Election 2020

Supreme Court Ruling Means We Probably Won't Know Who Won Pennsylvania Until Days After Election

And maybe a lot longer, since the Supreme Court left the door open to re-hearing a Republican-led challenge seeking to discard late-arriving absentee ballots.

|

Pennsylvania is the state most likely to decide next week's presidential election, but a Supreme Court ruling this week has all but guaranteed that we won't know who won the Keystone State's 20 electoral votes on Election Day.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a Republican effort to force Pennsylvania to discard mail-in ballots received after Election Day, but the high court left open the possibility of re-hearing the case after the election if those ballots could alter the outcome. Last month, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered counties to accept and count ballots that arrive through November 6, three days after the election, even if those ballots don't contain postmarks showing when they were mailed.

If the election in Pennsylvania is close—and if the overall results hinge on who wins Pennsylvania—those late-arriving ballots are likely to end up being 2020's version of the infamous "hanging chads" that defined the 2000 presidential election in Florida.

In a statement announcing the court's decision on Wednesday (no formal opinions were issued), Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch said that "it would be highly desirable to issue a ruling" on the Pennsylvania ballot rules before the election, but that the court decided "there is simply not enough time" to give the issue a proper hearing "at this late date."

Meanwhile, Pennsylvania's secretary of state issued new guidance to county-level election offices on Wednesday instructing officials to keep late-arriving ballots separate from absentee ballots that arrive before or during Election Day.

That should help avoid some of the potential chaos. But other issues are looming too.

Unlike most other states, Pennsylvania does not allow mailed-in ballots to be opened or counted before Election Day, which means election offices have not been able to get a head start on what's likely to be a record number of absentee ballots cast this year. Under state law, counties can begin counting those ballots at 7 a.m. on Election Day, but some counties have already decided they won't begin counting any absentee ballots until the day after the election, PennLive reports. In Cumberland County, a Republican-run suburban county near Harrisburg, that means at least 45,000 votes won't be counted the day of the election.

Statewide, there are expected to be more than 2 million mail-in ballots waiting to be counted. State officials maintain that the "overwhelming majority" of those votes will be counted by the Friday following Election Day, The Philadelphia Inquirer's Angela Couloumbis reports. Still, there's plenty of room for the results to shift in the days after the election. Keep in mind that President Donald Trump won Pennsylvania by less than 50,000 votes in 2016.

"We need to brace ourselves for a 'blue shift' in states like Pennsylvania," advises FiveThirtyEight's Geoffrey Skelley. "That is, states that primarily report Election Day results first could show Republicans with an initial lead on election night only to then shift toward Democrats as more mail ballots are counted."

In short, it looks like the best-case scenario in Pennsylvania is that a winner is announced before the end of next week. The worst-case scenario sees a Florida 2000–type mess and the election's outcome landing in front of the Supreme Court.

If that happens, newly minted Justice Amy Coney Barrett will be part of the decision-making process. She did not participate in this week's decision to punt the Pennsylvania ballot issue—or similar cases involving late-arriving mail-in ballots in North Carolina and Wisconsin—because she did not have time to fully review the cases. She did not recuse herself.

On Monday, Trump tweeted that states "must have final total on November 3rd."

In Pennsylvania—and probably in a few other places too—that is simply impossible.

NEXT: What Current Data Tell Us About How the Pandemic Could Play Out This Winter

Election 2020 Supreme Court Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

159 responses to “Supreme Court Ruling Means We Probably Won't Know Who Won Pennsylvania Until Days After Election

  1. “Impossible”?

    Sounds like a “not my problem” kind of problem.

    Change the rules? Well, as long as you can abide by the requirements, then it’s all good. If you cannot, then you fucked up and it is ALL on you to fix it.

    1. STAY AT HOME & WORK AT HOME FOR USA ]H̲o̲m̲e̲ ̲B̲a̲s̲i̲c̲ ̲J̲o̲b̲s̲….. ̲E̲v̲e̲r̲y̲b̲o̲d̲y̲ ̲c̲a̲n̲ ̲e̲a̲r̲n̲ ̲u̲p̲t̲o̲ ̲$1̲5̲k̲ ̲e̲v̲e̲r̲y̲ ̲m̲o̲n̲t̲h̲ ̲f̲r̲o̲m̲ ̲h̲o̲m̲e̲ ̲b̲y̲ ̲w̲o̲r̲k̲i̲n̲g̲ ̲o̲n̲l̲i̲n̲e̲. ̲I̲ ̲h̲a̲v̲e̲ ̲r̲e̲c̲e̲i̲v̲e̲d̲ ̲$1̲7̲2̲9̲4̲ ̲l̲a̲s̲t̲ ̲m̲o̲n̲t̲h̲ ̲b̲y̲ ̲d̲o̲i̲n̲g̲ ̲t̲h̲i̲s̲ ̲e̲a̲s̲y̲ ̲a̲n̲d̲ ̲s̲i̲m̲p̲l̲e̲ ̲j̲o̲b̲ ̲o̲n̲l̲i̲n̲e̲ ̲f̲r̲o̲m̲ ̲h̲o̲m̲e̲. ̲I̲t̲s̲ ̲a̲n̲ ̲e̲a̲s̲y̲ ̲a̲n̲d̲ ̲s̲i̲m̲p̲l̲e̲ ̲j̲o̲b̲ ̲t̲o̲ ̲d̲o̲ ̲o̲n̲l̲i̲n̲e̲ ̲a̲n̲d̲ ̲e̲v̲e̲n̲ ̲a̲ ̲l̲i̲t̲t̲l̲e̲ ̲c̲h̲i̲l̲d̲ ̲c̲a̲n̲ ̲d̲o̲ ̲t̲h̲i̲s̲ ̲j̲o̲b̲ ̲f̲r̲o̲m̲ ̲h̲o̲m̲e̲. ̲E̲v̲e̲r̲y̲b̲o̲d̲y̲ ̲c̲a̲n̲ ̲g̲e̲t̲ ̲t̲h̲i̲s̲ ̲j̲o̲b̲ ̲n̲o̲w̲ ̲b̲y̲ ̲j̲u̲s̲t̲ ̲c̲o̲p̲y̲ ̲t̲h̲i̲s̲ ̲s̲i̲t̲e̲ ̲i̲n̲ ̲b̲r̲o̲w̲s̲e̲r̲ ̲a̲n̲d̲ ̲t̲h̲e̲n̲ ̲f̲o̲l̲l̲o̲w̲ ̲i̲n̲s̲t̲r̲u̲c̲t̲i̲o̲n̲ ̲t̲o̲ ̲g̲e̲t̲ ̲s̲t̲a̲r̲t̲e̲d̲…….. ↠↠↠

      H̲E̲R̲E̲►COPY THIS WEBSITE………Click here

    2. Actually none of this will matter because Trump is going to clobber Biden so bad we will know the election results quicker than the Democrats hoped.

      Republicans should still fight to have no new changes to election law in any state. If Democrats wanted the election rules changed, they should have done it years ago.

