politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Devils advocate: elections are always going to be imperfect ways of polling the masses. They're so big, with so many moving parts, supported and organized by humans: mistakes will be made. I'll go so far as to say that crimes will be committed, electioneering and voter fraud. These inherent features must be weighed against the ultimate goal of the election, which is to decide a winner with finality. Rarely is it going to be that close of a race where the quantity of mistakes and misdeeds are going to make a difference, but if it might there are avenues to take a case through the courts where the law and the interests at play will be weighed.
One of the interests weighed here, maybe even by the lawyers that might decide whether to bring a case, will certainly be the fact that the 21 ballots were not misplaced and later found, but thrown out with the trash. I don't know enough about it to know whether the 21 voters could be identified and asked to recast their votes, but I would think not.
In my jurisdiction, such a close race triggers an automatic hand recount. That's the due process. If 21 ballots are missed in both the first count and the recount, that's still a valid election.
I have this understanding of it sort of like, when the counters finish counting, for better or worse, "you get what you get and you don't get upset." Going in, you have to know that it's an imperfect process run by humans, and you have to know that 21 ballots might get thrown out. So as a candidate, if you could talk to every voter and get a certain promise that they would for sure vote one way or another, and you knew you had enough promises to win by exactly 21, you'd still continue to campaign because you know you don't just need one more than the other candidate to win, but as many more as possible to ensure that you to win the count. And on non election days, you work to improve the process, to train new people to help run the election, to lobby for better election laws.
Ultimately, leaving an election undecided, uncertified, in my opinion, is more damaging to the electrical process and to democracy than occasionally, in the most narrow of margins, maybe, very rarely, getting it wrong. My two cents on it.
You don’t need to play devil’s advocate for anti-democracy fascists.
I'm not, thanks though.