Slashdot Mirror
Google Will Display Election Results As Soon As Polls Close (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Google has been highly involved with connecting U.S. voters to timely information throughout this election cycle, by offering everything from voter registration assistance to polling place information in its search result pages. Today, the company announced plans to display the results of the U.S. election directly in search, in over 30 languages, as soon as the polls close. Web searchers who query for "election results" will be able to view detailed information on the Presidential, Senatorial, Congressional, Gubernatorial races as well as state-level referenda and ballot propositions, says Google. The results will be updated continuously -- every 30 seconds, as indicated by a screenshot shared by the company on its official blog post detailing the new features. Tabs across the top will let you switch to between the various races, like President, House, and Senate, for example. The results will also include information like how many more electoral votes a presidential candidate needs to win, how many seats are up for grabs in the House and Senate, and how many Gubernatorial races are underway, among other things. This data is presented in an easy-to-read format, with Democrats in blue, Republicans in red, and simple graphs, alongside the key numbers.
When the polls close, typically, in a US state, precincts start tabulating and releasing the data to a Secretary of State or similar state official. Then, the results are released via a web site. This process is not fast, though it is much faster than it once was. The bottom line is that it takes hours for most states to get all the precincts accounted for to the 99% mark. 100% is not going to happen election night, as absentee ballots are not counted at that point. The early vote mostly will be accounted for, but may not be separately broken out, depending on the state.
Google is going to have to wait the same as everyone else.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
What is it they are doing? (Not living in the US I don't seem to have been targeted by "Google election meddling")
There are some states, (i.e. Florida panhandle) that span two time zones. In at least one recent election (Bush/Gore?) the TV pundits called the race before all the poles in the state (both time zones) had closed. It was claimed that this illegally discouraged voters. They risk running afoul of U.S. election laws if something like this happens.
Chaos maximizes locally around me.
Most states publish results as they are tabulated and recorded, providing these to media outlets. A long time practice.
And then the media will decide how to describe these results. That's the objectionable part.
Rumor is that exit polling data will be distributed before all polls close nationwide, which is somewhat of a departure form tradition, but predictable, since it's fairly obvious the media has tried to influence the vote, and why stop now?
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Yes, from the Podesta emails we've seen how "highly involved" they are with the Clinton campaign.
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
Washington State, Oregon, and most of California votes by mail or in early voting.
All the votes in WA are legal if postmarked Tuesday or dropped at a free drop box location by 8 pm PST. Most of those won't be counted until Saturday at the earliest (Friday is Veteran's Day).
Luckily for you, over half of WA has already voted, 40 percent of Oregon has already voted, and similar results in California, but technically, you can't call it until November 20th at the earliest.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I like that Google is doing this, but I predict that there will be some hand-wringing from people who don't realize how this works.
Often times certain parts of a state report earlier than others, different sorts of people vote early in the day and late in the day, and this can cause states' results to fluctuate a lot during the night. It could look like Candidate A is winning all day long, only for B to overtake at the end.
I feel the same way about being able to trust the media as any thinking person does these days, but there is something helpful in the expert analysts that are hired by media outlets to make projections during the night. They know how individual precincts trend and what the early returns might portend.
I'm guessing there will be some hand-wringing online about some state where soandso was winning big until The Pentavorate hacked the servers and swung the results huge at the 11th hour.
Although the practice has been stopped after the 2000 election, it used to be common place for network television to call results of elections before the polls even closed. This was done based entirely on exit polls and previous polling data. After the debacle in the 2000 election where Florida was called for Bush (before the polls closed), then back to undecided (I think after the polls closed), then to Bush again, then (if I remember correctly) Gore, the Easter Bunny, Elmer Fudd, and finally, "we have no idea"... all of which left a bunch of people very upset before they even got into the issues of the "butterfly ballot".
Google can have the same data that the networks used to have, but can wait to post it until 1 second after the polls close. Which is technically following the rules, but is still a bad idea. One of the main issues that people had in Florida was that the state was called while the western part of the state still had polls open, and some reports surfaced of people leaving the polls and going home after the state was called, since their vote didn't matter any more. You can debate the validity of those reports, but it is possible that people could still be in line at polls after the closing time, and see the results on their phones leading to exactly the same issue as 2000. In more contested districts, it is more common to have longer lines at the polls, which can mean that people technically vote after the poll close times, if they arrived before that time. People waiting in line and giving up based on speculated information, like what Google will be providing, is exactly what happened before.