      Changing the rules a month before the election should be unacceptable to any American. If we cannot have fair elections then what’s the point of this Country?

      1. Don’t get cocky. PA is agonizingly close. The key to a victory for POTUS Trump is that a whole lot of Team R voters show up on November 3. POTUS Trump supporters have to come out, and come out in RECORD numbers.

        PA is extremely fickle. Don’t get complacent.

        1. It’s LC’s shtick. I wouldn’t give it a ton of weight.

          I agree with you; this is going to be close. It shouldn’t be, but the Ruling Class has decided to dump all over this guy for most of his term, and now that includes completely ignoring evidence of abject corruption by the other candidate.

          We’ve also become much less trusting. I don’t see people taking news of troves of found ballots in this election, with the blase attitude of other elections.

          I think we’re living in one of those ‘historic times’, and that’s usually painful for the participants.

          1. I make up to $90 an hour on-line from my home. My story is that I give up operating at walmart to paintings on-line and with a bit strive I with out problem supply in spherical $40h to $86h… someone turned into top to me by way of manner of sharing this hyperlink with me,TRg so now i’m hoping i ought to help a person else accessible through sharing this hyperlink…

            ================► Home Profit System

            1. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job. Join now this job and start making extra Job cash online by follow instruction on the given website…..

              For more detail visit the given link………… Visit Here

            2. Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. ADF I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it what I do….. Visit Here

              1. Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my now first month from this action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it

                what I do………Click here

      2. I get paid more than $120 to $130 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this i have earned easily $15 from this without having online working skills. This is what I do……….USA PART TIME JOB.

  2. even if those ballots don’t contain postmarks showing when they were mailed.

    Bull fucking shit.

    1. Are there any legitimate reasons why mailed-in ballots would not contain postmarks?

      1. I’m guessing there are. Well, that’s a good question. Isn’t the DNC telling people to hand-carry their ‘mail-in’ ballot by hand? So if we’re classing a mail-in ballot as a ‘type’ then I suppose you could have mailin ballots as a class that lack a postmark.

        1. The election authorities around here (STL-MO) have been adamantly telling people, for weeks, that you HAVE to MAIL in your mail-in ballot – you cannot drop it off at an election office (like you can with an early absentee ballot).

          For in-person voting, they have changed the rules this year, where the 4 voting locations in my district have been consolidated into 1 (same as it was for the August primaries) but now, in addition to being eligible to vote at the designated location closest to your residential address, voters may NOW vote at any voting location in the entire county.

          I have no idea how they will have all the registry information at every location for the million or so eligible voters in the county, or correct ballots for each district, etc. Seems ripe for confusion and all kinds of other issues.

          Also – no idea how a) consolidating more people into fewer locations, b) letting everyone just vote anywhere, or c) both at the same time – help with COVID mitigation, or ease of voting, or confidence in the process.

          1. Texas has done in-person early voting at any early polling place in the county for years. Just this morning I did it. It is all electronic so they use my license to pull up my district and then my access code brings up the correct ballot. On election day we have to use our precincts but for the normally 2, this year 3, weeks of early voting you have 122 options in Harris County.

            1. That makes more sense than what we are doing. If you’re voting early here you have to wait in line at one of 6 designated places in the county. On election day you can vote at any polling place.

              Our voter rolls are printed sheets of paper in a binder, the last time I voted. Which was August. Our little precinct of about 10,000 people has 6k registered voters, so it’s several hundred pages each in 2 or 3 binders, sorted alphabetically by last name.

        2. I’m guessing there are. Well, that’s a good question. Isn’t the DNC telling people to hand-carry their ‘mail-in’ ballot by hand?

          Any such national-level advice is going to be misinformation†, so I kind of doubt it. Even if you think the DNC is malicious, evil and so-on, they’re expecting most people using mail-in ballots to vote D, so they have no incentive to spread misinformation.

          ________
          †It’s a state-by-state thing, so any national-level advice is de facto misinformation. Individual state chapters might be giving advice that is particular to that state, but no national advice I suspect.

          1. I make up to $90 an hour on-line from my home. My story is that I give up operating at walmart to paintings on-line and with a bit strive I with out qwn problem supply in spherical $40h to $86h… someone turned into top to me by way of manner of sharing this hyperlink with me, so now i m hoping i ought to help a person else accessible through sharing this hyperlink…

            ================►HOME WORK PROFFIT

      2. Yes. Mail that the post office accidentally delivers to the trunk of a car usually lacks the post mark.

        1. The good ol’ “Trunks full of Democratic voters” kind of election.

      3. Our ballots are sorted by bar-codes — a unique bar code matching each envelope and the ballot. None of the mail I get with bar codes is post-marked.

      4. Let’s think it through.

        The only way for the election office to receive a mail-in ballot between the 4th and the 8th that’s missing a postal mark is if it’s handed to them by the USPS missing one.

        So how did the USPS get a ballot without a mark? Well, since they’re the ones that put the mark on, either it was an accident (didn’t go through the machine right, dropped on the floor and when picked up was put in the wrong bin, etc.) or a postal worker is adding ballots that were handed to them.

        Unless there’s a large number of such ballots, assuming “postal mistake” is probably justified.

        If there’s a large number of such ballots, then either you’re dealing with the second case or the USPS screwed up part of their process, and the answer would be turned up by an investigation.

        So… sure. Accidents occasionally happen. Unless there’s a large number of such ballots, there’s not much reason to sweat it.

      5. “Are there any legitimate reasons why mailed-in ballots would not contain postmarks?”

        In CA, you receive a mail-in ballot that is watermarked to you. You can mail it back, or you can drop at off at several locations up to and including the day of the election. This has pretty much worked fine for the past 3 – 4 years.

        Granted, who the fuck knows what is going on in PA and other states trying to make this happen last minute. In CA there are still a couple counties (I believe) that haven’t been able to transition to mail in voting. That said, there are LEGITIMATE reasons why your ballot does not have a postmark on it.

      6. “Are there any legitimate reasons why mailed-in ballots would not contain postmarks?”

        Do you remember 2000? Military ballots were an issue:

        https://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/21/us/counting-vote-absentee-ballots-review-military-votes-florida-attorney-general.html

        “Republican criticism, though, focused particularly on what election officials said was the most common problem, failure to have a postmark. That seemed particularly galling to critics, since military mail can be sent without a postmark.”

    2. If having a post mark was a firm requirement, then DeJoy would simply eliminate postmarks in PA and invalidate all the mail in ballots. It is not the fault of a voter if the ballot has a post mark or not and thus should be be held against them.

      1. This is exactly why any election controversy will be 10x worse than 2000 in Florida. That year, neither candidate made any move to claim to that the election process itself was unfair or “rigged” against him prior to Election Day, and they largely remained calm in their public statements even while dueling teams of lawyers worked the issue. George W. Bush may have been annoyed that Gore walked back his concession call, but that was mostly the fault of the media for prematurely calling Florida for Bush when it was really far too close to call before the full official count.

