politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:

- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Sure, but the fast unofficial result is what leads to a quick victory being declared for the wrong person, and then "they're stealing the votes, stop the count" when the results "change" from what was on the TV.
Better to be slow and accurate, in my opinion.
But it's also my opinion that elections should be a drop-in event for a week rather than a one-day bash, with no partial results until they're all counted at the end, and by all I mean every district, and a moratorium on campaigning during the actual election week.
The all-night TV map can thrilling, like a sports final, but also probably part of the problem. I think it's too exciting.
Especially in American elections, where the vote is in November, but nothing takes effect until the end of January, why does counting the votes need to be instant? You could take 2 weeks to count them, who cares, nothing changes that night anyway.
That's caused by partial result announcements. Which would still happen with or without voting machines, given the way your elections are run. You could change that, but you probably won't. Especially given you'd end up with conspiracy nonsense ("but what are they hiding?!?") if you waited for the complete and official numbers - especially with the instant gratification people are programmed for these days. So damned if you do, damned if you don't.
The legibility and consistency (and potentially streamlining voter throughput at the polls) is probably the much more important part, anyway. Not necessarily to the point of voting machines being a reasonable expense, I'd suggest, but the voting machine company lobbyists are effective if nothing else.