Realcent.org

Do you think enough votes will be counted tonight to declare either Harris or Trump the winner?

No, I don't think so. Pennsylvania, arguably the most critical state, didn't even start opening and counting early votes until this morning. With how close the race seems to be, with delays in processing early votes, and with western states playing a key role and their polls closing relatively late, I don't think we'll have an answer by midnight tonight - regardless of what time zone "midnight" refers to.

I love politics. But tonight, my plans are to turn off my phone, go see a movie with my partner, and go to bed. We'll see if I can stick to that plan.

Corsair wrote:No, I don't think so. Pennsylvania, arguably the most critical state, didn't even start opening and counting early votes until this morning. With how close the race seems to be, with delays in processing early votes, and with western states playing a key role and their polls closing relatively late, I don't think we'll have an answer by midnight tonight - regardless of what time zone "midnight" refers to.

I love politics. But tonight, my plans are to turn off my phone, go see a movie with my partner, and go to bed. We'll see if I can stick to that plan.

Ha! You're right. I didn't specify which time zone midnight, so I unilaterally declare the midnight in Texas as the official time for this poll.

A movie sounds like a good distraction from all the noise that we've experienced in this election cycle.

I think that if there are record turnouts as they are claiming, we won't know tonight.

I think Trump will have enough votes to win the electoral college tonight but most states won't be finished which is relevant to House and Senate races. Too big to rig.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/mat ... ng-deficit

Trump's commanding lead and Harris' hiding is going to translate into motivated Republican votes and uninterested Democrats. That has implications down the ballot to other races.

The real question is when will the first post-election lawsuit be filed.

Lemon Thrower wrote:Harris' hiding

Why she hiding?

I replied to this at same time as shins last post, and my msg never posted. The shorter version is that Trump will declare by next morning, but a number of the major media organizations will refuse to declare, lawsuits will be filed, and unless tbe final tallies are convincing to almost all, this will drag out for weeks like 2000 Gore Bush.

I would rather be wrong, but we'll see.

I will say, yes. If Trump gets to 270 with the states that have their act together, it won't matter after that.

Not tonight.

Not tonight. Will be interesting to watch. I usually hit the hay around 8:30 but I'm on medical leave so I'm going to try and stay up for the first time ever.

My vote is - NOT

shinnosuke wrote:

Lemon Thrower wrote:Harris' hiding

Why she hiding?

Was a successful strategy for Biden.

Trump does a 3 hour Rogan interview. Harris does a minute and a half on SNL. I think hiding is a fair description.

Lemon Thrower wrote:

shinnosuke wrote:

Lemon Thrower wrote:Harris' hiding

Why she hiding?

Was a successful strategy for Biden.

Trump does a 3 hour Rogan interview. Harris does a minute and a half on SNL. I think hiding is a fair description.

Long form interviews are not her thing? Kind of amazing that Trump has opposed two of America’s worst women and a dementia patient.

I think too many swing states have a bit of a delay on counting ballots for it to be called until tomorrow, at the earliest. Possibly the weekend if it hinges on AZ and NV.

My own state (NV) has until Saturday to count mail-in ballots that are post marked by today. I think Arizona has estimated up to 7-13 days for mail-in ballots to be fully tallied. If I'm remembering correctly, Michigan and Wisconsin election officials have estimated their results won't be fully tallied until tomorrow (Wednesday).

Then will come the inevitable court cases from both sides, regardless of how it goes.

I think we might be without an official "winner" for a week. Hopefully I'm wrong.

Barring any surprises, this will take a while. My state of Wisconsin doesn’t start opening up all the absentee and mail in ballot boxes until 8pm.

I will buck the trending opinion here and say yes. The major networks, especially CBS, want a coronation and at least one of them will hand it to Kammy before midnight.

They may be coy about it, and perhaps offer a cautionary caveat or two, but the race to be first with the call is just too juicy to pass on.

Plus then, their "informed" pronouncement will (in their minds mostly) carry an authoritative position, which would then (as in the NFL) require irrefutable evidence to overturn their call. It'll be fun to watch them constructing that firewall around Harris/Walz.

But I will happily be sleeping by then. In 2016, I played a certain number in the nightly 4 drawing, and when I woke the next morning Trump had won and I had won. I bought the same number for tonight. I honestly don't recall if I bought it in 2020.

I'm going to say NOT TONIGHT. Keep in mind that the outcome will be bitterly fought and disputed. Much like 2020, probably even worse.

