Earlier this year, the board passed a rule that critics say could empower county boards to delay certification of results. The rule allows the boards to demand “reasonable inquiries” if they have questions about the outcome of an election. The rule does not specify what a reasonable inquiry is, and it places no limits on the time frame of such a probe or what documents a board can demand.
Georgia law requires county boards to certify their results by the Monday following an election, but critics of the new rule say it could lead boards to misinterpret their power and refuse to certify, thereby slowing the process of state-level certification.
In a presidential election, the calendar for determining which presidential electors will convene and send their votes to Washington is fixed and inflexible, with disruptions having the potential to derail the process. This year, electors are due to convene in every state on Dec. 17, a precursor to the counting of electoral votes in Washington on Jan. 6, 2025.
Some critics say that because the hand-counting requirement would almost certainly inject error into the tabulation process, it could give county boards the evidence they need to investigate results and delay certification. Some questioned whether the two rules together amount to intentional sabotage of state elections.
It would be better imo if his model had not had harris go from a one in three chance to a favorite based on nothing. But that would just be restating my post.
538 was at 60/40 during DNC and is 60/40 now. Seems to be performing objectively better post ante.
Mike ter Maat was born in Portland, Oregon. He earned a B.S. in aeronautical engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1982, an M.B.A. from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1983, and a Ph.D. in economics from George Washington University in 1992. Ter Maat’s career experience includes working as a police officer in Broward County, Florida, an economist, an economics professor, and a substitute teacher.[1][2]
It’s not. You can check this on his site. National polling has moved slightly towards Harris. Harris was up 2.2% at the debate, and is now up 2.9%. That is pretty significant given his model projects she needs to win by about 2.5% to overcome Trump’s EC advantage.
It’s fair to hate his model, but he is at least completely transparent about what is causing the changes, so see no reason to just make stuff up.
Harris is pretty clearly getting a bounce in national polls. She’s now up by 2.9 points in our polling average, as compared with 2.2 points on the day of the debate (and 2.0 points on the day after the debate, when there wasn’t yet any post-debate polling included in the averages).
Couple of months ago a roofer guy and his sidekick spent a week or so redoing the roof where I work. Chatted w him. He told me he’s Ukranian descent and can’t wait to vote for Trump - who’ll sort Russia out and get them out of Ukraine…
It’s fucking amazing!
I did explain a couple of things, in a gentle way. He seemed to take that on board and consider, but I’m not sure he’s gonna change his vote.
One of the things that makes no sense with this is that the votes are already counted by computer first. We vote on a computer, which spits out a paper ballot with a QR code. We then feed that into a machine.
Computers are used twice in the voting process. The paper ballots are supposed to be a backup for a) a paper trail in case a hand count is needed and b) to let people check their ballots one more time.
As depressing as all the blatant GOP election rigging efforts are, I think is that a lot of these people are true believers and actually think there was some blatant fuckery going on in 2020. They won’t know it’s all kayfabe so they may actually honestly count votes when the time comes.