        Here, we have an incumbent President that had claimed that 3 million illegals voted in 2016 (after coincidentally being just under 3 million votes behind his opponent in the national popular total). He sets up a commission on voter fraud that was obviously just a ploy to try and validate that claim, which disbanded without any significant findings or completing much of anything but controversy.

        He then launches into an attack on mail balloting when SARS-CoV2 lands in the U.S., and it is clear that it is going to affect at least the primaries. This is something that came out of nowhere. While some that have talked about voter fraud in the last couple of decades have mentioned absentee ballots (including the so-called “ballot harvesting”), no one had ever specifically targeted absentee ballots as being a source of fraud to this extent prior to Trump’s obsession with it. Fraud claims have largely centered on Voter IDs and purging registrations. With 25% of the ballots in 2016 having been mailed in, where would the political benefit be in such a claim? Absentee ballots had traditionally been viewed as more likely to lean to Republicans, in any case. Many Republicans, especially state party officials and activists have actually been frustrated by this, as they view it as hurting Republican candidates across the country if it ends up depressing Republican turnout.

        Stating explicitly that he believes that the only way he could lose is if the election is rigged, Trump has been priming his supporters to reject anything less than a Trump victory. He has demanded, and it looks likely to come to pass, that his supporters go out to be “poll watchers”, which could result in incidents that could validate claims of voter intimidation. There have been some at early voting already. A Miami city police officer in uniform and armed, wearing a Trump 2020 facemask including the phrase “no more bullshit” on it, was at one early voting site. It was not clear whether he was there to vote or for some other reason or none at all. But the police chief called it “unacceptable” for an officer to display any political message while on duty or while still in uniform if off duty.

        There are also fears of militia groups gathering in open carry states near polling locations, just outside of whatever boundaries state law places on firearms at polling locations. This could be a the lowest low for voting rights in this country since the days of Jim Crow, and 95+% of it is all on Trump.

        1. The connection to MollyGodiva’s post was more clear in my mind when I started than how it turned out on the page. She noted that Postmaster General DeJoy (Trump donor with business conflicts of interest already in that position) has taken actions that make it more likely that mail will be delayed rather than doing the opposite like a responsible leader of the Postal Service would. We also have armies of Republican lawyers fighting anything that might allow more votes to be counted in whatever situation election officials in the states think is reasonable given the extraordinary circumstances of a public health crisis on this scale. The Georgia state House Speaker said, “The president said it best ― this will be extremely devastating to Republicans and conservatives in Georgia.”

          “Every registered voter is going to get one of these [request form for an absentee ballot]. Now I ask you … what was turnout in the primary back in 2018 or 2016. Was it 100%? No. No. It’s way, way, way lower. This will certainly drive up turnout,” he added.

          Why? Republicans have been doing just about everything they can to make it harder to vote, especially since the Shelby County SCOTUS ruling neutralized the clearance requirement with the DoJ in the Voting Rights Act. That Act was supposed to end voter suppression and disenfranchisement of Black Americans under Jim Crow. It was very successful at that, and the Act has been reauthorized ever since. One of the arguments CJ Roberts used to declare the current formula for pre-clearance unconstitutional was actually that the clearance portion of the Act had been so successful, we don’t need it anymore. RBG retorted that this was like discarding an umbrella not because it had stopped raining, but because you weren’t getting wet.

          Republicans will respond that none of this is targeted at minorities, but just like the partisan gerrymandering that the Court also wouldn’t do anything about, with minorities and lower income voters overwhelmingly favoring Democrats, that is simply hard to believe.

          Regardless of the partisan or racial motivations, though, making it harder to vote is simply immoral in a Republic. The people are supposed to have the power. Republicans don’t seem to want that.

          1. Your cites fell off. About a dozen or so.

            1. Especially where armed Americans not bothering anyone are some problem.

              1. I especially enjoyed the blurring between absentee balloting and mail-in ballots.

                At least in a week, we won’t get many more ‘concerned’ posters correcting the record.

                1. “I especially enjoyed the blurring between absentee balloting and mail-in ballots.”

                  What blurring? Florida’s system for ‘absentee ballots’ is called Vote-by-Mail. Are there any states that actually have different systems for ‘absentee’ ballots vs. “mail-in” ballots? What procedures are different between mailing in ‘absentee’ ballots vs. ‘mail-in’ ballots in states that call them different things? R Mac dinged me for a lack of citations, so I expect verifiable details.

              2. “Especially where armed Americans not bothering anyone are some problem.”

                It is the “not bothering anyone” that is in question. Would you be “bothered” by armed men wearing BLM or antifa shirts hanging around your polling place?

                Here’s one of the articles from that Miami police officer to satisfy R Mac’s concerns for lack of citations. And here is another about militia groups planning to be at polling locations, armed, on Election Day.

                1. “[Stewart] Rhodes [leader of Oath Keepers] said if push came to shove, his members would draw their weapons.”

                  I would hope that he is only talking figuratively, or he badly misunderstands the right of self defense. The only legitimate reason to draw a firearm is the immediate need to defend yourself from a threat of death or serious bodily injury. A “push” or “shove” certainly doesn’t cut it.

                  “A QAnon-affiliated group has also been talking on Telegram, describing “heavily armed MAGA patriots” preparing for Election Day, according to the Times.”

                  There are some of the citations you wanted R Mac.

        2. “George W. Bush may have been annoyed that Gore walked back his concession call, but that was mostly the fault of the media for prematurely calling Florida for Bush when it was really far too close to call before the full official count.”

          Were you alive in 2000? Because this is only what happened if you are reading the fever dreams of leftist institutions written 5 years after the fact.

          Florida was in fact called for GORE first. And it was called *prior* to several precincts closing in the panhandle (which was on central time). The whole debacle changed how the media promised to cover elections in the future, and is why they do not call states until the precincts have closed.

          1. Either a mollygodiva sock or a fifty center.

            1. Message board P.I.M.P. Thinks he’s bringing the Magic Stick.

              A higher class of writing than our usual lefty drive-by trolls. Or righty for that matter.

            2. “Either a mollygodiva sock or a fifty center.”

              Sorry, but no. I don’t do sock puppetry. I’d have to look up what you mean by “fifty center”, and I don’t care enough to do so.

              I provided a couple citations for things that I said, so if that isn’t enough, then . . . whatever. If you have actual arguments and want a real debate, then go for it. If you just want to post one sentence attempts to dismiss everything I’ve said, then it is just more evidence that 90+% of the posts in the comments here are just noise. And that isn’t including the spam.

          2. Not only did they prematurely call Florida as you say, but they said that NC was “too close to call” for hours after the polls closed. Bush won NC with 56% of the vote in 2000, but they couldn’t call it until about 10 that night, but Florida could be called by the networks around 8 eastern.

          3. “Were you alive in 2000?”

            Yes, and I voted for Ralph Nader in Florida that year, so Democrats can blame me as one of the 548 Nader voters that could have given us President Gore. (This was really a pure protest vote and joke, and Nader rather than some other third party candidate, like the Libertarian, only because he was more known, not out of any agreement with his ideas. In retrospect, I should have wrote in Cthulu. Why vote for the lesser evil when you can vote for the greatest evil?)