68Camaro wrote:I replied to this at same time as shins last post, and my msg never posted. The shorter version is that Trump will declare by next morning, but a number of the major media organizations will refuse to declare, lawsuits will be filed, and unless tbe final tallies are convincing to almost all, this will drag out for weeks like 2000 Gore Bush.

I would rather be wrong, but we'll see.

My prediction was partially, maybe mostly, wrong, which I'm glad for. However the MSM has been slow to call it (though ABC and CNN finally have). But it was enough of a mandate, with a convincing popular vote to reinforce the electoral college, that even the skeptics are caving and agreeing that Trump won and that Kamala was a bad choice who ran a bad campaign.

I think Fox called it for Trump around 1:30 this morning so most of us were mostly right depending on much of a stickler one is.

Oh, and this election just reinforces the belief of half the country that Biden did not win fair and square in 2020. Kamala with 66 million votes, Trump with 71 million. No way that Biden got 80+ million real votes in 2020. Regardless of how Biden voters try to frame it, there were so many statistical outliers all over that race that it is obvious that (probably numerous types of) major voting hanky panky went on. This further shows that stealing an election in the US is possible, because it is only the most overt forms of illegal activity that will be acted on by the courts, otherwise their uniform response (of the courts) was to wash their hands of the questions and either say that there was no standing or an invalid question. Going forward election integrity can NOT be accepted as a given; something expected of all parties involved. Election integrity issues need to be thoroughly scrubbed in all states, and that will continue to take some time, and in solid blue states may not happen at all.

Lol 68 I just had this conversation with a colleague.

2008 Obama 69.5
2012 Obama 66
2016 Hillary 65.9
2020 Biden 81
2024 Harris 66

Harris' number looks inflated but Biden's sticks out like a sore thumb at 20% larger than Hillary or Harris or Obama 2012

I saw s report which indicated that Kamala did not get more votes than Biden in a single county across the entire USA. That seems highly unlikely, even with Biden's numbers being inflated via voter fraud. Surely somewhere across the wide USA there was a county where the Biden team didn't make much effort to cheat. Or, could it be, oh please no, Kamala really is/was horrible? Then why did the Democrat machinery allow her to run against Trump?

I mean we're talking about the Democratic National Committee. They ignored all their primary voters and all the Kamala delegates (oops...ZERO) and installed her. They could have resurrected Hillary or pulled in Gruesome from CA. They could have chosen Liz Cheney as a "bi-partisan" choice. Bwahaha. But no...they chose Kamala. Why?

shinnosuke wrote:I saw s report which indicated that Kamala did not get more votes than Biden in a single county across the entire USA. That seems highly unlikely, even with Biden's numbers being inflated via voter fraud. Surely somewhere across the wide USA there was a county where the Biden team didn't make much effort to cheat. Or, could it be, oh please no, Kamala really is/was horrible? Then why did the Democrat machinery allow her to run against Trump?

I mean we're talking about the Democratic National Committee. They ignored all their primary voters and all the Kamala delegates (oops...ZERO) and installed her. They could have resurrected Hillary or pulled in Gruesome from CA. They could have chosen Liz Cheney as a "bi-partisan" choice. Bwahaha. But no...they chose Kamala. Why?

Can't answer the why, but I saw on Fox an hilarious clip of election real time coverage from one of the liberal channels where (as is now universally popular on all channels) a host and his techie colleague were interrogating their election results map without knowing in advance what they would see. The host asked to see where Harris was doing better than Biden, so the Techie set the parameters to display in highlights the districts where Harris improved on Biden. He hit "enter" and the map went dark. Just the geographic outlines in gray. Nothing highlighted. "Did you do that right?" "Yep." They were stunned. They had no words, but the truth of the election become real for them in that moment.

shinnosuke wrote:I saw s report which indicated that Kamala did not get more votes than Biden in a single county across the entire USA. That seems highly unlikely, even with Biden's numbers being inflated via voter fraud. Surely somewhere across the wide USA there was a county where the Biden team didn't make much effort to cheat. Or, could it be, oh please no, Kamala really is/was horrible? Then why did the Democrat machinery allow her to run against Trump?

I mean we're talking about the Democratic National Committee. They ignored all their primary voters and all the Kamala delegates (oops...ZERO) and installed her. They could have resurrected Hillary or pulled in Gruesome from CA. They could have chosen Liz Cheney as a "bi-partisan" choice. Bwahaha. But no...they chose Kamala. Why?

Here is a clip from CNN where Jake Tapper makes this discovery on live TV:

https://x.com/libsoftiktok/status/1854064784351678941

Thanks for sharing.