I became a fan of Pete Buttigieg the first time I heard him speak. I hope to have the chance someday to vote for him for president. He is the sort of intelligent, rational, clear-speaking person who ought to be a model for what we expect from our leaders.
Buttigieg gave Democrats a gift by tricking Trump and Vance into going to East Palestine—both Trump and Vance have an aggressive form of ball cancer from visiting that toxic hellhole! Both will die from the cancer within 18 months and then the Speaker will become president. Buttigieg plays 5D chess!!
Agree wih everything except “decide who is entitled to vote”. With the possible exception of previous felons who have served their term, California has no say on who is entitled to vote.
If the races were not so close California could have called those House races before counting the ballots was completed
I do not understand why you are upset about California ballot counting, Chris.
The new House members do not get sworn in until next year! So why would it matter if Calif takes a long time to certify their election, as long as it does not take until next year?
You think it matters because 2.0 is selecting House members for his administration? Well they do not even become an administration until Jan 6 of next year!
Why don't you get worried over the fact that 2.0 has not signed any of the transition agreements to get his admin up to date with security situations and dangers around the world, and to comply with ethics rules to limit contributions to the inauguration and to make donors names known. These papers were supposed to be signed by October.
9-11-01 was determined to have happened in part because of the lack of cooperation of the Bush administration in their transfer of power from Clinton. With 2.0 not cooperating with the ethics laws, and not learning of US security dangers before taking office, that is much more serious than having to wait for California to accurately count every vote.
When they wonder why people have no faith in the elections, California is example number one. While the Feds cannot mandate election procedures in the states, they should consider passing a law that states races that are not certified within seven days of election day will not be seated . That might force these states to upgrade their procedures. As of now, California provides the fuel for the conspiracy theories.
Not bc a constitutional Lawyer. That’s why I would make it about seating the representative versus setting the procedure. Obviously I have no power. But we should be able to do better in what is supposedly a first world country.
You're right we should be able to do better. I've never doubted the fundamental honesty of our system, but that doesn't mean it can't be improved. So why not use the current distrust, whether it's justified or not, as an occasion to spread best practices across all of our states. The federal government can't tell states how to conduct elections. However, Congress could establish a federal commission to examine the best practices of the various states and establish recommended standards.
Chris, I totally agree with your comments about California’s vote counting process. I’m not saying anyone involved with it is manipulating the vote count, but if the vote count was being manipulated, it would look very similar to what we’re currently seeing from our limited view as outsiders.
You're correct the issue is how long it takes. The fundamental problem is that the system is designed to obtain the broadest possible participation. For instance, the vote curing process involves dealing with people who's mail-in ballots are defective. They didn't follow the directions. At some point you just have to say well if you can't follow the directions your ballot doesn't count.
The one thing I hate about the Politico/Axios-ization of DC news is that it makes stars out of people like Gaetz and MTG. There's a lot of bad things you could say about the old school David Broder types (archery coverage aside), is that those types would be relegated to freak status and ignored (take a look at someone like Jim Traficant).
MTG would be complaining about California's election results no matter how soon the races were called. She isn't happy unless she's complaining about some grievance in her head.
Chris, re: counting in California. Stop being ridiculous, America is world's laughing stick. Whole Europe, with Germany 84 million people (bigger than CA) has paper ballots, hand-counting, no scanners, full results by morning, following afternoon the latest, no complaints. It can be done. So why not United States?
Never mind that you can vote early in Minnesota in person six weeks before the election and the lines are not that bad either. Better yet, the state allows the counting of ballots to begin four weeks before the actual election. So precincts only have to count election day votes. If a voter is concerned about their early vote, they can "cure" their vote on election day to ensure their vote is properly counted.
I don't know what California's problem is. I live in Washington State and we also mail ballots to every single registered voter. We don't have that problem. And we also verify signatures etc. It's not mail in ballots that's the problem. Maybe they don't have enough election workers?? It's hard work.
I think this is it exactly. I'm guessing it's a matter of throughput--too many ballots for too few election workers. It takes time, money, and effort to train them, and you have to having people willing to do the job. And you're last line is spot-on too--it is hard work!
Concerning California: one of the advantages of having tons of gorgeous weather, wealth and human capital is that you can sort of get away with having an utterly incompetent government.
Well, we were one of the first states to allow gay marriage. Our redistricting after the ten year census is done by a non-partisan citizen committee. Abortions are basically up to a woman and her doctor here. Cannabis is allowed for both non-medical and medical reasons. We have a great community college system composed of 116 colleges. There are other efficiencies but I can’t think of them right now.
With the exception of the community college system the things you listed are all good things but they’re examples of freedoms rather than efficiencies. And I would 100% wager that the community college system was set up long before California’s ability to govern collapsed in the last few decades.
Matt Gaetz's political career is done, kaput. Particularly if the House investigative report ever sees the light of day. He's scum and the electorate knows it. Hell, even his father knows it. Hopefully, daddy will explain it to him and tell him to get out of politics.