It does lead to a question... are they going to project/call individual states for Kodos or Kang before we get to that 99% mark, like most cable TV networks do?
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Missing word: Live
If Hillary wins Florida, the election is over.
In more contested districts, it is more common to have longer lines at the polls, which can mean that people technically vote after the poll close times, if they arrived before that time. People waiting in line and giving up based on speculated information, like what Google will be providing, is exactly what happened before.
If this is true - and they'll call the result when there's still enough people in line to change the result - then shame on Google. They've gone from organizing the world's information to predicting (and influencing) the future.
How do you feel about Russia meddling with the elections?
You are welcome on my lawn.
If this is true - and they'll call the result when there's still enough people in line to change the result - then shame on ABC/CBS/NBC. They've gone from organizing the world's information to predicting (and influencing) the future.
FTFY - For the old timers who remember the Three Networks in the pre-24/7 news cycle, pre-Internet era.
From Censorship by Google
"During the 2016 Presidential Election, Google was accused by SourceFed for manipulating its results in favor of Hillary Clinton. They alleged that the recommended searches for the candidate are different than the recommended searchers to both Yahoo and Bing and yet the searches for both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are identical to both Yahoo and Bing. Furthermore, SourceFed placed the recommended searches for Clinton on Google Trends and observed that these terms were searched less than the recommended searchers for both Yahoo and Bing.[42][43] Later, on July 27, Google again faced controversy when Trump and Gary Johnson were left out of the Google search for "Presidential Candidates."[44] Google has responded with a statement that these omissions were as a result of a "technical bug" and has subsequently brought back the candidates.[45]"
[42] Hern, Alex (June 10, 2016). "Google Manipulating Search In Favor Of Hillary Clinton?". Techaeris. Retrieved June 10, 2016.
[43] http://www.washingtontimes.com, The Washington Times (June 9, 2016). "Google accused of burying negative Hillary Clinton stories". The Washingtion Times. Retrieved June 10, 2016.
[44] Fingas, Jon (July 27, 2016). "Google searches omitted key US presidential candidates". Engadget. Retrieved July 27, 2016.
[45] Brandom, Russell (July 27, 2016). "Google tweaks system after Trump left off search results for 'presidential candidates'". The Verge. Retrieved July 28, 2016.
The gamblers have already called the election:
https://electionbettingodds.co...
You are welcome on my lawn.
If this is true - and they'll call the result when there's still enough people in line to change the result - then shame on Google. They've gone from organizing the world's information to predicting (and influencing) the future.
Great. Now people aren't even reading the fucking title:
Google Will Display Election Results As Soon As Polls Close
Polls don't start to report until all of the polls have closed. What happens is that the media are conducting exit polling (asking people as they leave the polls who they voted for) and are reporting that before the polls close.
Google should only show tabulated votes, not anything else. The exit polls are temp college kids who are walking around with clipboards taking instant feedback from people at the polls. There is so much skew in this data - year after year - that it's fundamentally useless except for one thing - watching how many people go in and out of the precinct. Republicans don't like to be polled and i'm sure that's not the only demo that feels that way.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
For the last week Google has been harassing me every I look: Youtube, my phone, my tablet -- "do you know where to vote?" "look up your polling place?" etc... etc... etc...
Lucky you. I got 400+ political emails asking for my money over the weekend.
Build a wall around The Google, to make the cyber GREAT AGAIN! We will make the Internets pay for it! Google is part of rigging, the Second Amendters must do something! FOR GREAT JUSTICE!
If they do, I don't really object. The votes are in. They are subject to being wrong, but if they use the right kind of trained people, the errors will be uncommon.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Also, remember, they called the election before the Panhandle closed its polls - most of the state is ET, but the Panhandle is CT. The number of voters deterred is debatable, but almost assuredly there was more than one.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
What is it they are doing?
They are reporting the truth. Most ideologues consider that "meddling".
Nate Silver is predicting that Trump will win Florida.
