2020 Democratic Party primary thread

[Jaguar]

.

 

[rav3n]

I know. But I still somehow find all of this too slow. Here they have to process 1.5 million votes out of 4 million people, while in Iowa there is something like 3 million people with only a few hundred thousand votes (if I got it right). Also who was protecting all the hard data during the night ... too many loose ends for my liking.



I mean it was a glitch but this kind of stuff simply looks bad on the record.

Have you ever been involved in a substantial tech rollout before? I have and plenty of times. 99% of the time, something fubars. They're neither pretty or fast.

 

[Maou]

Have you ever been involved in a substantial tech rollout before? I have and plenty of times. 99% of the time, something fubars. They're neither pretty or fast.

If they cannot even design an app properly, what makes you think they can design a health care system that works?

 

[Merced]

Imagine unironically supporting Mayor Cheat

 

[rav3n]

If they cannot even design an app properly, what makes you think they can design a health care system that works?

My comment covers all tech rollouts within the context of 99% having fubars. The 1% smooth sailing for substantial rollouts are the anomalies. This would include rollouts for the GOP.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Have you ever been involved in a substantial tech rollout before? I have and plenty of times. 99% of the time, something fubars. They're neither pretty or fast.

I am not sure sure since English isn't my first language, but for the sake of argument let's I didn't. However since I know some things about computers that is exactly why I claim that elections and computers aren't really the best combination. Even if this gets fully fixed it will surely nudge the narrative and atmosphere for the next few months.

 

[Maou]

My comment covers all tech rollouts within the context of 99% having fubars. The 1% smooth sailing for substantial rollouts are the anomalies. This would include rollouts for the GOP.

Name one tech fallout on this scale in any previous race, where they couldn't even get results out in 24 hours.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Imagine unironically supporting Mayor Cheat

I haven't seen anything yet indicating that he cheated. What looks to be happening, with the percentage so far is roughly anomalous to the electoral college/popular vote difference. Now, those are really dumb rules, but those are the rules in place, so calling that cheating is a stretch. I get similarly annoyed (as some of my family members do) when people claim Trump "wasn't elected" because he lost the popular vote. No, under the rules we have, he was elected. It sucks, but the truth is that democratic values has always been something we've only cared about when it's compatible with plutocracy. The whole point of institutions like the Electoral College and the Senate is because the Founding Fathers feared "the mob" and the "tyranny of majority", particularly the ones from the region of the country that was modeled after the limited concept of "liberty" from the ancient world where most of the people were slaves, like Virginia. Hell, it's in their writings.

I'd need more evidence of how the process involved manipulation of the process by Buttieg supporters for me to feel comfortable claiming that he cheated, rather than the process in place just being kind of shitty.

 

[rav3n]

I am not sure sure since English isn't my first language, but for the sake of argument let's I didn't. However since I know some things about computers that is exactly why I claim that elections and computers aren't really the best combination. Even if this gets fully fixed it will surely nudge the narrative and atmosphere for the next few months.

Consider your voting population. Now look to the voting population of the U.S.. If all elections were hand counted, we'd be waiting weeks or months for the results. As it stands, using tech, the posted results aren't complete.

Name one tech fallout on this scale in any previous race, where they couldn't even get results out in 24 hours.

Name one tech rollout of this magnitude, relative to using an app. Luckily, this is one race among many.

 

[Maou]

Consider your voting population. Now look to the voting population of the U.S.. If all elections were hand counted, we'd be waiting weeks or months for the results. As it stands, using tech, the posted results aren't complete.

Name one tech rollout of this magnitude, relative to using an app. Luckily, this is one race among many.

Plenty of places still use the hand count method.

They didn't let them test the app before hand, it is still entirely incompetence on their part on such an important thing. They had all the money to higher a competent coder, and failed.

 

[rav3n]

Plenty of places still use the hand count method.

They didn't let them test the app before hand, it is still entirely incompetence on their part on such an important thing. They had all the money to higher a competent coder, and failed.

Whatever.

 

[Red Herring]

Handcounting shouln't be an issue if you have enough manpower. Over here elections are held mainly in public school buildings (meaning there is a polling station in every neighborhood) on a Sunday (meaning people can vote without having to abandon their work) and everybody registered as a resident (registration of residence is compulsory) is automatically also registered as a voter. You automatically get your ballot documents by mail and then show up at your neighborhood polling station (usually reachable by foot). There you show your ID (every citizen has a national ID) and are quickly counterchecked against a list of voters. You vote with a pen and paper. The volunteers working at the polling station are mainly teachers and other public employees. They count the ballots manually. Within minutes you tend to have first results which become a near certainty within two or three hours and the official final result stands the next morning. In case of any doubts a recount can easily be arranged.

