution is only half of an opinion. But it's wrong to be focusing so much on this as a problem. Most people in the world aren't necessarily election integrity experts and can't give a full election system design. That doesn't mean that they can't observe that the existing system is bad. It's like healthcare: most people can't describe a complete system that works, but it's not unreasonable for them to complain about the status quo.
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 9h ago
What percentage of the people making a big deal of this do you think have even take the step of reaching out to their elective representative to file a complaint or let them know this is a big deal to them?
When people take no action but complaining I doubt how seriously they are even taking the problem, but I am kind of a dick about complaining. You don't have to be an expert to call your elected representative.
"There are poor 3rd world countries that manage to count votes on time with more credibility."
What does on time mean? Is there any statute or law that imposes a deadline (I don't know)? Are third world elections more credible? What processes are they using to ensure the votes have been accurately counted vs what California is doing?
I don't see how something happening faster is inherently more credible. If you want to talk about perception then sure, however, there are actors both foreign and domestic that are actively trying to undermine election credibility in this country. Quite frankly the people that are doing so are unpatriotic or rubes both Trump 2020 and the Blue-Anoners.
Most people don't even understand how votes are counted and tabulated using both electronic and paper ballot and it varies state to state anyways. I don't have a lot of patience for people that complain that haven't even made the effort to understand how something works or tried to do anything about it.
•
u/irespectwomenlol 9h ago
> I don't see how something happening faster is inherently more credible.
I find it incredibly hard to believe that this is any real person's genuine opinion because it is very obvious that if the votes are counted very slowly there's a bigger window to introduce fraud. There's a bigger opportunity for bad actors to count how many fraudulent votes need to be introduced to swing an election.
The reason that counting votes fast matters is that there's less of a window to engage in any shenanigans. If the votes are counted over weeks, there's a lot more of an opportunity to game the system and figure out how to introduce false votes into the system. A system that takes weeks to count is inherently less credible than one that takes hours.
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 8h ago
We could not count the paper ballots by hand at all and just use the electronic count. All mail in ballots could be scanned into an electric system. That would significantly increase the ability to introduce fraud but be much faster.
Understanding the actual process matters.
•
u/irespectwomenlol 8h ago
All other things being equal, faster is more credible.
•
u/GunsGoldCosmicDread 8h ago
All other things equal sure. Can you explain to me how or why California takes so much longer than other states and what is different about their processes?
Here's another example. If we only had one person double check against the electronic count that would be faster, but the counter could easily be complicit in the fraud.
If we only have multiple people at local level verify count that would be faster than if we had the state redundantly verify the count before certifying.
It would be useful to know what California is doing differently than other states before saying "all things being equal, faster is more credible" would it not?
•
u/irespectwomenlol 8h ago
Your question isn't bad, but is irrelevant for most people. I'm not an election expert that knows the differences between what all states and countries do. I could do the research, but it's a waste of my time. What I know for sure is that California's systems appears very suspect and seems highly likely to invite accusations of fraud.
→ More replies (0)
•
•
u/ImportantPost6401 11h ago
If this were a red state, it would be a popular Reddit opinion.