            Yes, it was called for Gore first by the media (based on exit polls mostly, and I think some networks made this announcement prior to polls closing in the panhandle of Florida that is in the Central Time Zone – furthering their stupidity), then they walked that back, then they switched it to Bush after midnight when most precincts had reported. The media was calling Bush the projected EC winner at that point. Republican Secretary of State Kathleen Harris announced Bush as the winner the next day. The concession call and revoking of it by Gore is well documented.

            If you don’t trust NPR’s summary of these events that matched my memory, then find your own that you like better.

            1. Sorry, I failed to proofread. I was too quick and missed that you correctly pointed out the panhandle issue with the early call for Gore. I try to do better than the start writing before I’ve fully digested what I am replying to, but didn’t in this case.

  3. >>results first could show Republicans with an initial lead on election night only to then shift toward Democrats as more mail ballots are counted.

    equally likely the vote is so tilted T the mail-ins can’t flip it even if ballots are “found”

    1. Actually, according to 583, in a lot of states, (Including Eastern Time Zone states.) the mail in ballots are counted before election day, and so you’re likely in those states to see a shift *towards* Trump on election day.

  4. It’s horrible and disgusting news but… that still won’t be enough to beat Trump. Team D once again will throw everything and the kitchen sink at Trump and he’ll still going to crush them with ease.

    1. Joe Biden is a crook.

      1. The left must be crushed

      2. Hostinc is the best platform if you are willing to buy any type of dedicated server. In this, you can also take the license of your choice. In this, you get unlimited disk space, and much more and all this at very reasonable prices. So grab the server of your choice now.

    2. +1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

    3. “Team D”

      Ah, the cult of personality + sports fan mentality = lack of anything resembling rational thought from people posting on a website titled “Reason”.

      “Team D once again will throw everything and the kitchen sink at Trump and he’ll still going to crush them with ease.”

      Including teams of lawyers looking to do everything they can to get ballots thrown out in counties that are Democrat heavy and otherwise suppress the vote. This is why sports fan politics is so toxic. When it comes to your team, the attitude of sportsmanship and integrity morphs into, “If you ain’t cheatin’, you ain’t trying.”

  5. counties to accept and count ballots that arrive through November 6, three days after the election, even if those ballots don’t contain postmarks showing when they were mailed.

    So this will make it easier for truckloads of ballots to ‘appear’ after election day?

    1. That is the historical precedent.
      See Texas and LBJ (“I stole that election fair and square”)
      The dems need about 6 hours to determine how many ballots they need to “find”, and how many to allow to be Republican yet still “win”.

      “The runoff vote count, handled by the Democratic State Central Committee, took a week. Johnson was announced the winner by 87 votes out of 988,295, an extremely narrow margin of victory. However, Johnson’s victory was based on 200 “patently fraudulent”:608 ballots reported six days after the election from Box 13 in Jim Wells County, in an area dominated by political boss George Parr. The added names were in alphabetical order and written with the same pen and handwriting, following at the end of the list of voters. Some of the persons in this part of the list insisted that they had not voted that day.”

      1. And it didn’t matter, did it? Nobody kicked out LBJ, and he, much later, got to die in bed on his ranch.

        You get more of what you reward, and less of what you punish. We say we’re against voter fraud, so where’s the punishment?

        1. Hopefully locked and loaded

      2. “The dems need about 6 hours to determine how many ballots they need to “find”, and how many to allow to be Republican yet still “win”.”

        You can not do this with mail in ballots. You can only do it with the ballots submitted from in person voting.

        Mail in ballots are watermarked to the individual. In order to fraudulently submit a mail in ballot, you need to have stolen/harvested the ballot from that person’s mailbox. At that point you might as well have just voted with it already.

        OTOH, in precinct voting, you have two measures. The first is how many voters showed up to vote, and then the second is the actual anonymous ballots. These two records can be easily forged by a precinct captain checking in the last hour or so who hasn’t checked in and then marking them as “Voted”, then providing an untraceable ballot on their behalf.

        Really, it is the precinct voting that is more insecure.

        1. In CA, they may be.

          And spitballing, but what prevents a prepared group from having a list of registered voters from low turnout areas, generating a stack of those watermarked, individualized mail in ballots for those voters, filling them out, running them through a couple of postage meters, and voila! Stack of votes?

    2. That is the whole point. It is a strategy. All they have to do is wait for the totals to start coming in, then “produce” as many votes as are necessary to flip the election in their favor.
      I guess either party could use that strategy, but the democrats already have a system and people in place to do it.
      If they cannot win, they can at least create some ambiguity about the results, and use that as an excuse to foment unrest.

      1. The Ds also have the advantage over the Rs in that the federal bureaucracy and national media will cover up for them, while they won’t for the right.
        Plus their organizational commitment to such methods and their philosophical rejection of ethics.

      2. On thing though….I suspect there will be a lot of poll watchers in the three days after the election. If there are a bunch of ballots coming in without postmarks, we will know who delivered them, and when.

        Also, if the results swing either way because of ballots without postmarks received after the election, SCOTUS will get involved. I am certain of that.

        1. How are poll watchers going to notice a raft of ballots arriving, three days after an election? Are they allowed in the county/precinct/whatever counting area?

  6. What the PA Supreme Court has done has created an election without sensible rules which if not inherently corrupt is wide open to massive corruption.

    It is bad policy and it is a usurpation of legitimate authority.

  7. I don’t think we’ll have to wait. Because I am not at all convinced PA is going for Biden. In fact I think it will be the Biden campaign that will sue to overturn the results. Should they be successful then you may be looking at some very bad shit going down.

    1. I live about 10 miles southwest of Pittsburgh and it’s 9 to 1 trump over Biden signs. What really bodes poorly for Biden here is that even with blm shit heads creeping the streets there’s a good bit of trump signs in the downtown area. Back in 16 I lived in the city and there was barely any trump signs and he still got the state. He certainly has more overt support here now.

      OH and fuck boehm, limpwristed snowflakes like him smokin Tom wolfes pole while bitching about trump is what’s wrong with Pennsylvania

      1. Nixon won every state but one and DC partly because of national riots and violence.

        I predicted Trump would gain votes based on the same American concern for law and order.

  8. Pennsylvania is the state most likely to decide next week’s presidential election

    I fucking love science.

    1. Minnesota officially pissed.

    2. Like it or not it really is the case that Pennsylvania is the keystone state. While Joe Biden has several routes to win the electoral college Trump has only one and it goes through Pennsylvania. All that said while Tx, Fl, and Ga are most likely to go Trump if any would go to Biden and then Pennsylvania drops out and they can count till the EC meets.

      1. We all are aware of the Lefty strategy to so confuse elections in swing states that they cannot certify Electoral College votes to Congress.

        You have not been able to stop Trump to date and this wont work either.

      2. Trump can still win without PA. He would have to take Michigan and either Wisconsin or Minnesota, Hold FL, NC, GA, AZ and, depending on how much weight you put on some polls, TX. Without either WI or MN he might still win with NH and NV and he might surprise somewhere else like VA. Lots of potential paths to victory are open.