The total number of polling stations is irrelevant as they work simultaneously. You just need enough stations for everyone to have one assigned to them nearby and enough volunteers to get the job done quickly.

 

[Jaguar]

In 2012, Iowa Republicans declared Mitt Romney the winner of its party’s caucuses, in an unexpectedly tight battle with former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.). Days later, the party reversed course and declared Santorum the winner — by just 34 votes. But even after the correction, the final results remain unknown, as half a dozen precincts went uncounted.

Uncounted? Great job!

 

[Virtual ghost]

Consider your voting population. Now look to the voting population of the U.S.. If all elections were hand counted, we'd be waiting weeks or months for the results. As it stands, using tech, the posted results aren't complete.

Sorry, I am not really buying this.
That is defined by voting posts per capita, not the general population.



Plus if you want to play this card I can reply that last spring we had EU parliament elections and the entire union had 500+ million people (much more than US). However we still got results fairly quickly and if I am not mistaken we use only paper ballot continent wide. Therefore once people at polling stations count the votes in a few hours over evening it is easy to summarize who got what. Especially since this was 28 separated elections that make the final big picture (similar to US) You really don't need anything more advanced than a phone and perhaps standard calculator for this to work. It is possible that for summary of results they have started to use some kind of tech but I don't remember ever seeing a computer on the voting location which would be in input. I mean our organization of elections is pretty robust so it really is possible that it is all done just by people. 4 counters on each polling station can count the votes got throughout the day in a matter of hours and just call the central. Plus the paper ballot are saved for a few months in the case that something isn't clear, if it isn't we repeat election in "problem area".




Edit: I see Herring was quicker.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Handcounting shouln't be an issue if you have enough manpower. Over here elections are held mainly in public school buildings (meaning there is a polling station in every neighborhood) on a Sunday (meaning people can vote without having to abandon their work) and everybody registered as a resident (registration of residence is compulsory) is automatically also registered as a voter. You automatically get your ballot documents by mail and then show up at your neighborhood polling station (usually reachable by foot). There you show your ID (every citizen has a national ID) and are quickly counterchecked against a list of voters. You vote with a pen and paper. The volunteers working at the polling station are mainly teachers and other public employees. They count the ballots manually. Within minutes you tend to have first results which become a near certainty within two or three hours and the official final result stands the next morning. In case of any doubts a recount can easily be arranged.

The total number of polling stations is irrelevant as they work simultaneously. You just need enough stations for everyone to have one assigned to them nearby and enough volunteers to get the job done quickly.

Exactly this.
In my place the only difference is that you get the paper on the spot. What probably saves money on mailing them to the nation.

 

[rav3n]

Sorry, I am not really buying this.
That is defined by voting posts per capita, not the general population.

Don't forget the difference in tax rates between Germany and the U.S.

Plus if you want to play this card I can reply that last spring we had EU parliament elections and the entire union had 500+ million people (much more than US). However we still got results fairly quickly and if I am not mistaken we use only paper ballot continent wide. Therefore once people at polling stations count the votes in a few hours over evening it is easy to summarize who got what. Especially since this was 28 separated elections that make the final big picture (similar to US) You really don't need anything more advanced than a phone and perhaps standard calculator for this to work. It is possible that for summary of results they have started to use some kind of tech but I don't remember ever seeing a computer on the voting location which would be in input. I mean our organization of elections is pretty robust so it really is possible that it is all done just by people. 4 counters on each polling station can count the votes got throughout the day in a matter of hours and just call the central. Plus the paper ballot are saved for a few months in the case that something isn't clear, if it isn't we repeat election in "problem area".

That's not true.

 

[Red Herring]

Exactly this.
In my place the only difference is that you get the paper on the spot. What probably saves money on mailing them to the nation.

Well, you can get ballots at the polling station but they mail them beforehand together with a letter informing you about the date and place (assigned polling station) months beforehand in order to give you a chance to look at and familiarize yourself with all the options on the list including smaller parties and lesser known candidates.

 

[Red Herring]

EU population according to the latest official data (Eurostat): 513.5 million

Voter turnout is also often higher:

 

[rav3n]

EU population according to the latest official data (Eurostat): 513.5 million

I forgot to bold the rest of the statement about using paper ballots only.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Don't forget the difference in tax rates between Germany and the U.S.

Perhaps but that is another pair of shoes. This is no longer can it be done but how it can be done.
Plus in my country this is done mainly by volunteers and Herring mentioned them as well. Plus we have NGO volunteers that observe, so make sure that the problems are minimal.

That's not true.

Then google. Last years it had a little bit over 500 million people and now with Brexit it lost something like 65 million I believe. Therefore if we count only the adults that can vote there has to be a bigger base of voters than in US. Especially since generational structure is similar.