Arizona and Nevada counties plan to hand count ballots for midterms

[essentialsaltes]

Two counties in Western battleground states are moving forward with plans to hand count ballots in this year’s consequential midterm elections – a sign of the deep distrust of electronic vote tallying machines in some pockets of the country.

The two Republicans on the three-member Cochise County, Arizona, Board of Supervisors this week voted to authorize a “hand-count audit” in all precincts – over the objection of the county attorney, who said the move violates Arizona law.

In neighboring Nevada, meanwhile, the top election official in rural Nye County said he is forging ahead with plans to start hand counting mail-in ballots this week.

--

There are many reasons why final certified election results take quite a while for states to produce. This is another one. Don't mistake delays in official results as a reason to mistrust results. Additional checks and audits, even misguided ones like this, take time to execute, but with the intended result of making election outcomes more trustworthy.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Two counties in Western battleground states are moving forward with plans to hand count ballots in this year’s consequential midterm elections – a sign of the deep distrust of electronic vote tallying machines in some pockets of the country.

The two Republicans on the three-member Cochise County, Arizona, Board of Supervisors this week voted to authorize a “hand-count audit” in all precincts – over the objection of the county attorney, who said the move violates Arizona law.

In neighboring Nevada, meanwhile, the top election official in rural Nye County said he is forging ahead with plans to start hand counting mail-in ballots this week.

--

There are many reasons why final certified election results take quite a while for states to produce. This is another one. Don't mistake delays in official results as a reason to mistrust results. Additional checks and audits, even misguided ones like this, take time to execute, but with the intended result of making election outcomes more trustworthy.

Hopefully this administration realizes that it doesn't really matter if election integrity concerns are justified or not....there's a lot to be gained from improving the voting process so people gain confidence in the results.

 

[wing2000]

Hopefully this administration realizes that it doesn't really matter if election integrity concerns are justified or not....there's a lot to be gained from improving the voting process so people gain confidence in the results.

That's the rationale the AZ Senate leader used when she hired Cyber Ninjas....

 

[wing2000]

The findings from the Center for the Future of Arizona appear to counter the narrative that concerns about election integrity are widespread in the state.

“We found that 74% of all voters in Arizona consider our elections fair, 70% believe they are secure, 80% are confident in the results of the recent August primary, and 77% think the November results will be accurate,” Sybil Francis, president and CEO of the nonprofit group, told KTAR News 92.3 FM’s Arizona’s Morning News on Friday.

Polling shows most Arizona voters are confident in state's election results

 

[SimplyMe]

Hopefully this administration realizes that it doesn't really matter if election integrity concerns are justified or not....there's a lot to be gained from improving the voting process so people gain confidence in the results.

You mean like the numerous recounts, including hand recounting, and audits made everyone believe the results in Georgia were correct? Or the audits, including one supervised by the Republican legislature in Arizona, using a Trump-supporting "audit company," that created such trust in the election process that these counties are not going to hand count, to ensure they can trust the results?

Since the claims of fraud, by those at the top that know there was no major fraud, are not based on any type of actual fraud, but merely being used as a tool so they can keep claiming they "won," no actual evidence will convince those that believe the fraud claims.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The findings from the Center for the Future of Arizona appear to counter the narrative that concerns about election integrity are widespread in the state.

“We found that 74% of all voters in Arizona consider our elections fair, 70% believe they are secure, 80% are confident in the results of the recent August primary, and 77% think the November results will be accurate,” Sybil Francis, president and CEO of the nonprofit group, told KTAR News 92.3 FM’s Arizona’s Morning News on Friday.

Polling shows most Arizona voters are confident in state's election results

Wow....gotta say I'm surprised. You read other polls from the left regarding the dangers to democracy posed by the right....and they'd have you believe that 70% of conservatives believe the election was stolen.

 

[Ana the Ist]

You mean like the numerous recounts, including hand recounting, and audits made everyone believe the results in Georgia were correct?

No. They certainly didn't convince Stacy Adams.

Or the audits, including one supervised by the Republican legislature in Arizona, using a Trump-supporting "audit company," that created such trust in the election process that these counties are not going to hand count, to ensure they can trust the results?

No....I mean passing laws that give people confidence in election before the votes are counted.

That way the recounts and audits aren't needed.

Since the claims of fraud, by those at the top that know there was no major fraud, are not based on any type of actual fraud, but merely being used as a tool so they can keep claiming they "won," no actual evidence will convince those that believe the fraud claims.

Again, not talking about evidence. I'm talking about processes. If you have people demanding an audit, it's because the process is seen as lacking in security.

 

[SimplyMe]

No. They certainly didn't convince Stacy Adams.