        1. “would have to take Michigan and either Wisconsin or Minnesota”

          The problem here is that he is behind enough in these states that his campaign is not really spending any money in the states anymore. Usually a sign they have given up. I think that PA is the only real chance Trump has.

          1. I think Pence is IN Minnesota today

  9. So what was the original law the state legislature passed concerning mail-in ballots? Toss out the state court ruling and go with that.

    You can’t change the rules while people are voting.

    A reasonable rule would be that the ballot has to be signed and post-marked by election day, and received within 7 days (or whatever is customary for worst case mail delivery in the state) to count. But various states have various deadlines and requirements. Just go with what they have enacted in law previously.

    1. But firm, transparent rules on vote counting disenfranchises minorities.

      1. And dead people.

  10. a Supreme Court ruling this week has all but guaranteed that we won’t know who won the Keystone State’s 20 electoral votes on Election Day.

    How conVEEEEENient! 8-(

  11. I think we all know that Democrats will just keep finding ballots until they win.

    1. That’s how Civil Wars start and I predict Democrats finding bullets until they lose.

  12. I’m going to LMMFAO if Trump wins everywhere else so well, that PA doesn’t even matter. I’m not a Trump supporter, but I really hate this election game rigging; regardless of who does it.

    In AZ, you can vote by mail but it has to be post-marked 6 days prior to election date. Why is this so hard for PA to figure out? Idiots!

  13. PA law says that one can request an absentee ballot up to October 27. The state court, based on evidence from past elections, noted that due to postal and processing delays, a voter that properly requested a ballot may not get it in time for it to be back by Election Day. There is another law that says that ballots are valid if sent by 8 pm on Election Day, and another that says they must be received by 8 pm on Election Day. These laws create a conflict that would disenfranchise votes who did nothing wrong. The PA Supreme court reasonably ruled to extend the deadline to receive the ballots. One may disagree with it, but it is still a reasonable ruling based on the facts and the law.

    1. Man, did you think this was a website of law? This comment is far too reasonable for the likes of the reason comments section.

    2. The law says you can request a ballot up to October 27. It doesn’t require waiting until then. So if the ballot doesn’t get postmarked in time, that’s the voter’s problem for relying on a process outside of the election system (the USPS). If my bus ride gets me to the polling station after the polls close, can I vote anyway?

      1. Voting is not the lottery, it should not be based on chance at all. If a voter votes legally, then their ballot needs to count.

        1. So we’ll never actually have results, since elections have to stay open forever in case the mail is late? The only alternative to that is an arbitrary cut-off date. That’s what the legislature enacted. The court simply substituted its own arbitrary date.

          1. It was not arbitrary, it was based on the delivery timeline for first class mail.

            1. So you’re saying that there’s an objectively correct cut-off date based on USPS delivery times? What is it? And where did the court discuss that? Did it use average delivery times or maximum? Because unless it used maximum, which is infinity, there’s a risk that some mail won’t make the cut-off date. So we’re back to your lottery, which you said we can’t have. But it doesn’t matter, because the court never went there. Aside from the faulty reasoning that a cut-off date isn’t arbitrary, the legislature is as aware of USPS delivery timelines as the court, and it didn’t change the law. So unless the court had some reason for striking down the cut-off date as illegal, which it didn’t, the court simply substituted its judgement for the legislature.

                1. Try addressing my points instead.

                  1. They did quite well. Also it is their opinion which is the center of the debate.

                  2. Resistance at all costs!

                2. You wouldn’t know well reasoned logic if it bit you on the ass.

        2. If a voter votes legally, then their ballot needs to count.

          By “legally”, you mean their ballot has to be received by 8 p.m. Election Day? Or by “legally” do you mean “whatever I think is fair and reasonable”? Because that’s what this whole argument is going to be about – counting ballots that aren’t technically legal, but the Democrats think ought to be counted anyway.

          1. That’s what the Florida 2000 “recount” was about. “Hanging chads”, “dimpled chads”, “distressed chads”, whatever, were clearly not votes according the rules set before the election, but Gore wanted them to count anyway (in some counties).

    3. There is no conflict between the three rules in the sense that it is possible to comply with all three requirements simultaneously: one can (1) request an absentee ballot well before Oct. 27, (2) send it well in advance of 8pm Election Day, and (3) have the ballot received by 8pm on Election Day. The fact that complying with one of the three rules, say sending the ballot at 7:45pm on Election Day, doesn’t guarantee compliance with the other rules, say having the ballot arrive by 8pm Election Day, doesn’t mean that the rules are in “conflict”. Conflict means that it’s impossible to comply with all three rules simultaneously. For example, if a tax law requires that (1) someone keeps a receipt of a transaction and (2) reports the transaction on one’s return, then there is no conflict simply because keeping a receipt doesn’t automatically imply that one will also have reported the transaction on one’s return. One needs to do both. If laws are as you say, then it would seem to imply that ballots received after 8pm on Election Day are invalid.

      Now, if I was writing the laws myself, I might have made the receipt date later than the postmark date. That might have been my policy preference. However, policy preferences fall to the legislatures. Judges’ jobs are to interpret the laws as written, not to “fix” legislatures’ presumed mistakes by substituting judges’ own policy preferences.

      1. “Conflict means that it’s impossible to comply with all three rules simultaneously.”

        You’re twisting things pretty badly to come up with this statement. Conflict means that

        I had a long analogy written to try and illustrate the issue, but the situation is clear enough as it is. If you read a rule that says that you can mail your ballot on Election Day before 8pm (2), then that rule has to mean what it says by itself. If there is another rule, (3) that would disallow someone’s ballot if they believed (2) and acted accordingly, then the legislature is guilty of writing conflicting laws, and the courts would only be correct in resolving the conflict in favor of the voter.

        This isn’t a “presumed” mistake, but an actual one. Any reasonable voter is going to interpret rules (1) and (2) as meaning that you can request a ballot on 10/27 and mail it by 8pm Election Day and it will count, unless those rules also explicitly say that the actual deadline is for it to be received by 8pm Election Day. And even this would be stupid, since it is a person can follow (1) and (2) and be unable to meet (3).

        You are basically allowing legislatures to write sloppy rules (or to purposefully confuse people) and then say that judges can’t fix it in favor of citizens trying to do the right thing, but that understandably don’t figure out what the legislature really wanted. Laws that are vague, contradictory, or that punish people actually trying to comply with them, get struck down as unconstitutional all the time as violations of the people’s due process rights.

        I’m getting pretty frustrated with bad arguments here. It was hard to remain civil and give you the benefit of the doubt that you aren’t just rationalizing a preference to see Trump win by any means necessary.

  14. Lets also point out that there is not such thing as “Election Night results”. The only results that exist are the formal ones certified by the states after all the votes are counted. Anything else is just a media projection.

    1. Ah, another voice of reason in the comments of a website with that name that otherwise tends to lack it. There is no requirement that election results be known on Election Day. It only typically occurs that way because the votes that have been counted by then are often sufficient to accurately project a winner. That is, the 1-5% of precincts that don’t report their results by midnight aren’t enough to change the outcome, and any clearing up of provisional ballots and others that need verification won’t make a difference either.