Sorry you're so pissed at California, but the rules are the rules. If you don't like their rules, then move there and work to get them changed. Maybe you would you prefer they take the Pennsylvania approach and just throw them out? Not sure there is an answer to their problem that fits in between the two extremes because anything in between would be even more of a dog whistle to MAGA. At the moment, it's only MTG and she really no longer counts. She's like that dog in every neighborhood that barks at everything, so everyone just ignores them.
Loved the quote from Mayor Pete. Always on point with a literate and thoughtful answer or response. I think once some of the US electorate can get past their issues with a gay man, he will be President one day.
I wish I could share your optimism about the demise of Gaetz's political career. Sadly, I think Trump was elected not in spite of who he is, but because of who he is. People don't care that he's an adjudicated rapist. Will they care about Gaetz's alleged sex trafficking in two years when he runs for governor? I'm not sure that they will, and that disgusts me.
While I share your concern, I think things are changing and will change further in the next two years thanks to Trump’s selection of people that look good but cannot manage their way out of a grocery bag. I am betting that in two years people will be tired of inaction and gross mistakes so much, that Republicans will be tossed out of office for their incompetence to keep Trump & Co. in check.
Florida, after the embarrassment that was the 2000 count, passed reform and now they are one of the best and fastest voting states. And it's not small, that's the 3rd largest state in the union! California has no excuse not to pass some sort of voting reform; this sort of drawn-out count does indeed make people doubt the integrity of the voting process. Georgia also seems to have worked on improving their vote counting, though they are not as good as Florida yet. Frankly, I think if you can't get your damn ballot in by election night when the polls close, you should be shit out of luck. It's not like you didn't have a lot of time before to send it in.
I became a fan of Pete Buttigieg the first time I heard him speak. I hope to have the chance someday to vote for him for president. He is the sort of intelligent, rational, clear-speaking person who ought to be a model for what we expect from our leaders.
Buttigieg gave Democrats a gift by tricking Trump and Vance into going to East Palestine—both Trump and Vance have an aggressive form of ball cancer from visiting that toxic hellhole! Both will die from the cancer within 18 months and then the Speaker will become president. Buttigieg plays 5D chess!!
We are a united STATES of America.
We do not have federal elections we have 50 state elections for different state and federal offices.
I’m sorry but it isn’t up to anyone but California and the residents there of to decide who is entitled to vote and how elections are handled.
Totally agree. California can do whatever they want. Whining about how long it takes is just, whining.
Agree wih everything except “decide who is entitled to vote”. With the possible exception of previous felons who have served their term, California has no say on who is entitled to vote.
If the races were not so close California could have called those House races before counting the ballots was completed
I do not understand why you are upset about California ballot counting, Chris.
The new House members do not get sworn in until next year! So why would it matter if Calif takes a long time to certify their election, as long as it does not take until next year?
You think it matters because 2.0 is selecting House members for his administration? Well they do not even become an administration until Jan 6 of next year!
Why don't you get worried over the fact that 2.0 has not signed any of the transition agreements to get his admin up to date with security situations and dangers around the world, and to comply with ethics rules to limit contributions to the inauguration and to make donors names known. These papers were supposed to be signed by October.
9-11-01 was determined to have happened in part because of the lack of cooperation of the Bush administration in their transfer of power from Clinton. With 2.0 not cooperating with the ethics laws, and not learning of US security dangers before taking office, that is much more serious than having to wait for California to accurately count every vote.
When they wonder why people have no faith in the elections, California is example number one. While the Feds cannot mandate election procedures in the states, they should consider passing a law that states races that are not certified within seven days of election day will not be seated . That might force these states to upgrade their procedures. As of now, California provides the fuel for the conspiracy theories.
I don't think that would be constitutional. Because, as you said, "...the Feds cannot mandate election procedures in the states..."
Not bc a constitutional Lawyer. That’s why I would make it about seating the representative versus setting the procedure. Obviously I have no power. But we should be able to do better in what is supposedly a first world country.
You're right we should be able to do better. I've never doubted the fundamental honesty of our system, but that doesn't mean it can't be improved. So why not use the current distrust, whether it's justified or not, as an occasion to spread best practices across all of our states. The federal government can't tell states how to conduct elections. However, Congress could establish a federal commission to examine the best practices of the various states and establish recommended standards.
We do all mail-in voting here in Colorado. It doesn’t take that long to decide most elective offices.
Agree. Have voted in Colorado for the last 14 years and it’s easy peasy. So I think it has to be scale. Just so many more folks in Cali.
As a Florida resident, the thought of either Gaetz or Donalds as my next governor is nauseating. Come on, Sunshine State, be better.
Please leave my California alone!
Chris, I totally agree with your comments about California’s vote counting process. I’m not saying anyone involved with it is manipulating the vote count, but if the vote count was being manipulated, it would look very similar to what we’re currently seeing from our limited view as outsiders.