Great, we'll pass a law that a candidate for public office cannot be the state's top election official (Abrams -- not Adams -- main complaint). It is worth noting, she still conceded and hasn't kept stirring up "stolen election" claims. Instead, she strengthened the Democratic Party operations, such as getting stronger candidates and get out the vote drives -- that led to two Democratic Senators being elected from the state.

No....I mean passing laws that give people confidence in election before the votes are counted.

That way the recounts and audits aren't needed.

And what laws are those? When you have people who, for over two years, have complained of "stolen elections," allegedly knowing those claims aren't true, their followers are not going to be convinced that any election might be legitimate -- except maybe if only one party is allowed to win elections.

It is odd how, in the decades that I've been voting (and even when I was too young to vote), the complaint I heard was that elections didn't matter because a single persons vote couldn't change the results. In the last two years it is that one side is so "corrupt" as to always cheat -- and so good that no one can figure out how they are cheating -- in such a way that no evidence of cheating is left on the machines, that machine counts match paper ballot counts, etc. Seriously, what new laws -- when laws are already they toughest they've been my entire life -- will convince these people over the last couple of years that an election is fair when their candidate loses?

Again, not talking about evidence. I'm talking about processes. If you have people demanding an audit, it's because the process is seen as lacking in security.

Does this mean we need laws to ensure that there isn't some Jewish kabal that runs everything, so we can prove to Kanye West, and the others who have been out there for decades, that they don't secretly run the various nations? Do we need to send Flat Earthers to outer space to prove the Earth is round and that we aren't spending billions on NASA to keep the lies alive? And, if we did, would they believe it or think that the government used some type of "mind control" to make them believe they saw and experience outer space? At some point, when dealing with conspiracies (there is a reason it is called "election conspiracies") that "improving processes" not only does not increase security (just increases cost and slows results) but doesn't help, either.

 

[Valletta]

You mean like the numerous recounts, including hand recounting, and audits made everyone believe the results in Georgia were correct? Or the audits, including one supervised by the Republican legislature in Arizona, using a Trump-supporting "audit company," that created such trust in the election process that these counties are not going to hand count, to ensure they can trust the results?

Since the claims of fraud, by those at the top that know there was no major fraud, are not based on any type of actual fraud, but merely being used as a tool so they can keep claiming they "won," no actual evidence will convince those that believe the fraud claims.

To this day Georgia officials have not provided a legitimate explanation as to why they stopped the counting. Officials told numerous contradictory stories. As I and others have said so many times that it was of no use to count the same ballots instead of addressing the wrongdoing. The statement that this was the safest election in U.S. history was an outrageous fabrication. Enough wrongdoing took place so that numerous state legislatures took action to improve election integrity.
With improved safeguards we will see a lot of legitimate results. Hillary Clinton knows this, she is already putting out the story that Republicans are plotting to steal the next election.

 

[SimplyMe]

To this day Georgia officials have not provided a legitimate explanation as to why they stopped the counting.

Georgia hasn't addressed this because it didn't happen. They have addressed, multiple times, what happened in that counting room where they believed they were going to shut down for the night -- and prepared to do that -- before being told they were to continue counting throughout the night.

Officials told numerous contradictory stories.

No, media told numerous contradictory stories -- often the same media companies had false information and had to correct it as the night went on. From what I've seen, though stories didn't come from "officials" but rather the media companies, not getting stories from officials (who didn't realize that center was planning on closing for the night), tried to explain why they were stopping.

As I and others have said so many times that it was of no use to count the same ballots instead of addressing the wrongdoing.

What wrongdoing? Again, they had the Georgia Bureau of Investigation run and audit -- verifying signatures on ballots and, if they felt the signature did not match, contacting the voter to verify if they had sent the ballot in or if it was fraudulent. They did not find fraudulent ballots.

Though, to be fair, there were a few bad ballots found, after the serious investigating. But, to be clear, it was less than even the Republican officials who control elections in Georgia suspected there would be.

The statement that this was the safest election in U.S. history was an outrageous fabrication.

So you keep claiming, despite the fact that that quote originated from the Trump Administration, made by the person Trump appointed to oversee the Election security branch of Homeland Security.

Enough wrongdoing took place so that numerous state legislatures took action to improve election integrity.

No, the claims of wrongdoing got Republican Legislatures to "improve election security" in meaningful ways, such as not allowing people to give water to people waiting in hour long lines; despite the fact that it was already illegal to do as a type of campaigning. Yes, some really meaningful improving of "election security."

 

[Ana the Ist]

Great, we'll pass a law that a candidate for public office cannot be the state's top election official (Abrams -- not Adams -- main complaint).

I see no problem with that....it's certainly better than election laws Democrats have been trying to pass.

It is worth noting, she still conceded and hasn't kept stirring up "stolen election" claims.