      I think that the anti-Democrat side of this election is so insistent on knowing the result on Nov. 3 only because they have the expectation that any votes not yet counted that night will lean Democrat.

      And I think that I will start calling the right the anti-Democrats from now on, since that is what motivates them more than any other part of their ideology.

  15. On Monday, Trump tweeted that states “must have final total on November 3rd.”

    In Pennsylvania—and probably in a few other places too—that is simply impossible.

    Forget possible, that’s not the law and never has been. The man is not a reliable source for legal claims.

    1. Your citation fell off.

      Trump is gonna win!

      1. Anyone who has been alive and sentient during a prior presidential election knows that the votes are not all counted election night. What a retarded idea to even float.

        1. This is why Trump is so insistent that we declare a winner on election night. Not all the votes will have been counted by then, and he expects that mail-in votes still being counted at that time would tend to favor Biden. Trump’s strategy has been to try and favor himself in which ballots are considered ‘legitimate’ so that he can avoid being the ‘loser’ he is likely to become.

  16. Having gone back and read all the comments now…

    I think I’m moving towards the position that states shouldn’t announce intermediate results before they certify the vote count. The news media may like treating it like a horse race, where this candidate or that is making a “lead” and so-on, but I think it’s worse for the country to treat elections like another part of the 24/7 news cycle.

    Also? A lot of you commentors here are nucking futz.

    1. I also don’t think that if a person cannot get to the polls on time maybe that person does not need to vote. Especially the voting time is extended for about two weeks before the regular voting day has come. In addition these same people could get the ballot sent to them ( in some places they don’t even have to request a mail in ballot to get it) and mail it in without even having to go to the polls.

      1. There is no law that allows voters to cast their ballots late. The issue is voters who vote on time but either the mail is slow or their are long lines at the polling place.

        1. So what if the mail is slow? You took a chance and it didn’t work out. Ballots are available in advance to account for these kinds of things. The court has usurped the legislature and replaced one arbitrary deadline with another. Long lines at the polling place are a different matter. That’s a failure of the voting apparatus.

          1. Voting is not the lottery, it should not be based on chance at all. If a voter votes legally, then their ballot needs to count.

            1. Trite phrases such as “their ballot needs to count” work great in a perfect world. Mail can be delayed for years. Should we leave elections open for years?

              1. Molly also uses the word “needs” in place of “in my opinion, should”

                Needs are air, water, food and shelter.

              2. “Should we leave elections open for years?”

                Straw man. Molly did not say to wait that long, but a few days won’t hurt anyone. Deadlines for states to certify results are far enough away from the election that this would not be a problem. This is like the rest of the ‘concerns’ over mail voting. Opinions on it are based on perceptions about which side is favored, not principle.

            2. Unless its late or otherwise does not follow the law.

              You know how to make sure your vote is counted? Vote on election day and dont trust 3rd, 4th and 5th parties to get your ballot to election officials.

            3. You could always, I don’t know, be a responsible adult and mail your ballot in early?

              1. Or, I don’t know, the legislature could have made laws and deadlines such that anyone that follows the law could be sure that their vote would count. This seems like it would be the default position of anyone in a government that derives its power from the people. Let the people vote and let all of their votes count. Or is it that the government can make rules that allow random errors to interfere with the vote counting and then say, “Well, I guess it’s just too bad that following our rules meant that your vote won’t count. You were supposed to read between the lines and figure out for yourself that our deadlines were setting you up for failure.”

                1. Are you arguing that three weeks of early voting, Absentee ballots available at least that long, and mail-in postmarked by Election Day don’t allow enough time for someone to make sure their vote is counted? Or are you arguing like Molly, that none of that should matter (even though the overwhelming majority of people who vote are able to follow those rules) and they should count votes no matter when they come in?

                  1. “Or are you arguing like Molly, that none of that should matter (even though the overwhelming majority of people who vote are able to follow those rules) and they should count votes no matter when they come in?”

                    Maybe if you read what we wrote carefully (including comments above), you will see that people can follow one of the rules and still not have their vote count because another rule conflicts with it. If it was me, I’d think that a rule that says that you can mail your ballot or drop it off in person, up to and including Election Day would mean that your ballot will count when it is received. But since there is also a rule that says that ballots have to be received by Election Day to be counted, that is a conflict. The law is asking people to decide for themselves how long the mail might take and take the risk that their mailed ballot might not make it by Election Day based on their own understanding of Postal Service procedures and possible delays. Like I said, the rules are setting people up to fail unless they recognize all of the rules and correctly figure out for themselves which rule is the actual one.

                    To me, this is the fundamental problem with mail voting and insisting that ballots be received by a certain time on or close to Election Day. (Note that military and other overseas ballots from people serving the government have federal rules that allow something like 10 days after the election for receipt.)

    2. I agree that state election officials should not say a word about who ‘won’ an election until all the votes have been counted and the total certified. The problem then becomes whether all parts of the media will abide by that and caution the public about their projections based on almost all of the precincts and early vote totals and mail ballots counted so far. Ratings are why major news networks were declaring winners and losers based on exit polls and partial results up to and including 2000, and they got things badly wrong that year.

      People want the certainty so that they can either celebrate or vent their anger right away, but it is clear that it is far better to wait for official word before getting too worked up.

  17. I can’t under how people cannot get to the polls to vote on time since for well over two hundred years that has been the case and this nation has not been hurt that requirement. But now in modern times where there is much better means of transportation to get to the polls we no long get to the polls by the date required to vote. But even worse it has been made that people can vote early a couple of weeks early even and the still cannot get to the polling place to drop off their ballots. They also have made voting by mail even earlier so a person can request a ballot (in many cases the ballot is sent with being requested) and they still cannot get it the post office in time for it to be delivered by the deadline. Now they have ruled that is some states ballots that gets to the polling place even a week after the election it will still be counted. Why are making it easier for people to be lazy and procrastinate? If they want to be lazy they could get an absentee ballot even earlier and fill it out and mail it back even before voting by mail ballots is even out.
    If a person is not willing to put out a little effort maybe they don’t need to vote. How many elections have we seen in places that they did not have that right when they got it even under the three of death these people voted even with that threat.

    1. People work very hard to vote in this country. When I was growing up black Americans risked death to register and vote. In many urban areas people wait in line for several hours to vote. I am fortunate to live in a liberal community that make voting easy. Plenty of voting sites and drop off sites. My son lives in a different place. For him early voting is only allowed Monday through Friday 8 to 4. As he works those times are not open to him. So on election day he will get up, work, drive home stop at the polls at about 6PM and have a two hour window to get his vote. It is certainly doable but it is not as easy as everyone thinks.

      1. Democrats kept Blacks from voting.

        Democrats wanted to keep Blacks from the polls.

        Democrats used voter fraud to cheat Blacks out of representation.

        As we see from early voting returns, most Americans got their ballots in on time because its important to them.

        And they voted Trump!

