Election integrity and the transfer of power

[Paingod]

The absolute grotesque tribalism on display by the Republican masses, openly seeking to intimidate and disrupt the election process, is probably one of the most unpatriotic things I have ever witnessed.

I asked my wife this morning what, exactly, it would take to spark a civil war in the US.

I mean - if Biden is running the night and somehow Trump shuts everything out despite a massive losing streak, at what point do common citizens take to the streets with arms? How, exactly, do other countries with simmering civil unrest get to the point where people are attacking the government?

I would LOVE to say "Never in America" but Trump has ensured that nothing is impossible.

[malchior]

Just seeing all this cataloged is kinda scary.

Soon to fondly be remembered as the "pre-election" list.

[Little Raven]

I mean - if Biden is running the night and somehow Trump shuts everything out despite a massive losing streak, at what point do common citizens take to the streets with arms?

I'm not sure what you mean by "Biden running the night." Are we talking about a situation where Trump somehow prevents votes from being counted? Or just a highly unexpected but legitimate Trump win?

We'll see some violence in either case, but the former would generate orders of magnitude more than the latter.

How, exactly, do other countries with simmering civil unrest get to the point where people are attacking the government?

Slowly. Real life isn't the movies - people don't simultaneously take the streets and depose governments. Generally speaking, small groups of people decide that the current government is illegitimate, and begin planning and executing violent actions designed to destabilize society. Right now, that sort of thing is mostly confined to the American right, but the left has engaged in that sort of action in the past. It's far from inconceivable that it could happen again.

[Smoove_B]

Totally normal.

https://twitter.com/AriBerman/status/13 ... 8863526916

Many reporters, including me, attempting to listen to federal court hearing on whether to invalidate 127,000 drive-thru votes in Harris County TX

Press line was disconnected with hearing in progress & no reporters let in courtroom. This is huge case & we can't even cover it

[GungHo]

In case you're wondering how other countries are looking at the U.S. right now:

With only a couple of days before Americans head to the polls, Australians are being warned to steer clear of the USA.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade updated its advice saying there was a potential for violence in the coming days and weeks.

Foreign Minister Marise Payne’s office said the warning against travel was already in place because of COVID-19 — with similar warnings in place for all nations — and the only change is a mention of the US election this week.

...

“The US has a heightened risk of terrorist attacks. Terrorists may use vehicles, knives, homemade bombs, and poisons or toxins,” it said.

“Be alert, particularly in public places and at events. Violent crime is more common than in Australia and gun crime is possible in all areas. Follow local guidance and instructions. If you live in the US, learn active shooter drills.”

Sounds like we're one of those 'shithole countries' trump has talked about.
I wonder why that is?

And yeah we'll be staying home Tuesday night

[malchior]

Don't worry - the judge presiding is described in some circles as one of the most ultra-Conservative judge's in the judiciary. And he might not even rule until after the election for extra nullification power.

[Alefroth]

If those ballots are invalidated through no fault of the voter, shouldn't they have the right to cast another ballot?

[Paingod]

If those ballots are invalidated through no fault of the voter, shouldn't they have the right to cast another ballot?

All things being fair, sure. Elections aren't about fair, though.

[Octavious]

In case you're wondering how other countries are looking at the U.S. right now:

With only a couple of days before Americans head to the polls, Australians are being warned to steer clear of the USA.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade updated its advice saying there was a potential for violence in the coming days and weeks.

Foreign Minister Marise Payne’s office said the warning against travel was already in place because of COVID-19 — with similar warnings in place for all nations — and the only change is a mention of the US election this week.

...

“The US has a heightened risk of terrorist attacks. Terrorists may use vehicles, knives, homemade bombs, and poisons or toxins,” it said.

“Be alert, particularly in public places and at events. Violent crime is more common than in Australia and gun crime is possible in all areas. Follow local guidance and instructions. If you live in the US, learn active shooter drills.”

Sounds like we're one of those 'shithole countries' trump has talked about.
I wonder why that is?

And yeah we'll be staying home Tuesday night

This is why I took Wednesday off. If he loses biggly I fully expect them to be out in the streets causing issues. They stopped traffic in NJ on the GSP yesterday. Really the worst bunch of f'n people ever.