What, exactly is wrong with the process? The issue appears to be the length of the count, not the accuracy.
You're correct the issue is how long it takes. The fundamental problem is that the system is designed to obtain the broadest possible participation. For instance, the vote curing process involves dealing with people who's mail-in ballots are defective. They didn't follow the directions. At some point you just have to say well if you can't follow the directions your ballot doesn't count.
After you give them the opportunity to cure, yes. Prioritizing maximizing participation is great and this is simply the trade off
How long would be too long? One month? One year? One decade?
The one thing I hate about the Politico/Axios-ization of DC news is that it makes stars out of people like Gaetz and MTG. There's a lot of bad things you could say about the old school David Broder types (archery coverage aside), is that those types would be relegated to freak status and ignored (take a look at someone like Jim Traficant).
MTG would be complaining about California's election results no matter how soon the races were called. She isn't happy unless she's complaining about some grievance in her head.
Chris, re: counting in California. Stop being ridiculous, America is world's laughing stick. Whole Europe, with Germany 84 million people (bigger than CA) has paper ballots, hand-counting, no scanners, full results by morning, following afternoon the latest, no complaints. It can be done. So why not United States?
I think the biggest problem with voting is precincts that make voters stand in line for several hours. In my
St. Paul suburban precinct I have always had 0-1 person ahead of me in line and I am in and out in 5 minutes.
Never mind that you can vote early in Minnesota in person six weeks before the election and the lines are not that bad either. Better yet, the state allows the counting of ballots to begin four weeks before the actual election. So precincts only have to count election day votes. If a voter is concerned about their early vote, they can "cure" their vote on election day to ensure their vote is properly counted.
I don't know what California's problem is. I live in Washington State and we also mail ballots to every single registered voter. We don't have that problem. And we also verify signatures etc. It's not mail in ballots that's the problem. Maybe they don't have enough election workers?? It's hard work.
"Maybe they don't have enough election workers??"
I think this is it exactly. I'm guessing it's a matter of throughput--too many ballots for too few election workers. It takes time, money, and effort to train them, and you have to having people willing to do the job. And you're last line is spot-on too--it is hard work!
Concerning California: one of the advantages of having tons of gorgeous weather, wealth and human capital is that you can sort of get away with having an utterly incompetent government.
California is very efficient at some things, our government is not totally incompetent at everything, but we are at counting ballots.
What is California governance very efficient at?
Well, we were one of the first states to allow gay marriage. Our redistricting after the ten year census is done by a non-partisan citizen committee. Abortions are basically up to a woman and her doctor here. Cannabis is allowed for both non-medical and medical reasons. We have a great community college system composed of 116 colleges. There are other efficiencies but I can’t think of them right now.
With the exception of the community college system the things you listed are all good things but they’re examples of freedoms rather than efficiencies. And I would 100% wager that the community college system was set up long before California’s ability to govern collapsed in the last few decades.
Matt Gaetz's political career is done, kaput. Particularly if the House investigative report ever sees the light of day. He's scum and the electorate knows it. Hell, even his father knows it. Hopefully, daddy will explain it to him and tell him to get out of politics.
Sorry you're so pissed at California, but the rules are the rules. If you don't like their rules, then move there and work to get them changed. Maybe you would you prefer they take the Pennsylvania approach and just throw them out? Not sure there is an answer to their problem that fits in between the two extremes because anything in between would be even more of a dog whistle to MAGA. At the moment, it's only MTG and she really no longer counts. She's like that dog in every neighborhood that barks at everything, so everyone just ignores them.
Loved the quote from Mayor Pete. Always on point with a literate and thoughtful answer or response. I think once some of the US electorate can get past their issues with a gay man, he will be President one day.
I wish I could share your optimism about the demise of Gaetz's political career. Sadly, I think Trump was elected not in spite of who he is, but because of who he is. People don't care that he's an adjudicated rapist. Will they care about Gaetz's alleged sex trafficking in two years when he runs for governor? I'm not sure that they will, and that disgusts me.
While I share your concern, I think things are changing and will change further in the next two years thanks to Trump’s selection of people that look good but cannot manage their way out of a grocery bag. I am betting that in two years people will be tired of inaction and gross mistakes so much, that Republicans will be tossed out of office for their incompetence to keep Trump & Co. in check.
Florida, after the embarrassment that was the 2000 count, passed reform and now they are one of the best and fastest voting states. And it's not small, that's the 3rd largest state in the union! California has no excuse not to pass some sort of voting reform; this sort of drawn-out count does indeed make people doubt the integrity of the voting process. Georgia also seems to have worked on improving their vote counting, though they are not as good as Florida yet. Frankly, I think if you can't get your damn ballot in by election night when the polls close, you should be shit out of luck. It's not like you didn't have a lot of time before to send it in.