He also says Hillary is one state away from losing the election (ie - if even one D state flips to an R, she loses).
It's a close race - I'm looking forward to seeing the results.
Yes, they will, but that's not really a bad thing. You can give accurate results well before the 99% mark in almost every election. Certain districts have a very repeatable voting pattern (meaning a district will vote nearly all republican or democrat in every election), and you can get voter turn out numbers well before results are counted. In addition, polling data, exit polls, and statistics can give you a prediction, and if the first 15% of the results are following the pattern, you can say with a reasonable amount of mathematical certainty that the rest of the results will follow. As most races are not decided by only a few hundred votes, it's not even an interesting math problem...
As long as the results are not posted until after everyone has had a chance to vote, it really doesn't matter. Google (or anyone) could wait until 30 minutes after the polls close, and no one is left in line, and declare that New York has been won by Jill Stein. While that would almost certainly be incorrect, it wouldn't impact the results of the election, as no one is still voting. It would make for an interesting night of TV, but otherwise, who cares what the result predictions are? The only thing that matters is what is certified by the state official in charge of certifying elections.
Any sufficient level of incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
"Accidental" my ass.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Curiously, the total money bet favors Clinton, while the total number of bets favors Trump.
In a situation where everyone has exactly one vote, it's not clear which measure has predictive power.
How do you feel about Russia meddling with the elections?
You mean when the Russians gave the American people accurate information that America's own leaders were trying to hide? Is that the "meddling" you are referring to?
If this is true - and they'll call the result when there's still enough people in line to change the result - then shame on Google. They've gone from organizing the world's information to predicting (and influencing) the future.
Great. Now people aren't even reading the fucking title:
Google Will Display Election Results As Soon As Polls Close
Great. Now people aren't even reading the fucking parent comment
In more contested districts, it is more common to have longer lines at the polls, which can mean that people technically vote after the poll close time
Wish I could remember the old Max Headroom bit about the top two candidates negotiating a plausible election result for network 66.
Even worse, the differences in reporting times aren't necessarily random, but can be determined by things like actual vs. expected turnout or urban vs. rural precincts, which can correlate with party. It's entirely possible for, say, a bunch of rural Republican precincts to report early while a bunch of urban Democratic ones don't have their votes tallied until well into the night (or vice-versa).
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
The symbolic first black president who also tainted the idea of black presidents at the same time for future generations.
FTFY - Same complaint in 2008 and 2012. Obama did a fine job despite Republican obstruction. I'm sure Hillary will too.
Google is going to have to wait the same as everyone else.
Only if the election is really close. That is unlikely.
Here is a quick cheat sheet:
If Donald wins in Pennsylvania, Hillary is in trouble.
If Hillary wins Florida, she will likely win the election.
If Hillary carries North Carolina, she almost certainly will win the election.
If Hillary wins in Ohio, she will likely win by an Electoral College landslide.
No other states matter.
What happens is that the media are conducting exit polling (asking people as they leave the polls who they voted for) and are reporting that before the polls close.
Maybe a decade and a half ago, but not anymore; at least not legally. The Representation of the People Act of 2002 made it a crime to report exit poll results before a state's polls have closed.
All the polls in a state have the same closing time, but polling places stay open until all the people in line at closing time have had a chance to vote. So, some votes get cast after "official" closing time, and after some precincts begin reporting results.
(2) Each individual precinct reports results when the count in that precinct is complete. This, not exit polling, is why the election night news coverage always goes like "In Florida, with 30% of the vote counted ..."
Oh a fine job for sure. Question is a fine job for who?
Click-bait is click-bait.
Unless there's clear cut discrepancy with clear evidence, I prefer to believe that Google's interpretation of data isn't inherently 'political', or 'racist' or 'insert-other-bad-thing'. Instead, its regurgitating back signals that people are generating creating a cyclically re-enforced trend.
A general model:
- Google sees 10 pro-ABC articles, and 10 anti-ABC articles.
- Web searcher searches for ABC.
- 51% of searchers click on the anti-ABC pages, and the 49% click on pro-ABC pages.
- Google's algorithm ranks these pages (the anti-ABC pages ahead nominally).
- Web searcher searches for ABC.
