35 Comments

The answer is simple: only after all of the mail votes have been received and the registered voters who didn’t vote in person or by mail have been identified is it possible to complete and then process ballots from those who didn’t vote. That takes time!

Expand full comment

'individual pairs of identical twins'...brilliant

Expand full comment

LOL! Yeah, I live here. But presidentially it doesn't matter as the outcome is totally predictable.

Expand full comment

It takes time to create plausible deniability. This California....check out the High Speed Rail.

Expand full comment

Fixing the vote takes time, people.

But 2020 was totes not rigged, you bigot!

Expand full comment

How long do they take with the real election, the primary?

The South was a one party region for a century after throwing out the rapacious Republicans. My unambitious grandfather died holding the county office he was elected to 35 years before. Somehow, Nixon forced the desegregation of schools without alienating whites--I guess courts and local officials got more of the blame. The black riots during LBJ and the Dems turning tail on Vietnam also helped many whites change parties.

How big a disaster will it take to change the Left Coast? Tucker had a SoCal guy on this weekend who explained some sources of its recent decline. If Trump brings the hammer down on sanctuary cities, and things get better after mass deportation of criminals, will Repubs then have a chance again?

Expand full comment

If Trump wins, I fear rioting will break out.

Expand full comment

I'll be sorry for the innocent victims, but NY, California, Oregon et al have the rotten and malicious law "enforcement" they voted for. Getting it good and hard might wise them up.

Expand full comment

Seattle could be burned to the ground and I wouldn't give one hoot. Topple that idiotic Space Needle.

Expand full comment

If Trump wins, there will be burning, rioting and looting. Men wearing MAGA baseball caps might get pummeled.

Expand full comment

It wasn't just Nixon on school deseggregation. It started with Eisenhower instructing the SCOTUS, then JFK and LBJ, and finally Trickie Dick. The Democrats were roped in over their social justice agenda.

Expand full comment

I was told my grandfather said JFK got what he deserved for trying to interfere with the South (probably Irish Catholic Yankee animus, too). He was also dead within a year, so karma's a bitch. Despite Brown (1954), public schools weren't widely integrated until Nixon. Biden had to be anti-busing in 1972 to win in Delaware. My late uncle was a suburban Wilmington school board president when they tried to bus blacks out of the city and whites in.

Expand full comment

Yep, but then, Republicans are the law-abiding party. Not like Dems euthanizing peanut the squirrel and the raccoon just because they could. For Republicans, the threshold is higher. Only If SCOTUS says something, they will force it through. If Nixon followed Eisenhower immediately, deseggregation and busing would have come earlier.

Expand full comment

This is only a slight exaggeration!

Expand full comment

There is a correlation between degree two which the "Big Blue" element is influential in a state and the slowness of announcing full results. A lot of these voters are non-Americans (defacto) or Third World-origin populations. The question is to what degree the dysfunction is "bottom-up" and to what degree it is "top-down" by the people who run these areas.

The System-party wants slow vote-counting for its own reasons. The System-party, whose power extends to almost all institutions in the wider society; the System-party, which, in all the major power-centers enjoys one-party state status, often with open-opposition that is trivial at most. They do indeed run the show, and so in the tradition of that great simplifying principle "the purpose of an organization is what it does," we have to think, or at least consider, that slow vote-counting (and associated poor management of elections) is specifically engineered that way by the System-party.

As for California. It tilted into "one-party state" status by the year 2000. The Pete Wilson campaigns of the 1990s were the final hurrah of long-influential White-California Republicanism that still looked quite strong in the 1980s (and every decade prior, more or less). Many early-1990s races were close, but by the 1996 and 1998 cycles the writing was on the wall. Even if some results still looked competitive, the White-Christian element was obviously being outvoted already by some time in the mid-1990s, roughly. By the 2000 election cycle, it was all over, and with no "Trump"-like figure to mandate deportations, California would not recover in any near term.

After 2000, California tilted even further to "huge supermajority D multiculti-coalition" status, which it reached by 2010, the actual tilt to near-supermajority status (two-thirds, constitution-changing-ability) having come with the 2008 election cycle.

California being slow to count votes in the 2010s and 2020s is, in that sense, entirely "the fault" of the System-party, in that it has had near-supermajority or outright-permanent-supermajority control for near 20 years.

