It Could Take Days To Get A Winner, But, It’s Totally Not Fraud Or Something

The Credentialed Media has been running these pieces for a few days, and here’s the latest

Why we might not get a presidential winner on election night
Even if takes days to declare who won, it doesn’t mean there’s been fraud.

On Nov. 5, voters across the United States will head to the polls to cast their ballots in the 2024 presidential race between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump. But as was the case in 2020, they might not know the results on election night.

That’s because it takes time to count the votes — record numbers of which have been cast before Election Day. And in a race that’s expected to be extraordinarily close, more votes will need to be counted before a winner can be called.

For this election, some swing states, including Nevada and Michigan, have new laws and policies designed to expedite ballot counts. But others, including the battlegrounds of Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, still don’t allow the counting of absentee and mail-in ballots until Election Day — which could prolong the process of declaring a winner, especially in such a tightly contested presidential election.

“We are counting ballots faster than ever before,” David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, said on a call with reporters. “But when the margins get tighter, it takes more ballots to count until we can call a race.”

Here’s an idea: stop allowing mail-in ballots due to people being lazy. It’s fine for the disabled (though I do see them getting to curbside early voting), students out of state, people in the hospital. Stuff like that. But, because you just can’t be bothered to get your ass up and go wait in line? That’s what adults do.

“I think it’s likely towards the end of the week — Thursday, maybe Friday — we should have an idea of who won the presidency,” Becker said in response to a question from Yahoo News.

The media is simply setting the stage. Why could the U.S. count these before without problems? Why could India count in a day?

Even if it does take days to declare a winner, as it did in 2020, it doesn’t mean anything nefarious is going on. It just means the election was as close as it was expected to be.

“It’s normal that it takes a period of days to get results,” Becker said. “That’s the way it should be.”

“We want them done accurately,” he added. “And anyone who is casting doubt on that process while that process is ongoing probably thinks that they lost.”

And why does it seem that the majority of areas that take so long are battleground states, especially in the districts/counties run by Democrats? And why do all the late tallies tend to benefit Democrats? Why are there all these irregularities, counting sites being kept secret, Republicans kept out, Republican observers kept out, boxes just appearing, ballots postmarked too late or not at all?

Nothing instills confidence in the voting public like taking days to tell everyone the winner of an election! I wonder how many votes they will “find”, how many water pipes will break, and what districts will find boxes of ballots in someone’s car! Honestly, every state should be required to have the ability to process all votes in 24 hours. This is a setup to cheat. If we had an honest, non-partisan media they’d be asking questions, not playing coverup.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

8 Responses to “It Could Take Days To Get A Winner, But, It’s Totally Not Fraud Or Something”

  1. sd says:

    Joe Rogan’s interviews with President Trump AND JD Vance posted below: VIDEOS

    https://commoncts.blogspot.com/2024/11/joe-rogans-interviews-with-president.html

  2. alanstorm says:

    “But when the margins get tighter, it takes more ballots to count until we can call a race.”

    There’s a word for this – actually, several words, the kindest of which is “Used Food”.

    • L.G.Brandon!, L.G.Brandon! says:

      When she said “more ballots to count” she actually meant “more ballots to print”.

  3. H says:

    Why mail in ballots for some, but not all?
    Ahhh because voting is a primary right wand ALL should have the same equal rights to participate.
    In 2000 we had our closest election ever, decided by 533 votes in FL. Many black Americans had to wait for 3/4 hours inline to bite in “Dem leaning” areas. The GOP legislature in Tallahassee mandates the location and number of polling places. They deliberately were able to suppress voting in Dem areas. That is just ONE reason we need mail in voting.

    Plus also our space based Italian satellites that control the Dominion voting machines, overload and need to be manually reset

    Before a mail in ballot can be even opened, the signature on the OUTSIDE of the envelope must be visually certified by 2 people. It is quite secure. If and only if the signature matches what is on file, can that envelope be open dd and counted.

    • Jl says:

      “The GOP legislature in Tallahassee mandates the location and number of polling places..” Gee, thanks, Johnny, but legislatures in all the states due the same thing.

  4. H says:

    Why does it take longer to count the votes in areas controlled by Dems?????
    Why does it take longer to count the votes in big cities with millions of voters rather than in small rural areas??
    Why does it take longer to do big jobs rather than small jobs????
    Mr Teach wants these complex questions answered, by someone/anyone.

  5. Jl says:

    For your info-France banned mail-in voting in 1975 due to fraud.
    Mexico banned mail-in voting in 1992 due to fraud.
    Belgium banned mail-in voting in 2018 due to fraud
    Sweden, Italy, Japan, Russia and most Latin American countries don’t allow mail-in voting

  6. ruralcounsel says:

    If they cannot PROVE the fairness and integrity of the voters, the voting, and vote counting, there is NO reason to assume it was fairly done. The burden of proof is on governments, not people questioning it. NO government is assumed to be legitimate.

    The governments are in the best position to prove legitimacy through total transparency. If they can’t or won’t, results should not be respected.

Pirate's Cove