2020 Presidential Election

[budwom]

I think we had some discussion on this way upthread (or in another thread) that I believe different states have different rules about students registering to vote. I recall that the issue that particularly mattered to some was not on national or statewide elections but in big college towns, if a lot of students register they can really have an influence on local politics, though their priorities are different from long-term residents of the community (i.e. vote for the person whose platform revolves around keeping bars open later and improving the local golf course rather than the one who wants to fund elementary schools).

If given the choice, I think college students choose to vote where their vote matters more. So if one of my kids from NY ends up going to Duke (fingers crossed), this year they would want to be registered in NC as their vote would matter a lot more there than in NY, where the presidential election is a given and there are no major local or state races. I also don't know how much flexibility there is to bounce back and forth.

yes, I think you accurately describe what happens in Burlington, Vt, our biggest "city" (all of 40,000 people) in which there are probably seven or eight thousand out of state students, whom local politicians DO court...that's a really major influence.

As close as NC may be in the presidential vote, there just may not be enough out of state voters there to make a meaningful difference (but ya never know).

[AustinDevil]

I even get tired of ads supporting the candidates I support.

One of my favorite high school teachers loved to respond to any and all political calls by saying, "Now, I always support the candidate whose campaign interrupts my evenings the least. Who did you say you were supporting, again?"

[Bostondevil]

About 5 years ago, BBC created a series called, "How we go to now". It was fascinating. It showed how early technological advancements made huge impacts on modern society. They have an episode called "Cold". This episodes shows how an ice chest made food transport possible. Then the "ice-box" made food storage possible. Finally, air conditioning made living in the south possible. It explores how the population of the south has exploded since AC has become a viable option for all. Surprisingly, the northerners that moved south have mostly assimilated to southern culture and political views (at least according to the show). The ramifications are huge because the population is growing and creating a larger "southern" voting block while also reducing the voting block of the north from which they came.

The whole "How we got to now" series is great. I think it is currently watchable on Prime and you can still find it in on the PBC website to stream from time to time. I highly recommend it.

IMHO the political views come with them and that's why they moved south in the first place.

[swood1000]

I came across an interesting argument that the net result of an increase in voting by mail could be to Trump’s benefit. The argument follows from the finding that a much larger percentage of Biden supporters believe that there is no drawback to voting by mail, and so are more likely to vote by mail. But unlike those who vote in person, a high percentage of mail-in ballots aren’t counted. The argument goes like this:

Of those ballots that make it back to their voting precinct, “tens of thousands of mail-in ballots were invalidated for technicalities like a missing signature or a missing postmark on the envelope.” And that’s not even counting the people who requested an absentee ballot that never arrived or arrived after the election.

In one study out of Georgia in 2018, the rejection rate for absentee ballots was as high as 17 percent—and that’s of voters who were able to receive their ballots and return them. Currently in New York, they are reporting that 20-25 percent of absentee ballots that were returned have been disqualified.

In 2016, about 23 percent of all votes were mailed. Given the pandemic, I’m assuming this number jumps to 40 percent. Looking at current polling, I’m also assuming that Biden voters will be three times as likely as Trump voters to vote by mail. Finally, assuming a 10 percent loss rate (failure of mailed ballots to arrive or make it back in time) and a 17 percent rejection rate, I’m rounding off to a 25 percent overall mailed ballot failure rate (although based on the current numbers in New York, 25 percent would be on the lowest end).

This means that out of 100 voters, Joe Biden would be starting with 50 and Donald Trump with 45 (and five more voters are voting third party roughly tracking 2016’s popular vote outcome, but we are going to ignore them to make the math a little easier). Thirty of Biden’s voters would request a mailed ballot but only 23 of those would be returned and accepted. He’d lose 14 percent of his voters to ballot failure in this scenario. On the flip side, only nine of Trump’s voters would request a mailed ballot and 7 would be counted. In that scenario, despite a 5-point lead, Biden ends up with 43 votes … same as Trump.

[Bluedog]

I came across an interesting argument that the net result of an increase in voting by mail could be to Trump’s benefit. The argument follows from the finding that a much larger percentage of Biden supporters believe that there is no drawback to voting by mail, and so are more likely to vote by mail. But unlike those who vote in person, a high percentage of mail-in ballots aren’t counted. The argument goes like this:

So, the argument goes that: 1. People can't follow directions, 2. Our mail service sucks. I think I actually buy that argument. 😂

[rasputin]

If I recall correctly (and this is a far from certain thing) I believe at least some states have voting residency rules that do not include college students (at least, college students living on a college campus) as state residents for voting purposes.

When I was an undergrad attending a state school in my home state, I voted absentee (this in 1976). When I was a law student at Duke, my then-new wife and I adopted North Carolina residence because we didn't really know where we'd wind up, although we eventually wound up back in Missouri. We voted in North Carolina in 1980.

[swood1000]

So, the argument goes that: 1. People can't follow directions, 2. Our mail service sucks. I think I actually buy that argument. 😂

A Harvard CAPS-Harris poll found that 88 percent of Democrats want to have a mail-in ballot option versus only 50 percent of Republicans. An ABC News/Washington Post poll found that “only 28 percent of Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s supporters saw mail voting as vulnerable to substantial fraud, whereas 78 percent of Mr. Trump’s supporters did.”

Given that there is often a visceral rejection on the part of Trump’s opponents to any position that he supports, one wonders whether his opposition to widespread mail-in ballots is, at least in part, designed to increase the differential between the percentage of his supporters who use mail-in voting and the corresponding percentage of Biden voters who do so, in order to benefit from the greater percentage of mail-in ballots that aren’t counted.

[Phredd3]

Personally, I was planning to request an absentee ballot for myself (allowed in NC with no reason given). However, given Postal Service issues and the irreversible error problem, I feel that my vote is more likely to be counted if I vote in person. My current plan is to opt for in-person early voting in the most low-traffic time slot I can find.

[swood1000]

Imagine the controversy that will erupt if the winner of a state is determined by ballots that were rejected or that arrived late. Hanging chads all over again, but this time in the context of explosive civil unrest and acrimony.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

Imagine the controversy that will erupt if the winner of a state is determined by ballots that were rejected or that arrived late. Hanging chads all over again, but this time in the context of explosive civil unrest and acrimony.

What if they arrived late because the incumbent candidate limited the ability of the postal service to function properly?

That is what Trump's goal seems to be (and fits in with his historic MO) - if he wins it is legit, if he loses it is due to questionable electoral procedures. Whether that is a healthy attitude for the future of our country is up to you to decide.

[CDu]

I came across an interesting argument that the net result of an increase in voting by mail could be to Trump’s benefit. The argument follows from the finding that a much larger percentage of Biden supporters believe that there is no drawback to voting by mail, and so are more likely to vote by mail. But unlike those who vote in person, a high percentage of mail-in ballots aren’t counted. The argument goes like this:

What this hypothetical doesn't account for is the number of new votes the mail-in ballots bring in. Again, purely thinking hypothetically, let's look at those same 100 potential voters (with the 50/45/5 split). Let's say, due to difficulties in getting to the polls (and there are myriad reasons for this), let's say 20 of them can't get to the polls, with the split being that 3:1 you described (so 15 democrat and 5 republican). Without the mail-in option, the vote goes 40 for Trump, 35 for Biden, 5 3rd-party. Despite Biden having the support of more of the populace, he'd lose. Now, with mail-in, all 100 vote, but with the errors in mail-in voting. So this time we get 11 more votes for Biden and, say, 4 more for Trump. The result is 46 votes for Biden, 44 for Trump. Biden loses more voters to the error than Trump, but by getting more voters able to vote he wins instead of loses.

That's the main thrust of why Dems want mail-in to be an option: because they feel that their voters are more likely to be disenfranchised by the "vote in person" restriction. So they are willing to trade some loss to error in order to have more of the voting population able to voice their vote.

Again, just another hypothetical, but the point is that the analysis you've described doesn't get at the point of the mail-in vote argument (i.e., to get more people able to vote).

A Harvard CAPS-Harris poll found that 88 percent of Democrats want to have a mail-in ballot option versus only 50 percent of Republicans. An ABC News/Washington Post poll found that “only 28 percent of Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s supporters saw mail voting as vulnerable to substantial fraud, whereas 78 percent of Mr. Trump’s supporters did.”

Given that there is often a visceral rejection on the part of Trump’s opponents to any position that he supports, one wonders whether his opposition to widespread mail-in ballots is, at least in part, designed to increase the differential between the percentage of his supporters who use mail-in voting and the corresponding percentage of Biden voters who do so, in order to benefit from the greater percentage of mail-in ballots that aren’t counted.

I don't think this is some form of "3-D chess" being played. I think it's really straightforward. The GOP has, for some time now, looked to limit access to voting. Trump's argument follows along those same lines: restricting voting to in-person is a means of restricting access. I think the simplest answer is the most likely to be correct.

[Devilwin]

Let's see the debates. Reckon they are going to happen?

[PackMan97]

Personally, I was planning to request an absentee ballot for myself (allowed in NC with no reason given). However, given Postal Service issues and the irreversible error problem, I feel that my vote is more likely to be counted if I vote in person. My current plan is to opt for in-person early voting in the most low-traffic time slot I can find.

We've already requested ballots for my wife and I plus my in-laws. My parents (live in SC and both 80+) insist on voting in person.

I have no plan to risk continuing this pandemic by standing in line and voting for any current politician.

[sagegrouse]

I think we had some discussion on this way upthread (or in another thread) that I believe different states have different rules about students registering to vote. I recall that the issue that particularly mattered to some was not on national or statewide elections but in big college towns, if a lot of students register they can really have an influence on local politics, though their priorities are different from long-term residents of the community (i.e. vote for the person whose platform revolves around keeping bars open later and improving the local golf course rather than the one who wants to fund elementary schools).

If given the choice, I think college students choose to vote where their vote matters more. So if one of my kids from NY ends up going to Duke (fingers crossed), this year they would want to be registered in NC as their vote would matter a lot more there than in NY, where the presidential election is a given and there are no major local or state races. I also don't know how much flexibility there is to bounce back and forth.

We've already requested ballots for my wife and I plus my in-laws. My parents (live in SC and both 80+) insist on voting in person.

I have plan to risk continuing this pandemic by standing in line and voting for any current politician.

I get my mail-in ballot (we're a vote-by-mail state) and deliver it in person a number of days before the election. I think that covers it.

[swood1000]

That's the main thrust of why Dems want mail-in to be an option: because they feel that their voters are more likely to be disenfranchised by the "vote in person" restriction. So they are willing to trade some loss to error in order to have more of the voting population able to voice their vote.

You may have a point there. There is no doubt a large number of lower-income Biden voters who may not be sufficiently motivated to get out and wait in line on election day but who would be willing to fill out a mail-in ballot.

I don't think this is some form of "3-D chess" being played. I think it's really straightforward. The GOP has, for some time now, looked to limit access to voting. Trump's argument follows along those same lines: restricting voting to in-person is a means of restricting access. I think the simplest answer is the most likely to be correct.

Trump can have more than one motivation. He may feel that excluding the unmotivated voter benefits him but also that converting Biden voters into by-mail voters benefits him.

[CDu]

You may have a point there. There is no doubt a large number of lower-income Biden voters who may not be sufficiently motivated to get out and wait in line on election day but who would be willing to fill out a mail-in ballot.

Trump can have more than one motivation. He may feel that excluding the unmotivated voter benefits him but also that converting Biden voters into by-mail voters benefits him.

"Motivation" is just one of the reasons why in-person voter turnout may be low, just to be clear.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

You may have a point there. There is no doubt a large number of lower-income Biden voters who may not be sufficiently motivated to get out and wait in line on election day but who would be willing to fill out a mail-in ballot.



Trump can have more than one motivation. He may feel that excluding the unmotivated voter benefits him but also that converting Biden voters into by-mail voters benefits him.

It is not just about them being insufficiently motivated. In a targeted way it has been made more difficult for traditional Democratic voters to vote through the strategic closure of polling locations in their areas. So they have to go longer distances and wait in longer lines. Some of this can be attributed to the consolidation of polling places for the sake of economic efficiencies, ADA access, etc. But not all of it. For example, this study from Texas:

The analysis finds that the 50 counties that gained the most Black and Latinx residents between 2012 and 2018 closed 542 polling sites, compared to just 34 closures in the 50 counties that have gained the fewest black and Latinx residents. This is despite the fact that the population in the former group of counties has risen by 2.5 million people, whereas in the latter category the total population has fallen by over 13,000.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...losures-voting

[swood1000]

"Motivation" is just one of the reasons why in-person voter turnout may be low, just to be clear.

Are you thinking of some other group of Dem voters who are more likely to be disenfranchised by the "vote in person" restriction?

[CDu]

Are you thinking of some other group of Dem voters who are more likely to be disenfranchised by the "vote in person" restriction?

Yes.

[AustinDevil]

Are you thinking of some other group of Dem voters who are more likely to be disenfranchised by the "vote in person" restriction?

A good reply to your prior post has already been posted, but it does not take much intelligence, or an overly great amount of attention, to understand that those who work lower income jobs have far less flexibility in their schedules and in their ability to invest the hours that are often required for voting in person.