A Three Minute Primer On Why Florida Might Turn Blue This Election (Local Perspective)

[Man With A Plan]

HikerGuy wants to make a bet based upon who wins the election. I am happy to take him up on the bet provided he is going to be willing to accept the results of the election, either way, without question.
If he is not willing to commit to this then obviously a bet based upon an election winner is impossible and pointless.
If he loses he'll just claim he didn't really lose because the election was "fraudulent."

Quite frankly the "internet bet" is always amusing! Why bother?

 

[Man With A Plan]

There wasn't any election fraud in 2020 or 2022 and there won't be when Trump loses this year either.
He's just a born loser. It's what he does.

I don't know Mike...I've seen a lot of elections in my time and that 2020 one was weird. I can't remember ever seeing a sitting President get a lot more votes than he did the first time and still lose the race. The fact that Joe Biden got the most votes EVER made me question what took place. Sorry but Joe wasn't the most exciting candidate. Barack Obama fired up his base...Joe Biden? Not so much. Just saying... Not something you could ever prove so I've never wasted a moment trying to prove election fraud but that doesn't mean I don't suspect it took place. I think the GOP had best be on their game when it comes to monitoring vote counts or they're going to get the same kind of late results they got in 2020.

 

[MagicMike]

I don't know Mike...I've seen a lot of elections in my time and that 2020 one was weird. I can't remember ever seeing a sitting President get a lot more votes than he did the first time and still lose the race. The fact that Joe Biden got the most votes EVER made me question what took place. Sorry but Joe wasn't the most exciting candidate. Barack Obama fired up his base...Joe Biden? Not so much. Just saying... Not something you could ever prove so I've never wasted a moment trying to prove election fraud but that doesn't mean I don't suspect it took place. I think the GOP had best be on their game when it comes to monitoring vote counts or they're going to get the same kind of late results they got in 2020.

I understand your point and thank you for stating it in a thoughtful, respectful way.
Some issues with the "stolen election" argument for me have always been first, that Trump's legal team was never able to put together the evidence of any voter fraud required to make a decent case in any (except for one) of the federal cases. Every single one (except one in Pennsylvania) was dismissed for lack of evidence.
So then the next leap of logic in the conspiracy goes "that's because the judges were in on the conspiracy to steal the election and/or were biased against Trump."
Well...no. Probably not. A number of them were Trump appointees. A more logical conclusion would be that there wasn't any real evidence of any stolen election because there wasn't any stolen election.
Also don't you find it funny that the ONLY states and precincts/wards in which election fraud allegations were made by the Trump campaign in 2020 were the ones that Trump lost?
In all the places where he won those election results were "legitimate."
Uh-huh.
That's conveniently coincidental right?
And as for the numbers, we are going to see higher and higher voting numbers every year as more young, first time voters cast ballots. We also have rapidly changing demographics in our nation with non-white (U.S. citizens) sub groups overtaking Anglo's as a voting block. These sub groups tend to vote for Democrats....especially with a racially polarizing candidate like Trump.
Oh yeah, one more thing concerning the late counting of votes...and this goes right back to some of the original conspiracy theories about "fraud" and another reason why fraud on any scale that would alter national election results is very difficult to impossible.
It would have to be done at the precinct by precinct, state by state level and that kind of thing would leave a clear chain of evidence leading straight through the local precincts to the feds.
Of course team Trump tried to claim that this was EXACTLY what happened (again, conveniently only in the places he lost) but their problem was all they had were accusations....no evidence.
As for votes coming in/being counted late....that's just the nature of our voting system. Different stares have different procedures.
Trump was warned ahead of time not to be fooled by rhe "red mirage" of thinking he was winning too early because many states have rules where mail in ballots cannot be counted until the polls close in that state.
So although in person votes are counted immediately and flashed across TV screens all over the country those totals aren't accurate until all the envelopes are opened on the mail ballots and those totals are counted.
This can take all night and even days in some states.
And for some reason in person votes tend to favor Republicans while Democrats prefer mail votes.
So there it is. Late counted votes are just the nature of the beast. Especially in the future with millions and millions of new votes to process. Republicans need to get used to this and quit using it as an excuse to alledge "voter fraud."
That's just ridiculous.