        1. “Democrats kept Blacks from voting.”

          “Conservatives of this nation constitute the balance of power in presidential elections. I am a conservative. I intend to give the American people a clear choice. I welcome a fight between our philosophy and the liberal left-wing dogma which now threatens to engulf every man, woman, and child in the United States. I am in this race because I believe the American people have been pushed around long enough and that they, like you and I, are fed up with the continuing trend toward a socialist state which now subjects the individual to the dictates of an all-powerful central government.”

          -George Wallace in 1964

          Democrats had conservative members (remember the Blue Dogs?) for many decades after the Civil Rights Era. They were often the remnants of segregationists (like Wallace) that didn’t want to associate themselves with Northerners and the “Party of Lincoln”. Generational changes and the rise of the Religious Right helped move people in the South with those points of view to the GOP, where they found those willing to listen to their backlash against integration and “busing” using more coded language than had been the case when Southern Democrats were full-throated segregationists.

          This Dinesh D’Souza revisionism on segregation and Jim Crow might play well with current group of anti-Democrats (Republicans, some libertarians, and all conservatives), but I am not fooled.

      2. When I was growing up black Americans risked death to register and vote.

        Woah. Just how old are you?

        1. Fought with Sherman at Vicksburg?

        2. I was eight years old when Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner, three civil rights workers were murdered for trying to get black Americans registered to vote.

          1. Wow, 64.

            From the way you write I thought that you were some edgy 20-year-old, choc full of intersectionality and critical theory from your gender studies prof. When in reality you’re a Baby Boomer, the generation that made Peter Pan syndrome a way of life and “Screw you, Dad!” a motto.

            1. You sound like a cunt, for what it’s worth.

      3. Sorry…I have to call BS here. Early voting for weeks before the election, and your adult son cannot find 30 minutes from 8-4 M-F to head over and vote. Seriously?

        Sorry, your post pegged my BS Meter to max. 🙂

        1. Translation is that his anecdotal person cannot visit multiple voting locations in time to commit enough voter fraud to win it for Biden.

      4. And now you pussies can’t even risk the small chance of getting sick to stand in line with your mask on and socially distanced.

        Fucking pathetic.

        1. “And now you pussies can’t even risk the small chance of getting sick to stand in line with your mask on and socially distanced.”

          Ah, the measure of a true man is whether his is willing to sacrifice for his right to vote, I see. Yet you follow Capt. Bone Spurs whose campaign doesn’t recognize that playing CCR’s “Fortunate Son” at his rallies is destroying irony meters everywhere. Of course, the infamous germaphobe took not wearing a mask as a sign of manliness and got COVID himself (along with his wife and teenage son and a couple dozen other people probably at the ACB super-spreader event). He had a whole team of doctors working for him, getting the latest in experimental treatments, when ordinary Americans are stuck with hoping to get just one doctor and that standard treatments are available, and that treatment will both work and be affordable, when they might not have insurance due to being unemployed and being unable to afford COBRA, if they had insurance before the pandemic. He takes his recovery as a further sign of his invincibility and continues to argue that it isn’t that bad despite over 200k people having died so far, and many people that recovered taking weeks longer than he did to do so, and months in some cases, with lingering effects that we’re only beginning to recognize and understand.

          But that is all nothing. Only pussies worry about that. And who wants to be a pussy that Trump might want to grab and expect to get away with it because he’s rich and famous?

    2. “I can’t under[stand] how people cannot get to the polls to vote on time since for well over two hundred years that has been the case and this nation has not been hurt that requirement.”

      This nation has been hurt every time that any voter could not cast a ballot because of hurdles that affected some groups of people more than others. Whether that person is poor, a minority, disabled, elderly, or other, if they face barriers to voting than people more fortunate in their circumstances, then that is something that should be remedied. The whole point of early voting was that some people might work two jobs or have shift work that would prevent them from being at the polls between 7am and 7pm on Election Day. Some people work so much, that even early voting can be tough.

      So when some states closed their early voting on Sundays, and it just so happened that it was popular for Black communities to have “Souls to the polls” buses and events after church on Sundays during early voting, everyone that believes in free and fair elections should have been outraged equally, regardless of party. That Sunday was popular among those Black communities because the higher rates of being low-income and holding multiple jobs among that population meant that Sundays were the most convenient days for them makes it doubly outrageous.

      If you want to make it so that all votes have to be cast on Election Day, in person, then how about we make that a national holiday that no one can be required to work? All businesses and other locations that are typically open on all holidays, like gas stations, hospitals, emergency rooms, fire departments, police, etc., would be required to pay at least overtime rates for anyone that chose to work that day and with shifts limited to 8 hours or less, so that they’d still have time to vote either before or after their shifts. States and counties would be required to have sufficient polling locations and staff at each station such that lines would not be substantially greater in different neighborhoods. Public transit could make sure that they are still running those days as if it was a regular workday (with its workers paid overtime and limited to 8 hours as above) so that people without cars could still get to their polling location if outside of walking distance and otherwise unable to get a ride. If it takes two hours to vote in one location, then it there can’t be a location in a wealthier area 10 miles away where someone could be in an out in less than 15 minutes. If you want to allow mail voting for people that truly can’t get to a poll, then that system can be done in a way that is more even and less subject to random problems that aren’t the fault of the voter.

      When the right to vote is truly equal for everyone, then we can make blanket statements about it being the fault of the voter if they don’t get to vote.

  18. I have long wondered why we have this need to know immediately who won the Presidency. No matter who wins President Trump will be in office for nearly three more months. It is not like thinks will change immediately in any way. We need to let the votes be counted. We need to remember that some of those late votes may belong to our soldiers serving abroad and that their votes should be counted as well. If we truly believe in the democracy we espouse to have we should hope that all votes get counted.

    1. Many is this country do not believe in democracy and try to suppress votes of those who probably won’t support them. Those want to know immediately because it is projected that Biden will get more of the slower to count votes and they want to stop the vote when their side is ahead.

      1. Many is this country do not believe in democracy

        Yes, we’re called “Americans”. If you’re a big fan of democracy, you’re in the wrong country.

        1. See they actually say it out loud now.

          This is a controversial opinion, but I think I’m on solid ground: Republicans are better at fascism than Hitler ever was, by some measures.

        2. “Yes, we’re called “Americans”. If you’re a big fan of democracy, you’re in the wrong country.”

          People so often use the term “democracy” in a broad sense for any system of government where people vote for the leaders of their government and/or in other ballot propositions, that it really is pedantic to insist on this distinction. I used to think that this is what people like Jerryskids were doing. They just wanted to be the contrarian against someone they disagreed with on other issues in order to demonstrate their intellectual superiority (in their minds).

          But now, I see it for what it is when it comes from the anti-Democrats. They really don’t want free and fair elections, because they don’t want a ‘big tent’ party for their side that could actually win a solid majority of the votes. They want to ally themselves only with voters that think very closely to how they do. That way, they don’t have to compromise and can get exactly what they want if they do manage to win.