- 55% of searchers click on the anti-ABC pages, and the 45% click on pro-ABC pages (Since there are fewer pro-ABC pages at the top of the search listings).
- Rinse and repeat.
Bye!
To be fair, according to the gif (bottom right), that site is Rep' oriented, or at least anti-Hillary.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
"We didnt realize that the comparison if(term == "gary johnson") return 0; would bias the search results. Sorry about that."
"His name was James Damore."
A totally unbiased news source I'm sure.
From that site's front page:
"But the outcome of Election Day 2016 was planned down to the last devil’s detail eight years ago in a long forgotten pact between two of America’s most corrupt public figures, Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and their greedy, gruesome global masters."
Shit like this gets +3. LOL I come back to slashdot just to laugh.
I'm voting early in the morning. When I get home from work, I'm not going to be sitting on the edge of my seat, biting my nails hoping candidate A, beats candidate B. Personally, I think the entire system is so screwed up, it won't matter who wins. Career politicians just care about their own cushy little deal they have. I'm going to attempt to go about my life, and try to survive whatever happens.
Actually Trump needs to pretty much win every swing state to win. He needs Florida and Ohio and North Carolina and Arizona. There's only 1 or 2 small ones he can fail to win... or he has to win in a state that hasn't voted republican for president in decades. Demographics just don't favor the republican party and are getting worse. Its actually harder now as Virginia is fairly solidly blue (where 12 years ago it was red) and North Carolina is red leaning purple (where it was red). The growth of urban centers in both states are pushing the states into the blue column, while the only state trending red that way is West Virginia.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
You mean when the Russians gave the American people accurate information that America's own leaders were trying to hide? Is that the "meddling" you are referring to?
Digging up all the dirt you can find on a candidate and then dumping it to the public (at the time you think it will do the most damage to their reputation) is not a new practice; when a political campaign does it, it is called "opposition research".
So now we have Russia doing opposition research on behalf of the Republican Party. I'd call that meddling, wouldn't you?
You don't really believe that Putin has the best interests of the American voters in mind, do you?
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
to rig the election. Then again we're already seeing lower early voter turn out among blacks in N.C. which was pretty much predicted by the (then GOP) folks running the state, so I'm not hopeful. :(
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
FTFY - For the old timers who remember the Three Networks in the pre-24/7 news cycle, pre-Internet era.
back in 1980 on television when Carter conceded election to Reagan before the polls closed in California.
mfwright@batnet.com
Most everything you've said is wrong:
Polls say Hillary can win even without PA.
Hillary doesn't need Florida to win, either.
Hillary doesn't even need North Carolina to win, though one of those 3 is necessary. PA is heavily in her favor, and she's ahead in the other two as well.
Trump needs to win all THREE above listed swing states (which are polling against him) to even stay alive, and that's assuming he wins every other close state, too.
See:
http://projects.fivethirtyeigh...
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Thinking AZ is a swing state is a tell tale that you are trusting polls with bad demo mixes. Out of the four you mention, precisely zero are going to Clinton. The election day mix in Florida is +16 Trump. The same in Ohio is +8 Trump. You should check out the CNN article about the North Carolina vote and how Trump is significantly ahead of Romney 2012 - who won the state, while Clinton is significantly behind.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
The problem is that the sum of human knowledge is both the truths and mistruths that are told and while that information is there the metadata to determine which is which is either conspicuously absent, or has the same problem with misinformation as the higher/lower level layer.
You don't really believe that Putin has the best interests of the American voters in mind, do you?
Frankly, I don't think that either of the major party candidates (or most of the party leadership) have the best interests of the American voters in mind. From my perspective, any additional accurate information is helpful, even if it comes from distasteful sources.
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
Not 16 points ahead, +16 on those intending to vote on Election Day. HRC was about 0.3% ahead in the early vote last I checked. In Florida, the Republicans vote on Election Day mostly.
In Ohio, same deal but +8 Trump.
Check the CBS/Yougov poll from today for both states, you'll see the numbers there, buried in pages and pages of other stuff.
The CNN article in question about NC is on the front page of RCP.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
The only polls worth anything at this point are the latest ones - the last few days. Everything older than a week is useless.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Why are large multi-national corporations having any say in the US political process?