That's debatable. To my knowledge she has not simply come out and said she lost fair and square. Instead, she claims that Kemp got more votes....but the process was corrupted somehow and certain black voters were unable to vote for her. If she changed this story at some point....I haven't heard about it.

Instead, she strengthened the Democratic Party operations, such as getting stronger candidates and get out the vote drives -- that led to two Democratic Senators being elected from the state.

In other words, election lies are acceptable when spread by someone helping your party win.

And what laws are those? When you have people who, for over two years, have complained of "stolen elections," allegedly knowing those claims aren't true, their followers are not going to be convinced that any election might be legitimate -- except maybe if only one party is allowed to win elections.

Do you want me to list election laws that the right has passed since Biden was elected?

It is odd how, in the decades that I've been voting (and even when I was too young to vote), the complaint I heard was that elections didn't matter because a single persons vote couldn't change the results. In the last two years it is that one side is so "corrupt" as to always cheat -- and so good that no one can figure out how they are cheating -- in such a way that no evidence of cheating is left on the machines, that machine counts match paper ballot counts, etc.

The hilarious part of this is I genuinely don't know which party you're referring to here. I started off thinking you were talking out the Russia investigation...not so much by the end.

Does this mean we need laws to ensure that there isn't some Jewish kabal that runs everything, so we can prove to Kanye West, and the others who have been out there for decades, that they don't secretly run the various nations?

Kanye has a mental disorder...I don't think dunking on him for political points is appropriate.

Do we need to send Flat Earthers to outer space to prove the Earth is round and that we aren't spending billions on NASA to keep the lies alive?

Probably not. We're talking about keeping democracy in one piece though....debunking flat earthers doesn't seem relevant.

And, if we did, would they believe it or think that the government used some type of "mind control" to make them believe they saw and experience outer space?

Possibly.

At some point, when dealing with conspiracies (there is a reason it is called "election conspiracies") that "improving processes" not only does not increase security (just increases cost and slows results) but doesn't help, either.

No offense...but the point in bringing up Abrams and the Russian investigation is to point out that both sides believe in conspiracies. Sure, you may not name your conspiracies appropriately....but the idea that Trump won the election because of Russian collusion was always a conspiracy. At no point was anyone going to show how many votes went to Trump because of Russian disinformation. It could have been 0....could have been 1 million....but nobody knows. The claim he won because of Russian collusion? Pure conspiracy.

Abrams was banking on the prospect of no one daring to disagree with her claim of Georgia election laws being racist. She was correct regarding her own party....but that's not the one that matters once she lost the election. As for the racism claims? The voters unable to vote? Completely baseless. ..judge dismissed her whole case because she failed to provide evidence of her claims. Victims of racism were in extremely short supply.

How many Democratic voters do you think believe the GOP is engaging in widespread voter suppression right now?

My guess is that a lot do.....it's part of the narrative they've been fed after all....

Is it true and you've got a pile of evidence? Or will this accusation disappear after elections because it's a conspiracy theory? I understand that the conspiracies on the right are easier to see....they're also fringe beliefs not shared by the majority. The ones on the left...like most of the problems on the left....are invisible to the left.

 

[FireDragon76]

Hopefully this administration realizes that it doesn't really matter if election integrity concerns are justified or not....there's a lot to be gained from improving the voting process so people gain confidence in the results.

They are taking advantage of peoples ignorance.

Hand-counting is actually less reliable, not moreso. It's also slow.

 

[wing2000]

Arizona Cochise County Board of Supervisors has clarified their intentions in a letter to the Arizona Secretary of State noting they will abide by Arizona law....which does not allow for counting every single ballot for every race:

There are other guardrails in state election law on how such a hand count would proceed:

• A count can't start until the unofficial tally of ballots cast at the vote centers is made public.

• The count would involve four items on the ballot, not the full ballot, which has about 50 items. The count would review one federal race, one statewide race, one legislative race and one statewide ballot proposition. The ballot items are chosen by a random drawing done by the participating party political chairs in Cochise County.

• Registered voters — who take an oath to follow the law — must do the counting.

• None of the hand count board members could have appeared as candidates on the Nov. 8 ballot.

• The count must happen with enough time for the county to meet its deadline to submit election results for the statewide canvass, which happens on Dec. 5.

The county board of supervisors has yet to layout out a plan on how they will go about it. It's small county of around 126k population.

Cochise County explain plans for election hand count

 

[wing2000]

The Pinal County Board of Supervisors on Wednesday unanimously rejected a plan to increase the percentage of ballots counted by hand in order to ensure voting machines are accurate.

Republican Supervisor Kevin Cavanaugh, who sought the expanded hand count as a more reliable test of voting machines, ultimately voted against his own proposal after a barrage of community opposition.

Pinal County rejects ballot hand count sought by supervisor