          Of course, this means that winning is out of reach if it requires a true majority of voters to support them. That is then why reasons must be invented to make sure that their voters are more likely to turn out and have their votes counted. Anything that might boost turnout on the other side more than theirs must be opposed, and anything that place obstacles harder for the other side’s voters to overcome than their own must be implemented.

          Then there are the structural issues with how the Founders set up the Senate and Electoral College. It was intentional, of course, to dilute the ‘whims’ of the ‘masses’ with a Senate not directly elected by the people, and to have an Electoral College chosen by a method each state legislature could determine on its own. (Talk about elitism. The Founders were the original American elitists.) Then both of those institutions were also distorting in allotting voting power based on simple statehood for the Senate and a combination of statehood and population for the EC.

          When you have a chance to govern without a majority of the country supporting you, why try and broaden your support and have to compromise to do so? If a President can win reelection while never having his approval rating go over 50, why should he try and garner the support of a majority? Democracy? Pfft. That is for losers.

          [Even a constitutional amendment can’t really undo the equal state representation in the Senate, as Article V explicitly disallows changing that without the consent of any state that would end up with less than an equal share of the Senate (which means, in practice, that all states would have to agree, not just 3/4).]

    2. Democrats are proven crooks. The longer the vote counts takes, the greater chance it can be manipulated.

      Trump will be reelected based on large margins that even Democrats cannot manipulate.

      1. If Democrats are proven crooks why is it always Republican caught for voter fraud? The Mark Harris campaign in NC for example. Talk is cheap put up some examples.

        1. Penny Hubbard and the entire Hubbard family.

          1. Perhaps you could explain this? I looked up Ms. Hubbard and saw no indication of fraud. I did note in a recount that a number of ballots were disqualified, but I don’t see that as cheating. People voted but information was missing and the votes were disqualified. That a little different than throwing away ballots that don’t support you as was done in NC.
            Do you have a different example?

    3. I have long wondered why we have this need to know immediately who won the Presidency.

      Sure you have. I’ll bet it never entered your head until you saw it in your talking points pdf.

  19. The sculpture has its roots in prehistoric civilizations, undergoing numerous changes over time and evolving simultaneously with society. During this time, the sculpture has played several roles in people’s lives. It believed that, in the beginning, sculptures had a magical role.

    From time immemorial, the sculpture has been considered a means of artistic expression, its beginnings being much more distant than those of painting. People began to carve in stone or wood either to make different tools or to create small figurines that they used for various purposes. Archaeological discoveries have shown that the sculptures dating back to prehistoric times were made of stone or ivory, but also clay.

    The Ancient Times Sculptures

  20. Many of us in PA are not pleased that Democrat Gov. Tom Wolf. and Democrat controlled County leaders have been aggressively pushing (and spending millions of taxpayer dollars promoting) mail in ballots, extending the voting dates, allowing mail in ballots without postmarks and signatures, and otherwise encouraging voter fraud.

    My wife and I receive more than three dozen applications for mail in ballots, the county and state have issued dozens of press releases urging mail in voting, and ads urging people to vote by mail have run daily on radio and TV and via mail for several months.

    But just yesterday, we received a notice from our county (Allegheny) election office informing us of our polling location, which is different than where we (and about 90% of other county voters) were assigned to vote for the June 2 primary, and which is likely to be our only notice.

    Voters in Allegheny County who didn’t vote by mail (mostly Republicans) who didn’t open or notice their lone mailing this week won’t know where to vote next Tuesday.

    In sum, Democrat politicians in PA have spent lots of taxpayer dollars and gone to great lengths urging lazy Democrats (who won’t go to the polls on election day) to vote by mail, while discouraging Republicans from voting on election day.

  21. After Biden’s many flip flops on banning fracking (which will fuel Western PA’s economy for the next 60+ years), and after Philly’s anti police race riots, extensive looting and stand down orders by Philly’s left wing woke mayor this week, I’ve never been more confident that Trump will win PA next week (although it may take several days before the winner is known for certain).

    1. Honestly, it will be Black and Hispanic voters that give Trump such a big vote win that Democrats trying to find votes wont be able to.

      Young voters might surprise us too. I have been pleasantly surprised with young voters knowing how corrupt Biden is because they aggregate news and dont get their news from a gatekeeper, like old people.

  22. “That is, states that primarily report Election Day results first could show Republicans with an initial lead on election night only to then shift toward Democrats as more mail ballots are counted.”

    And they’re going to keep counting until the shift shows, even if it takes all month and hundreds of extra ballot boxes.

    1. “All the patients at this drug rehab facility voted for Biden!”

      Of course, that might not be fraud at all, the addicts may simply have been angling for jobs with foreign energy companies.

    2. Innocent until proven guilty in this country, so good luck proving anything.

  23. The courts… Not the legislature… In Pennsylvania have decided that ballots cannot be disqualified for lacking a signature that matches the voter registration. If they arrive days late and there is no evidence of when they were cast (such as a postmark), you must count them.

    These decisions are in direct opposition to Pennsylvania law.

    Does anyone think these are rational decisions that simply follow the law?

    The only plausible explanation for an entirely partisan divide that directly contradicts the black letter law in the state seems to be that one party perceives an advantage to be had.

    And one party is warning that nobody should accept the results on the day of the election. One party is warning that it is illegitimate to declare victory on election day. One party is openly predicting that even if they lose by a landslide on election day, it will actually turn out to be a landslide in their favor after late arriving ballots are counted.

    If it seems fairly obvious, it should. They are telling you right to your face what they are doing.

    1. SCOTUS will step in to decide the fate of ballots without postmarks received after November 3rd. I don’t think they’ll be allowed in. My guess is they will say Courts cannot change the law just before an election; the PA Legislature should have done that.

      1. Didn’t SCOTUS already rule on this exact issue? I guess it could have been a related issue, allowing them wiggle room to revisit the topic.

        What a mess this is going to be.

  24. I have made 96,760 Buck just last month by working online from my home. I am a full time college student and just doing this in my free time for few hours per week by using my laptop.Everyone can check this out and start making cash online in a very easy way by just following instructions……..by follow detailsHere═❥❥  Click Here    

  25. not counting any mail in ballots until the day after the election….. in a year with record mail in voting….. don’t expect this election to be called anytime quick after polls close. considering mail in ballots seem to be higher for democrats this year, this could guarantee the nightmare scenario where it looks like Trump won when polls close and Biden takes it from him as mail in ballots are counted.

  26. On the plus side, morphing election day into weeks will help keep a supply of tissues on the store shelves, for the losers.

  27. We will never know who actually won this election.

    1. If Biden wins it we’ll know that night.
      If Trump wins it we won’t know until several weeks later when the press announces a Biden victory.

      1. Do you think the press counts the votes?

        1. Do you think at all?

  28. Start now earning extra $16,750 to $19,000 per month by doing an easy home based job in part time only. Last month i have got my 3rd paycheck of $17652 by giving this job only 3 hrs a day online on my Mobile. Every person can now get this today and makes extra cash by follow details her==► Read More  

  29. I question whether we will ever know who actually won. Sooner or later the courts will ‘announce’ a winner.