[Alefroth]

If those ballots are invalidated through no fault of the voter, shouldn't they have the right to cast another ballot?

All things being fair, sure. Elections aren't about fair, though.

I'm not suggesting they will get to exercise it, but literally, do they have that right?

[Jaymann]

My party is destroying itself on the alter of Trump.

[malchior]

If those ballots are invalidated through no fault of the voter, shouldn't they have the right to cast another ballot?

All things being fair, sure. Elections aren't about fair, though.

I'm not suggesting they will get to exercise it, but literally, do they have that right?

If he rules tomorrow after polls close, how *can* they vote? If he does it today, assumedly they can get in line and vote today/tomorrow.

Edit: That said, I'd be shocked if he went this way. Legitimately shocked. It seems like a less than 1% chance.

[Alefroth]

If those ballots are invalidated through no fault of the voter, shouldn't they have the right to cast another ballot?

All things being fair, sure. Elections aren't about fair, though.

I'm not suggesting they will get to exercise it, but literally, do they have that right?

If he rules tomorrow after polls close, how *can* they vote? If he does it today, assumedly they can get in line and vote today/tomorrow.

Again, I'm not saying they will be able to, but are they allowed too.

Of the states that allow ballot curing, they all seem to be focused on signature discrepancies. Nothing about what happens if the place you submitted your ballot suddenly becomes invalid.

[El Guapo]

If those ballots are invalidated through no fault of the voter, shouldn't they have the right to cast another ballot?

All things being fair, sure. Elections aren't about fair, though.

I'm not suggesting they will get to exercise it, but literally, do they have that right?

If he rules tomorrow after polls close, how *can* they vote? If he does it today, assumedly they can get in line and vote today/tomorrow.

Again, I'm not saying they will be able to, but are they allowed too.

Of the states that allow ballot curing, they all seem to be focused on signature discrepancies. Nothing about what happens if the place you submitted your ballot suddenly becomes invalid.

Before the election, if a ballot from a registered voter is disqualified (whether due to a lack of a signature on a mail in ballot or on any other issue), then the voter remains registered and has not yet voted. So as a general rule that's easily cured by the voter just casting a new ballot (in person or otherwise). Obviously that voter would have to be notified, but if they are then (subject to variation by state law) there shouldn't be an issue with a new ballot.

*After* the election it gets a lot more complicated, on account of the voting deadline having passed. Judges do have broad equitable powers to forge whatever remedies seem just, within the limits of the constitution and any valid statutes. So it would be within normal practice for the judge to order the TX secretary of state to provide new ballots to disqualified voters and an opportunity for them to cast those ballots (and for them to be counted), though that order could be appealed.

However, given that this guy is apparently an uber conservative partisan, my expectation is that if he rules that the drive-in ballots are invalid that he's not going to be super concerned with making sure that the relevant voters have a chance to vote.

[El Guapo]

Edit: That said, I'd be shocked if he went this way. Legitimately shocked. It seems like a less than 1% chance.

I dunno. I don't know the guy, so I'm only operating off of what has been posted about this guy being regarded as an uber partisan. Ruling that the ballots are invalid seems ridiculous, but would it really be more ridiculous than ruling that the entire ACA is invalid because Congress stripped the mandate from the law? I'm thinking more like a 20% - 30% chance (though I don't know what the 5th circuit would then do).

If the ruling waits until after the election, I do have some doubts about whether he's going to have the stones to rule the ballots invalid in a situation where that could change the outcome of the presidential race. Though if the guy's a partisan... and it's also possible that the ballots could save Cornyn even if it's not enough to help Trump.

[YellowKing]

If the presidential race winds up hinging on Texas, then Biden was screwed from the outset.

[malchior]

Again, I'm not saying they will be able to, but are they allowed too.

Of the states that allow ballot curing, they all seem to be focused on signature discrepancies. Nothing about what happens if the place you submitted your ballot suddenly becomes invalid.

I mostly agree with El Guapo but I looked around and can't find an instance where this has happened on this scale *or* an instance where people were allowed to cure their ballots at this scale after the election day. Some states allow post-election day curing but it is usually within a day or two. You are essentially asking a hypothetical that has never happened. We have no roadmap here.