 

[JohnDB]

 

[Man With A Plan]

I understand your point and thank you for stating it in a thoughtful, respectful way.
Some issues with the "stolen election" argument for me have always been first, that Trump's legal team was never able to put together the evidence of any voter fraud required to make a decent case in any (except for one) of the federal cases. Every single one (except one in Pennsylvania) was dismissed for lack of evidence.
So then the next leap of logic in the conspiracy goes "that's because the judges were in on the conspiracy to steal the election and/or were biased against Trump."
Well...no. Probably not. A number of them were Trump appointees. A more logical conclusion would be that there wasn't any real evidence of any stolen election because there wasn't any stolen election.
Also don't you find it funny that the ONLY states and precincts/wards in which election fraud allegations were made by the Trump campaign in 2020 were the ones that Trump lost?
In all the places where he won those election results were "legitimate."
Uh-huh.
That's conveniently coincidental right?
And as for the numbers, we are going to see higher and higher voting numbers every year as more young, first time voters cast ballots. We also have rapidly changing demographics in our nation with non-white (U.S. citizens) sub groups overtaking Anglo's as a voting block. These sub groups tend to vote for Democrats....especially with a racially polarizing candidate like Trump.
Oh yeah, one more thing concerning the late counting of votes...and this goes right back to some of the original conspiracy theories about "fraud" and another reason why fraud on any scale that would alter national election results is very difficult to impossible.
It would have to be done at the precinct by precinct, state by state level and that kind of thing would leave a clear chain of evidence leading straight through the local precincts to the feds.
Of course team Trump tried to claim that this was EXACTLY what happened (again, conveniently only in the places he lost) but their problem was all they had were accusations....no evidence.
As for votes coming in/being counted late....that's just the nature of our voting system. Different stares have different procedures.
Trump was warned ahead of time not to be fooled by rhe "red mirage" of thinking he was winning too early because many states have rules where mail in ballots cannot be counted until the polls close in that state.
So although in person votes are counted immediately and flashed across TV screens all over the country those totals aren't accurate until all the envelopes are opened on the mail ballots and those totals are counted.
This can take all night and even days in some states.
And for some reason in person votes tend to favor Republicans while Democrats prefer mail votes.
So there it is. Late counted votes are just the nature of the beast. Especially in the future with millions and millions of new votes to process. Republicans need to get used to this and quit using it as an excuse to alledge "voter fraud."
That's just ridiculous.

Or we could just go back to voting in person with paper ballots after presenting a valid ID and there would be zero question about voter fraud. Sometimes the simplest solution to a problem is doing it the "old fashioned" way! I know people like the convenience of mail in ballots but if anyone really cares about preventing fraud that's something we probably should be doing. Make election day a national holiday...give everyone the day off...show your ID...stand in line...and cast your vote. Keep it simple. Keep it secure.

 

[MagicMike]

Or we could just go back to voting in person with paper ballots after presenting a valid ID and there would be zero question about voter fraud. Sometimes the simplest solution to a problem is doing it the "old fashioned" way! I know people like the convenience of mail in ballots but if anyone really cares about preventing fraud that's something we probably should be doing. Make election day a national holiday...give everyone the day off...show your ID...stand in line...and cast your vote. Keep it simple. Keep it secure.

I guess this would work but election day would probably have to be several days instead of one. There are just too many voters to process in one 12 hour day these days.
Also the arguments for and against requiring voter ID are not as uni-faceted and sumplistic as some would make them out to be. I personally don't have a problem with personal ID but on the other hand there's something a little creepy and dystopian about the gub-mint demanding "show me your papers" in order to participate in democracy.

 

[Man With A Plan]

I guess this would work but election day would probably have to be several days instead of one. There are just too many voters to process in one 12 hour day these days.
Also the arguments for and against requiring voter ID are not as uni-faceted and sumplistic as some would make them out to be. I personally don't have a problem with personal ID but on the other hand there's something a little creepy and dystopian about the gub-mint demanding "show me your papers" in order to participate in democracy.

You have to "show your papers" to get on an airplane, Mike! Let's be honest...it's really not a big deal.

 

[Man With A Plan]

I guess this would work but election day would probably have to be several days instead of one. There are just too many voters to process in one 12 hour day these days.
Also the arguments for and against requiring voter ID are not as uni-faceted and sumplistic as some would make them out to be. I personally don't have a problem with personal ID but on the other hand there's something a little creepy and dystopian about the gub-mint demanding "show me your papers" in order to participate in democracy.

And someone who wouldn't show an ID in order to get on a plane...I wouldn't want ON a plane with me. The same thing should apply to voting. If you can't take the time to get a valid ID then I don't think you deserve to vote! That's just me though...

 

[Man With A Plan]

As for the logistics of it? If I were running things I'd propose a Federal law requiring so many polling places for so many voters in an area. But again...that's just me. I like to fix problems...not assign blame for why a problem can't be fixed.