Why do we have to wait until the evening to get election results?

[ck4829]

You would suppose that with electronic voting and such, we could get a live vote count, is there a problem with having that?

[mike_c]

1. results are not released until the polls close....

One of the reasons is that partial results posted while the polls are still open influence voters who have not yet voted and can affect the outcome of elections.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

2. Of course there is a problem with that

because a live vote could skew the results. Let's say the Dems hear they are winning and the Pubs are losing. Dems are going to be inclined to stay home while the Pubs are going to get their purses and get out there.

[question everything]

5. Or just give up

as happened in California in 1980 when Carter conceded before the polls there closed.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

8. Either way, it shouldn't be announced until the polls are closed

[BootinUp]

3. The idea is not to supress voting by

showing one or the other candidate winning before the polls close. Even electronic results have to be compiled and double checked etc. I wouldn't want them to rush it too much. I actually think the electronic voting machines systems are still pretty primitive by todays computing standards.

[Chipper Chat]

4. That would hand the republican party a big advantage.

They have a better "get out the vote" organization (churches). Working-class democrats wouldnt get off work until 4 or 5. More reason for Rove & ilk to introduce fraud.

[ck4829]

6. OK. I see what you all are saying now.

Definitely don't want to skew the results.

[Left Is Write]

7. Because we have more than one time zone.

We do not want to discourage later voters.

[rocktivity]

9. What I have a problem with winners being projected

with a fraction of the precincts reporting in. If I had my way, winners couldn't be projected until at least an hour after the polls closed AND at least 67% of the precincts had reported.

:headbang:
rocknation