[malchior]

If the ruling waits until after the election, I do have some doubts about whether he's going to have the stones to rule the ballots invalid in a situation where that could change the outcome of the presidential race. Though if the guy's a partisan... and it's also possible that the ballots could save Cornyn even if it's not enough to help Trump.

For me the scale is the problem. Pulling out the rug on 100K voters over a technicality...seems...injudicial even for a partisan.

[El Guapo]

Again, I'm not saying they will be able to, but are they allowed too.

Of the states that allow ballot curing, they all seem to be focused on signature discrepancies. Nothing about what happens if the place you submitted your ballot suddenly becomes invalid.

I mostly agree with El Guapo but I looked around and can't find an instance where this has happened on this scale *or* an instance where people were allowed to cure their ballots at this scale after the election day. Some states allow post-election day curing but it is usually within a day or two. You are essentially asking a hypothetical that has never happened. We have no roadmap here.

FWIW New Hampshire is generally checking mail in ballots in advance, and is notifying any disqualified ballots so that the affected voters (if any) can cast new, valid ballots. After election day it gets a lot harder. But then, judges have ordered new elections in a few cases, so you figure if they can do that, then they can require post election day voting.

[El Guapo]

If the ruling waits until after the election, I do have some doubts about whether he's going to have the stones to rule the ballots invalid in a situation where that could change the outcome of the presidential race. Though if the guy's a partisan... and it's also possible that the ballots could save Cornyn even if it's not enough to help Trump.

For me the scale is the problem. Pulling out the rug on 100K voters over a technicality...seems...injudicial even for a partisan.

Unless the 100K voters are the "wrong" kind of voters, and allowing them to vote is going to threaten to overturn the proper constitutional order.

I hope you're right, but the Supreme Court has done a lot over the past couple decades to change my assessment of what conservative judicial activists might be willing to do.

[Alefroth]

If the presidential race winds up hinging on Texas, then Biden was screwed from the outset.

I assume there are other important races on the ballot.

[Jaymann]

If the presidential race winds up hinging on Texas, then Biden was screwed from the outset.

I assume there are other important races on the ballot.

+1 I have been saying this for months. If there is an election within 100,000 votes, to say the candidates would be apoplectic would be a gross underestimate of apoplexy.

[El Guapo]

Apparently Biden's team has 49 predrafted emergency action complaints ready to file, per an Atlantic article that I just read.

One of my main comforts (other than the scale of Biden's polling lead) is that the Biden team does seem to take this very seriously, and that Clinton states + states where Democrats control the state executive is enough for Biden to win.

[Alefroth]

We have a web site in Washington that would use publicly available information to create a list of 'rejected' ballots. The Secretary of State called it misinformation, and Facebook made it impossible to share. I believe it was eventually cleared.

https://votewashington.info/voter/wa

I think the SoS's main gripe was that they used the term rejected, when in fact no ballots have been rejected. They've since updated it to read challenged.

[Daveman]

We dropped off our election ballots over a week ago here in NJ at an official dropbox at our township building. I just logged in to the tracking website and was happy to see our ballots show as received.

I was less happy when, out of curiosity, I checked the voting history section on the same site and saw that my primary ballot months ago was not received. My wife's was, but those were returned via mail.

[malchior]

Apparently Judge Hanen called a recess for 20 minutes and said he is coming back with a ruling on the Harris County matter. A lot of legal pundits collectively just said WTF.

[Skinypupy]

DOJ just released a list of 44 jurisdictions in 18 states that they will be sending in folks to "monitor for compliance with federal voting rights laws". Unsurprisingly, they're all Dem-heavy areas.

Interestingly, it's actually less than they sent in 2016.

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/ ... 9798785029

[malchior]

Some more of the WTF-ness of the Harris County circus as we await the ruling - which from following along might stop at invalidating votes but could include an order to stop 'new' drive-thru voting tomorrow.

https://twitter.com/FranklinAdams76/sta ... 8238278657

[malchior]

Hanen rules in Harris County suit that the Plantiffs don't have standing and the ballots will stand.