Has a California-style Third Worldization process undermined White-Christian NW-European-normed institutions all over the map? Because, as a lot of people comment, there is no reasonable or realistic technical reason for slow-counting in the 21st century. In fact, already by the late-19th century we could easily turn out full election results and have the full-results disseminated widely, by telegraph, within hours (and we did). Our kinspeople in Europe today do indeed turn out full/final results in hours of polling-stations closing.

I say: those who believe it is Third Worldization undermining of White-Western institutions and norms are not going far enough. They are not thinking through the full problem.

The real reason for the slow counting is really that the Big-Blue coalition is managed, overseen, directed, and steered by the System-party. That party sees advantages in slow-counting, to scoop up all possible low-info Nonwhite voters. It knows the marginal vote(r)s go, by wide margins, for the Regime party -- and against the White-oriented, sometimes-anti-System opposition. Slow-counting is a way the System-party manages its system. When election disputes come up, it has plenty of slack by which to get results changed or massaged in the right direction, even without any out-and-out illegal ballot-stuffing or the like.

I think this particular practice, or re-norming of what should be "our sacred democracy" towards a Big-Blue-oriented managed system, evolved specifically after 2000 and the Florida election-dispute. In the intervening 24 years, there are plenty of ways that even a shabby, third-rate Blue Ribbon Commission on Vote-Counting-type of thing could have been formed, and simply brought the USA up to Western standards. That, ironically, as Florida itself has done (full vote counts are out within hours in all recent elections). So if it doesn't work, there is a reason.

That the Regime has been so sluggish with vote-counting and associated matters (voter-identification, "mail-in voting," verification of eligiblility, and more) is curious. ("the richest, most-powerful country in the world"!), It would be highly curious, that is, to a neutral-observer fresh over from the Earth Studies Institute on Alpha Centauri. But our extra-terrestrial USA-focused anthropologist will soon learn that this vote-counting sluggishness is a keystone of the USA's ethnopolitical coalition and System-party.

The observation that it's generally Big Blue states that have this problem -- or those with heavy influence from Big Blue areas within the state, or adjacent Regime-adjacent states or influences (most of all, I suppose, with Pennsylvania) -- that observation is key to understanding the phenomenon.

As for California itself, there are never statewide or national elections that are ever in much doubt, not since the 1990s. So they don't even need such a system. But they evolved it and keep hold of it for the same reasons that other Big Blue areas do, as an insurance policy for the System-party and its power.

The system I describe is corrupt without needing overt corruption. It is exactly the kind of manipulative spin on institutions and 'norms' that people who care not for maintaining institutions, or the polity itself or its ethnocultural stability, would come up with. Those who would come up with such a system, and run and maintain it, are an ethnocultural-political "slash-and-burn" element, who somehow become empowered within a society. An elite-diasporic element would see it as okay, or even a positive good to keep the Bad People down.

As for those of us of the White-Western-Christian core who have any kind of cognizance of the value of or own norms "at scale," we would never allow for this. But our people are not the dominant element of the System-party. We are certainly long since past the point of the dominant single ethnopolitical element of most Regime-core-supporting Big Blue areas (with minor exceptions here and there, often being "college towns" or smaller metro-areas).

Why is California so slow to count votes? Because it's part-and-parcel of the same system which, in that and similar states, Voter ID laws are so appallingly lax. To use a tired-out cliche, "it's a feature, not a bug" of the Regime-party's system as it evolved in the late-20th century and (I believe) as it tacitly dug in after the 2000 election-dispute.

The System-party's coalition is top-heavy with ethnopolitical and fringe elements, amounting to a series of ethnocultural protectorates within the society. It's easy to think this System's byproducts resemble the more-direct byproducts of Third Worldization (observable everywhere where immigrants are to be found). In fact the slow vote-counting practice is not a sign of dysfunction. It is a sign of the stable functioning of the System-party crafting a system to benefit itself.

Expand full comment

IN 2020 87% of the ballots in California were cast by mail. California is a postmark state and allows ballots to be dropped in any drop off box anywhere in the world. Since counting does not start until several days after the election, the counting has to be done by civil servants instead of recruiting a bunch of low paid semi-volunteers who can work on election day.