When have they not? Who do you think delivered the election news in the past? At least these days there's a much wider spread of multi-nationals involved with election information, so individual entities have less influence overall.
if Google reports an incorrect count people will believe it
Perhaps, same as with Facebook and Twitter and CNN and Fox News etc etc. But since no counts are reported until all polls are closed, it won't affect the result.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
I don't blame you for feeling this way, but...
I can't believe i'm doing this because I have been a huge critic of Nate Silver this year, particularly what he did during the primaries. However, Nate does not do poll demographic adjustments. And the polls he has been getting have all (well, almost all) been essentially conditioned on a 2012+ electorate. Meaning a 2012 plus assumed demographic shifts based on census numbers. There are two problems here. One is that we don't do yearly censuses, so a lot of the drift that is assumed is just that ...assumed based on the 2010 numbers. This is a recipe for error. Second, there is an assumption that the demoes that showed up for Obama vs Romney would continue at the same levels. This is wrong - we can see that now. Black vote is down, Hispanic up, old people way up, independents up, Republicans up, Democrats down.
So i'm saying that the topline numbers in the polls are shit. Therefore, Nate Silver is working with bad data. To his credit, he realizes that there is a problem and he is hedging strongly - not convinced at all Clinton is going to win. He is right. So, therefore, we shouldn't shit all over him until he does something wrong again.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Polls say Hillary can win even without PA.
If Hillary loses Pennsylvania, then the polls are WRONG. Brexit level wrong. So many other states will likely break the "wrong" way too. She will be in trouble.
Hillary doesn't need Florida to win, either.
She doesn't need it, but Trump does. So if she takes it, she will likely win.
Hillary doesn't even need North Carolina to win
If she takes NC, then her vote is even better than her support in polls, and she will likely cruise to a strong victory.
And that worked out so very well during Bush v Gore, right?
I'd be happy if they just wanted one full week before releasing the preliminary results. It would at least give people who vote in the west or later in the day some confidence that their vote is actually counted before the media declares what the outcome is.
If they are reporting results when the polls close then that's not the truth. They're engaging in statistical prediction which is not the same thing as presenting the truth.
Who on earth moderated this as informative? There is no such thing as the "Representation of the People Act of 2002," unless you happen to be living in India.
There is an informal agreement among U.S. media outlets to hold back exit polling results until the polls close in a state -- which, incidentally, Fox News broke in 2014 in certain respects.
There is a constitutional amendment you may have heard of that sets a really, REALLY high bar for any law which would prevent the news media from reporting information. It is completely legal to report exit poll results before a state's polls have closed. The proof: the linked article.
Your rebuttal: point to a U.S. federal or state law, by title or code section, that says otherwise. Go...
Any reporting of voting results should be withheld until all districts, including Hawaii and Alaska, have closed their polls.Early reporting in the east coast states can effect the later closing polls to the west.We just have to get over being an instant gratification society when it comes to elections. Stay up and wait for the results or wait for the morning news.Let the media use exit polls to gain insight into the results.
Filter error: You can type more than that for your comment.
*submits again*
Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
*tries to submit again*
Slow down cowgirl! You have to wait 60 seconds before posting again. 59. 58. 57. 56....
*tries to submit again*
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are the actual fucking candidates on my ballot?
This can't really be happening!
*checks ballot*
Damn it. I was hoping it was just a sanity effect. You know like when
CONTROLLER 1 DISCONNECTED
So what happens when a vote is really close in a state but it takes them 2 weeks to finish counting? You can't predict that with compete certainly
exit polls should be illegal, just wait for the legal count. Exit polls are all well and good when they are right, till the day they are wrong, then it's hell
Unless you have something called a model. They're wrong, but some are super useful. It's cool.
Dixville Notch results have been out for well over 30 minutes, yet Google doesn't display it.
Muslims account for 4.4% of the population in the UK.
Shut the fuck up with your bullshit conspiracy theories, dumbass.
Eat the rich.
How do you feel about Russia meddling with the elections?
You mean when the Russians gave the American people accurate information that America's own leaders were trying to hide? Is that the "meddling" you are referring to?
