How Trump Is Trying to Ensure an Early Election Night Lead

[Mike Niendorff]

Excellent article, great catch by this author.

-----

For months now, I and other observers have suggested that the president’s demonization of voting by mail wasn’t just aimed at securing restrictions in the practice by the states. He also wants his own supporters to vote in person. Why? Well, because if they comply, he is likely to take an early lead in Election Night returns that will only slowly erode as disproportionately Democratic mail ballots drift in after being authenticated and then tabulated. Since he has taken the position that mail balloting (except in Florida!) is fraudulent, and that elections decided after Election Day are “rigged” and stolen, then he will be in a position to claim victory and then contest any reversal of fortune.

...

What can opponents of election tampering do about this fairly open plan to skew the early results? Well, it would be helpful if polls began to distinguish between those planning to vote by mail and those planning to vote in person, in order to make expectations realistic and head off the possibility that pundits and citizens alike will see the early returns and decide Trump’s 2016 miracle is happening again. Some pundit education is in order, too, so that the petulant behavior of TV gabbers when they were denied an early decision from the 2020 Iowa caucuses doesn’t recur.

-----

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/08/trump-voters-could-vote-in-person-and-give-him-early-lead.html

-----



MDN

[budkin]

1. It's going to be a shitshow of epic proportions

Hopefully we wash that orange menace away in a blue tsunami.

[Laelth]

2. Reasonable. k&r for visibility. n/t

-Laelth

[Drunken Irishman]

3. Most mail-in ballots are counted first.

There will be late stragglers, of course, but it's likely the mail-in vote is processed much faster, or a good chunk of it, anyway, than the same day voting.

This is why Hillary took an early lead in states like Florida & North Carolina in 2016 - because the initial mail-in ballots were counted at the start.

Early on in election night, Hillary led Trump by nearly ten-points in North Carolina. Most those voters were mail-in ballots.

[Hoyt]

7. Good point. Some states differ, but mail ballots shouldn't be too far behind.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/vopp-table-16-when-absentee-mail-ballot-processing-and-counting-can-begin.aspx

I knew Clinton was in big trouble early on election night. Kentucky’s votes came in early. Even though Clinton was expected to lose there, it wasn’t by the margin of votes coming in. You could also feel it on CNN and MSNBC.

I think major media will factor the impact of increased mail voting, etc., and keep us informed, except for FOX.

[Drunken Irishman]

8. I briefly felt very optimistic for a time early in the evening...

When Hillary took the lead in Florida and was up by eight-plus in North Carolina, coupled with favorable exit polls, it felt like things were turning around.

But it was very fleeting. That election night turned fast.

IF 2020 is like a typical election night, you'll know who's going to win between the 8:00 and 9:00 (ET) hours. That's when it became pretty evident Hillary was not performing near as well. It's also when it became evident, in 2012, that Obama was probably going to be reelected, and really, the same for Bush in 2004.

Why?

Because all of Pennsylvania and most of Michigan start coming in during that hour and Florida generally becomes 'characterized' in some way, even if a projection isn't made for hours.

If Biden is going to win the election, he'll win both those states and we should have an idea of where they're trending in that hour window, which was the case in 2016 and when it became grim for Hillary.

[Grasswire2]

4. It worked for George W*

The Bush cousin last name Ellis was assigned to FOX NEWS election desk on election night.

He called the election for George, his cousin, prematurely.

In order to do just this: set up the scenario that W. had won the election.

And from there, a massive PR effort went into high drive. Really. It was gamed out in advance. It was the strategy.

The narrative was set. Gore had to DISPROVE it.

[MoonlitKnight]

5. Lots of states can count them first

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/vopp-table-16-when-absentee-mail-ballot-processing-and-counting-can-begin.aspx

Here is a list.

[Drunken Irishman]

6. Exactly. In 2016, Hillary took a deceptive lead in NC because of this.

As polls closed, and they tabulated the initial votes, Hillary led Trump 53-45 and had just over one-million votes. She'd get a million more, but most the votes after that initial surge were same-day voters, which Trump won.

[Mike Niendorff]

9. It's gonna depend on state-by-state procedures, honestly

The most important will be the "postmarked by election day" vs "received by election day" distinction. And honestly, I'm not an expert on that, but just playing it out, any "postmarked by" states are gonna face a significant delay in getting their final numbers, with the postal service issues being font and center on that, and those states will be the ones where it games out as discussed in the article above.

The flip side of that is substantial numbers of ballots going missing in the "received by" states -- due to both the outbound and inbound delays that DeJoy is now actively engineering. Add enough delays, and people can't get their ballots and then return them within the window for them to be actually counted.

The upshot being, they're gonna game both sides of it -- trying to get ballots thrown out on the one side, and de-legitimizing the count on the other side if it doesn't go their way.


MDN

[SiliconValley_Dem]

10. way too intelligent for the brain trust at cable news to absorb