[Isgrimnur]

[Isgrimnur]

https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1 ... 9694167040

[Skinypupy]

Hanen rules in Harris County suit that the Plantiffs don't have standing and the ballots will stand.

Feels like good news if even the reddest of red judges is telling them to GTFO.

[Smoove_B]

Interestingly, it's actually less than they sent in 2016.

It's extra interesting because in NJ there is no in-person voting tomorrow. If you show up to vote in person, you're going to be provided with a provisional ballot. There are machines, but they're only for designated medically identified individuals. Part of me is wondering if there's an online group of (R) in NJ that are planning on storming the polls tomorrow and demanding access to the voting machines and they're going to cause a scene if they're not given the ability to vote in the way they've been doing for other elections. I kinda believe this only because on local social media (since this was all announced in August) there's been more than a few vocal Trumpaloos demanding the right to vote on a voting machine and that anything else is fraud, it doesn't count, etc...

How federal monitors are going to intercede in NJ's elections, I guess we'll see.

[malchior]

Hanen rules in Harris County suit that the Plantiffs don't have standing and the ballots will stand.

Feels like good news if even the reddest of red judges is telling them to GTFO.

It's a sorta. The hearing should have never happened to begin with. He gave them a shot. They just didn't give him enough to work with.

[El Guapo]

Hanen rules in Harris County suit that the Plantiffs don't have standing and the ballots will stand.

Feels like good news if even the reddest of red judges is telling them to GTFO.

It's a sorta. The hearing should have never happened to begin with. He gave them a shot. They just didn't give him enough to work with.

Still a huge relief. And honestly I wonder whether this will have a deterrent effect for other judges considering similar motions this week. E.g., "If even Hanen isn't buying this shit, maybe it's time to just chill and let this play out as it would?"

[ImLawBoy]

DOJ just released a list of 44 jurisdictions in 18 states that they will be sending in folks to "monitor for compliance with federal voting rights laws". Unsurprisingly, they're all Dem-heavy areas.

Interestingly, it's actually less than they sent in 2016.

For what it's worth, in the past I've gone to polling sites to monitor for compliance with federal laws (specifically that polling places were accessible to the disabled). This was specific to Chicago, where the Chicago Board of Elections has a consent decree with the DOJ regarding "issues" in the past. Of course, my partner and I were just there with tape measures and devices to measure the slope of the ground, so anyone who was intimidated by us probably would have been too intimidated by the prospect of navigating their car into traffic to get to the polling place.

[El Guapo]

One caveat is that Hanen said that if the 5th circuit reversed him on standing that he would likely grant the request to enjoin curbside voting for *tomorrow*.

[Skinypupy]

One caveat is that Hanen said that if the 5th circuit reversed him on standing that he would likely grant the request to enjoin curbside voting for *tomorrow*.

Didn't they go to this guy because they had already struck out (multiple times?) with the state courts?

At what point can they quit shopping it around until they find someone who likes them?

[Octavious]

Interestingly, it's actually less than they sent in 2016.

It's extra interesting because in NJ there is no in-person voting tomorrow. If you show up to vote in person, you're going to be provided with a provisional ballot. There are machines, but they're only for designated medically identified individuals. Part of me is wondering if there's an online group of (R) in NJ that are planning on storming the polls tomorrow and demanding access to the voting machines and they're going to cause a scene if they're not given the ability to vote in the way they've been doing for other elections. I kinda believe this only because on local social media (since this was all announced in August) there's been more than a few vocal Trumpaloos demanding the right to vote on a voting machine and that anything else is fraud, it doesn't count, etc...

How federal monitors are going to intercede in NJ's elections, I guess we'll see.

I would be highly amused if they did try and show up to vote. I loved being able to drop it off and not have to deal with people. I need to hit the store and get some supplies for the next two days. While we might not know the winner tomorrow I would think we should generally know by Wednesday. If he loses I'm curious to see how long the Trump swag stays up on everyone's houses.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

Yeah - he was pretty clear that he wouldn't have a problem ruling against future curbside voting. He just won't invalidate votes already cast. Interestingly, curbside voting is also allowed in three other counties in Texas. I'm wondering why the GOP didn't try to invalidate them. It's a mystery.