Does it really make any difference? The term "honest politician" is an oxymoron is it not? For the idealists, isn't the politician you're searching for as rare as a unicorn? Finding discrepancies in what politicians say is like shooting fish in a barrel.
We'll make great pets
You don't really believe that Putin has the best interests of the American voters in mind, do you?
I challenge you to show me any politician or political leader that doesn't have a bias towards some special interest or another. In that context, your question is irrelevant. Your question should be re-phrased as: Who has the best interests of the American voters most in mind? Everyone of a reasonable amount of intelligence is meta gaming. Show me someone in this space that isn't. You know why you can't? Because those that don't play the game well get kicked from the game. You can have all the disdain for the game you like but you'll be sulking in a corner like a little kid.
We'll make great pets
Just don't think it can't happen. Don't make the mistake a lot of British people did with Brexit, making a protest vote or not bothering at all on the assumption it wouldn't matter. It did matter.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Doubting the electoral process and its integrity is a threat to democracy - per Hillary Clinton
By "Brexit level wrong." I take it you mean correct?
No, the Brexit polls were wrong by a big margin. They predicted Brexit losing by over 5%. It won.
The Representation of the People Act of 2002 made it a crime to report exit poll results before a state's polls have closed.
So yet another infringement of free speech.
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
No, the polling in PA can prove to be wrong without any other state being affected by whatever issue there is in PA.
She will likely win without it, so you're stating absolutely nothing, here. Sky is blue, water is wet, etc.
No, same fallacy as PA above. Local issues can affect voting in NC without affecting others like a contagion. In short, you've said nothing of value at all.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Nonsense. Trump was well-ahead in AZ for most of the race (even with his racist comments and supporters), and ONLY fell behind after the open-mic scandal broke, and John McCain repealed his endorsement. The race-baiting may have helped things, but it was the sexual assault that made a huge enough difference to change the color.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Except for Nebraska and Maine.
That's not a real concern. "Since the Civil War, all states have chosen presidential electors by popular vote. This process has been normalized to the point that the names of the electors appear on the ballot in only eight states". "Faithless electors have not changed the outcome of ANY presidential election to date" and "twenty-four states have laws to [prevent and/or] punish faithless electors."
"On four occasions the Electoral College system has resulted in the election of a candidate who did not receive the most popular votes"
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
East voting reports should not be presented until the polls close in Hawaii, or California. Early results from New York could influence voting results in California up to three hours before the polls close.
Integrity is more important than profits during a voting day.
Ditto for CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc.....
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
> After the debacle in the 2000 election where Florida was called for Bush (before the polls closed)
You remember incorrectly.
Florida was called prematurely for Gore while the polls were still open in the panhandle.
This probably cost Bush a staggering number of votes in the panhandle by the effect of the losing party not going to the polls, while the winning party jumps in and still triumphantly votes (which in turn would have prevented the debacle). The panhandle is as rich in Republican votes as Palm Beach in Democratic.
The classic case is Carter's early concession in 1980, which is generally believed to have cost his party several house seats in the west. (there are now some folks contesting this conventional wisdom, but I'm skeptical of their arguments).
(FWIW, from my first election through that one, I never used anything *but* a butterfly ballot. When I put a slide of the ballot up on the overhead for my statistics class, the voice from the back of the room asked, "Are they morons?" for supposedly being confused).
No, the polling in PA can prove to be wrong without any other state being affected by whatever issue there is in PA.
Possible, but extremely unlikely. The big question is black turnout in Philadelphia. It that is lower than expected, the same factors will likely depress black turnout in places like Miami, Richmond, Raleigh, etc.
Right now, it is 68F and sunny in Philadelphia. That should help Hillary. In fact, the weather is nice across most of the East Coast and Midwest, and Democrats do better when turnout is higher. She should have a good day.
Less than 3 million, out of a population of 65+ million.
Do you have any proof that they all vote labour?
No? Thought so.
Eat the rich.
Yup. And let ABC or an anti-ABC super PAC chime in, and you can have it dance however you like.
How do you feel about Russia meddling with the elections?
You mean when the Russians gave the American people accurate information that America's own leaders were trying to hide? Is that the "meddling" you are referring to?
True, but how do we know that Russia will be fair and balanced?
It would seem the weather wasn't good enough...
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant