In a vacuum, sure.... but when they are removing ballot drop boxes that are already in place, you can’t say that it is because they didn’t forecast demand... it is intentionally reducing capacity after increased demand was already anticipated.
This could serve as a good example of how politicians manipulate voting areas to ensure majorities. The results are probably correct, but the result is misleading.
Not, because here lies the trap. This was a farce, not a real election.
It was practically guaranteed that the votes would be replaced later in the cardboard urns guarded exclusively by the separatists. The obvious plan was to drag as many millions of people as possible to vote and then use this number as new upper limit to made up a separatist support number (see? 80% of this new cipher voted separatist, we counted the votes ourselves, [invented a number], and this is two million more of supporters than before, so I'm right. Now lets negotiate how money you own me to not secede).
It must be noticed that they printed 10 millions of ballots, for a pool of voters much lower. Why they needed to have like two ballots for each possible vote?... well, fill the dots.
The only good move in that situation is avoid voting
“Abbott in July acted to lengthen the early voting period and allow voters to deliver completed absentee ballots in person for longer than the normal period. But after large Democratic counties including Harris and Travis established several sites where voters could deliver their ballots, Abbott ordered Oct. 1 that they would be limited to one… Harris County — home to 2.4 million registered voters and spanning a greater distance than the state of Rhode Island — had designated a dozen before Abbott’s order forced them to close most sites.” [0]
If party A looks at the districts with majority party B voters and targets those areas for polling station closures, that can have a huge effect.
I live in one of the wealthiest zipcodes in Georgia that tends to vote strongly Democrat.
The usual voting location was moved to the edge of the district to a building with limited parking despite a large Church being located next to the usual voting location.
Due to undersupplying voting machines the waits were 2hours +
Average wait in traditional Republican areas was under 15 minutes.
The GOP controls the Voting committee.
I have every reason to believe that was intentional.
Some have suggested that they wanted to burn the ballot boxes in an attempt to prevent counting them. The problem is that, even if they did, it wouldn’t matter. The counting is just a formality and they can declare a winner without them. They already know who won.
It doesn't look like (from TFA or the collected spreadsheets) there's enough information collected (2nd choices) at the polls to support an instant runoff. So they'd need to go back to the polls for a traditional runoff if that were the case.
As someone who followed things fairly closely at the time, that's not true. There was talk of meddling with voter rolls, but changing of votes was basically not discussed and was quickly dismissed.
That’s not what I’m saying. Florida did not have them administrative capacity to conduct an accurate count. That would have been fine if the margin were thousands of votes, but in a tight election it ended up affecting the outcome.
Yes. And far more than hanging chads, that election was primarily decided by thousands of potential voters being incorrectly purged from the voting lists.
I worked as a poll worker in San Francisco during the 2016 elections. I answered so many questions about ranked choice voting that I got tired of it by the end of the day. I would guess that more than 50% of voters were somewhat confused. Some of them were so confused that they botched the ballot twice, and had to return to the desk to pick up new ballots. Other times, the voter thought they had filled it out correctly only to have it rejected at the voting machine. These problems definitely increased queue times and size of the waiting line.
Newsom may have other motives but I don't think his explanation is disingenuous.
reply