Live data from Hacker News

My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

portal.drewdevault.com

211–220 of 358 posts

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#211
post #70

> The voter approaches their table, and gives their name and party affiliation. I’ve voted in PA for 20 years and have never once been asked my party affiliation. This is all in Philadelphia, so maybe other counties are different? This seems sketchy. Even more so than the cop, who likely didn’t expect anyone to challenge him.

He explained it in the article and it makes sense:

> The party affiliation is used as a signal that something fishy might be going on if the ratio of R to D is very different from the votes recorded.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#212
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your party affiliation is a matter of public record, and you're not required to vote for your party. Not really a big deal IMO. Any attempt by the election workers to suppress your vote based on your answer would be trivially detected by a number of security checks.

You're dodging the allegation. It's not that it's not public information or that it must dictate the vote. It's that there's no reason for the poll worker to ask or know what you party registration is prior to sending to you machine A or machine B. At best it's a non-issue, at worst it's an opportunity to steer voters to a broken machine. Any comparison of total turnout v.s. historic turnout based upon political part…

I don't know how votes work in PA, but where I'm from the voter picks the machine.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#213
I'm curious where everyone is getting their "news" at. For one, the "blue wave" of mail in ballots is a myth: https://i.imgur.com/LIX2cwQ.jpg

Two: No one is really questioning the machines not "working right". It is clear that there is no validation with the mail in ballots. MIB's are some of the most rejected ballots there are, yet no one seems to have any stats on this, or the stats provided are very low. Then you factor in tons of twitter and facebook posts of women saying that they were sent two ballots, one for their maiden name and one for their current name, at both their current address and their old addresses. Never mind that it is state law in most of these places that a ballot has to be "solicited" and cannot just be mailed en mass via mail. Put another way, you can't just mail 5 million ballots out to just 1 million physical addresses. I would not be surprised if during a recount, 50% of these MIBs are rejected.

Three: elections are quite predictable. There are 100's of counties that for the last 40 years have always predicted the outcome. If this county is blue, then blue is our president, etc. This seems to still be the case this time around, except for the states in question.

People's Pundit Daily https://youtu.be/Em0R9DRSbIE for the most part has been a really good source of information on behind the scene numbers and what "normal" elections typically should look like. I'd recommend it.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#214
post #125

Biden only gets lucky in PA a full day after that if you look at vote share per batch, well after in-person votes are counted, and the later you go, the luckier he gets. The pattern is the same in every swing state except Arizona, and in Virginia as well. If you plot out Edison data that has vote count updates, in "normal" states (both Biden and Trump dominant), things are chaotic initially (when in-person votes are…

COVID precautions are highly stratified by political affiliation: Republicans have received the message that many/all precautions are unnecessary. Many others have followed more cautious recommendations from medical experts. In addition, Republicans received the message the mail voting was inherently more subject to fraud, while Democrats, cautious of COVID and not believing the "fraud" message, frequently votes by mail.

This had the exactly predicted result that Democrats voted by mail significantly more than Republicans, who were much more inclined to vote by person.

Many states report in-person voting very quickly, while mail in votes take more time to process. This, again, had the easily predicted outcome of increasingly the tally of votes for Democratic candidates by a significant margin over Republican mail votes.

A great example of this same phenomenon can be seen in states like Florida that are allowed to count such votes before election day. In those states, the predicted result of increased Democratic early/mail voting was fully born out by the results: Democrats lead the early available result, and as in-person votes on election day were tallied Republican votes significantly outpaced Democratic votes. Of course neither Republicans, or Democrats whose tallies suffered as more in-person results were processed, complained about this or alleged fraud, because again, it was the exactly predicted result

Another consideration is that, while polls weren't perfect, the overall result of the election is supported by the polls. Yes, in any individual state the polls may have been outside the margin of error, but as a whole, and in national polls, the results of the election follow the direction of the polls, and the national popular vote is generally within the margin of error on display in national polls. While still not perfect in this election cycle, pollsters did rethink their methods after 2016, taking steps like weighting education level in their models in accordance with the 2016 outcomes, so it is not surprising that, overall, the polls more closely mirrored the results of the 2020 election.

A final point with respect to the claim that Democrats are good at or routinely cheat in elections. The record of Democratic wins does not support this. If they were excellent at stealing elections, I would not expect them to have lost more than half of the presidential elections in the last 40 years. I would not expect them to occupy less than half of the state Governorships. I would not expect them to be in control of less than half of state legislatures. I would not expect them to lose very tight races in toss-up states. I would not expect election results in specific regions, counties, etc. to closely mirror party affiliation trends in voter registration.