If the U.S. ever goes to national popular vote for president, then all of the states will have to adopt the same rules such as being in-hand instead of postmark, start processing early and mailed votes before election day, and be ready to report results on the night of election day.

Expand full comment

What is Steve Sailer's prediction for the Trump vs. Kamala presidential election, and/or other elections happening today?

Expand full comment

Why would anyone care about a prediction. Since everything is showing a very close election, any prediction being correct would be due more to randomness than to any real insight.

Expand full comment

(1.) as Steve Sailer is an important pundit, he may want to toss some punditry in the common-area, like everyone else is doing.

(2.) Trump won his implausible victory in 2016 through using the Sailer Strategy. Therefore Steve Sailer may be morally obliged, it to the blog-reading masses (and his Twitter followers), to give a prediction. As usual with Sailer it would probably be heavy on the "how" and less on the "what."

(3.) Steve Sailer has repeatedly said he refuses to do predictions about the future, but there is still time to suspend that long-held policy and join in.

Expand full comment

I think this year will be the true test of the Sailer Stratgy. It seems like white vote share/rural is way up, so a Trump win? It's only 2:45 EST so we will find out

Expand full comment

As Steve has said, he's more interested in "predicting" those outcomes that, far from being knife-edge affairs, are easily predictable every time and yet somehow lots of influential people just don't notice the clear pattern.

Expand full comment

Steve Sailer is exactly the sort to get interested in the art and craft of "polling" and how it works and has changed, but somehow he never has gotten interested.

Expand full comment

Since the algorithms used by the pollsters to covert the raw data into a final results are proprietary, there is no way for a quant to use them except in the aggregate such as the way that 538 uses them.

Expand full comment

It must be difficult with 57 languages to deal with in elections. Here in West Virginia, we have three languages. Southern-accented English. Yankee Pennsylvanian-accented English. And foreigners from Washington DC who buy weekend houses in the mountains.

Expand full comment

West Virginia was in the bottom five of states for turnout in 2020.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1184621/presidential-election-voter-turnout-rate-state/

Expand full comment

Not surprised. In 1990, West Virginia was virtually a one-party Democratic state. The State Senate was down to one Republican. Today, West Virginia is overwhelmingly Republican. The State Senate is something like 36-4 Republican and the State House 89-11 Republican. It is all cultural. I'll go out to vote today out of habit but there is no suspense in my county on who will win office.

Expand full comment

I have tried to talk several graduate students into doing an analysis of what percentage of voters go to the polls in a general election and do not vote in any competitive election.

Expand full comment

People often ignore it but there are always four classes of citizen with these elections at presidential level (different in specific local races at times):

- D-coalition voters

- R-coalition voters

- third-party voters (oddballs, statement-makers)

- Nonvoters

The results should always be reported with all four categories.

When the "spread" is 30-28-2-40, what does it say? What is the preference of the 40% nonvoters? Why don't they vote? In the golden age of civic participation, it would look something more like 40-35-10-15. The demoralization of the pool of Nonvoters, and their nonparticipation despite saturation 'coverage' of the "elections" is an amazing little social phenomenon which probably ties in with Sailer's "White Death" theory.

Expand full comment

https://youtu.be/1bO9dNBpVRc?si=U-nXlcVEqy0kwAGZ. “Honest to goodness, the bars weren’t open this morning,musta been voting for the president or sumthin”

Expand full comment

Lets face it, head of Vote counting is a hugely important Democrat role in Dem run Cities across all marginal states, because that is where the "Swing Vote" can be found.

The only goal that California has is to make the count in Maricopa look less fraudulently slow.

Expand full comment

Washington state is almost as slow as California for the same reasons that California is slow. Colorado uses vote by mail as much as California but will report the results by early Thursday morning because Colorado is an in-hand state and starts processing early so that all of the votes are counted by election day. Also, Colorado has higher turnout than California.

Expand full comment

Ballots coming from Azkaban and written in Voynic manuscript is GOOD. I thought fellons were not allowed to vote?

Expand full comment

California is SOPHISTICATED! This could take weeks, MONTHS. Not like those slovenly rubes back east!

Expand full comment

Are Klingons allowed to vote in American elections? They are foreign and fascistic.

Expand full comment