I would expect massive conspiracies that would require thousands of people across the country to collaborate to be just about impossible to hide. I would expect more concrete evidence of voter fraud to appear than claims that typically disappear on close inspection. I would expect the bipartisan group of election officials, poll workers, etc. to include substantial numbers of people from opposing parties to have witnessed systematic irregularities instead of the rare vague suspicion.

In short, no available data has come to light to support any sort of widespread election fraud. Should any of the very small scale allegations being levelled by President Trump's campaign demonstrate concrete evidence, I fully support a rigorous investigation and legal proceeding to bring the incidents to light.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just the flag, it's a stylized flag blended with the oath. Which is much more political than a plain flag. A simpler example might be a flag with 52 stars. It's blatantly political, even though it would likely be harder to notice than the hoodie I looked up. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/119415827607659191/ (whether that's the exact same hoodie, who knows, but it matches the description close enough)

He was still wrong though. The ban isn't on anything that might seem vaguely political... gay pride flag, blue line flag, trans flag, UAW hat, etc. They just can't support a candidate or political party.

It depends. In Minnesota, wearing any of the items you listed would be considered electioneering if that was a major issue of the campaign.

So if one candidate has made gay rights a major plank of their platform, then wearing a shirt with a gay pride flag would run afoul of the rules. But that same shirt would be allowed in the absence of that specific issue being promoted by a candidate’s campaign.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the narrative that Trump hasn't started a new war interesting, but not particularly compelling given his actions with Iran and ongoing incitement of civil unrest. > The people have spoken, and they want war I see where you're coming from, as usually I vote third party or abstain to avoid thinking I support one candidate that differs only by an epsilon of cultural preferences. But when one of the choices is res…

So you're saying no one would have died from CoVid-19 if Trump weren't in office? Citation needed.

It seems likely that if the national response to covid had tracked with, say, the NY State response, that yes: we'd have seen far fewer deaths. The first 60-100k, mostly in the northeast, probably couldn't have been saved. The initial outbreak happened too fast and too hard. But after that, NY has been flat. They controlled it. The same could have been true for the rest of the country, yet we collectively chose not to.

And yeah, that national response is the job of the executive branch. So very roughly 150k americans are dead now because Trump was in office. Somewhere around there.

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#218
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not "lucky" at all, this was an orchestrated outcome. Theres 2 components to this: 1. Mail in ballots were heavily partisan. The president made a point to instruct Republican voters to vote in person, and not by mail. And many other correlated factors (eg. COVID and social distancing has also been heavily politicized, influencing whether a voter would vote in person vs mail in). 2. Mail in ballots were delayed. T…

Why just those states, though? Other states show more-or-less similar distributions of in-person to mail-in ballots. It's only these handful of swing states (WI, MI, PA, NV, GA) that have such a massively different ratio of votes in-person vs. mail-in.

That's not true as far as I can see. Which other states are you talking about? Are you confusing party registration with vote, maybe? Are you correcting for ballot return rate, which itself was very different between registrations?

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#219
post #143
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not "lucky" at all, this was an orchestrated outcome. Theres 2 components to this: 1. Mail in ballots were heavily partisan. The president made a point to instruct Republican voters to vote in person, and not by mail. And many other correlated factors (eg. COVID and social distancing has also been heavily politicized, influencing whether a voter would vote in person vs mail in). 2. Mail in ballots were delayed. T…

Did this only happen in swing states and VA though? And why does drift happen _well after_ in-person vote is already counted? And do you have data to support your point #1? Because people claim that, but I don't really see any evidence to support the claim.

> why does drift happen _well after_ in-person vote is already counted?

Where is the evidence for this? Most states weren't particularly clear about exactly which ballots were being counted when, and didn't report distinct ballot cohorts. The GA data (where they were really good about it after Tuesday) doesn't show the effect you're talking about.

[edit: OK, you're just repeating this point without evidence again and again in this topic, despite being repeatedly asked for a citation. That doesn't seem like rational discussion, and I suspect you're just being a troll.]

Re: My experience as a poll worker in Pennsylvania

#220
post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The flag of the United States is not adulterated with text or anything else in place of its stripes, stars, and field. I could give you a billion examples where it is. Just do a Google image search.

Then it is not the flag of the United States.

How would you describe what it is then?
Post reply on HN