this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
310 points (99.1% liked)

politics

18821 readers
4983 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

In the northwest corner of Louisiana, a candidate for parish sheriff is demanding a recount after losing by a single vote in an election where more than 43,000 people voted.

all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 79 points 9 months ago (2 children)

The most salient part of the article:

When the recount takes place Monday only absentee ballots will be tallied again and checked for errors. But they only account for about 17% of the total vote in the runoff race. Absentee ballots are mailed in and are the only auditable paper trail under Louisiana’s current voting system.

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 68 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

They can only recount absentee ballots?

That's something that should really be fixed

Edit: Being able to audit the full process is important for preserving transparency in elections.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago

I thought the same thing. I went looking and found a whole trail of articles on it. Louisiana actually tried in years past, but internal state politics and bid rigging killed their efforts.

[–] force@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

Louisiana is possibly the most corrupt state in the entire country, I don't think they'd ever even come close to changing that

[–] moistclump@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

John Oliver talks about electronic voting machines and their impact, pre-2020.

https://youtu.be/svEuG_ekNT0?feature=shared

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 60 points 9 months ago (5 children)

The vote was for a sheriff, the Republican candidate lost by 1 vote and is asking for a recount.

However, the vote was performed using electronic voting machines, so a recount doesn't do much other than reload the same result.

[–] qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.world 38 points 9 months ago (2 children)

That’s fine. Let them watch them recrunch the numbers as many times as they want.

[–] bigbluealien@kbin.social 17 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Only if they play old modem sounds for 5mins before showing the results

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Unleash The Storm!

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago

I’ll be shocked if it doesn’t come out different than before. Voting machines tend to find votes when you “look” hard enough. 😫

[–] Alto@kbin.social 32 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Eh, completely unpreventable things such as bit flips have caused weird things in an election before, so it's not exactly unreasonable to call for a recount when the margin is so small.

Obviously it's incredibly unlikely to change though, and is a perfect example of why individual votes do matter.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 24 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Some states require, or at least allow, a recount when the margin is a single-digit percentage, let alone 1 single vote.

This election clearly deserves a recount.

a perfect example of why individual votes do matter

LOL, could there be a better example?! Right with you.

[–] theangryseal@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

I guess every individual vote usually matters.

In my area there’s usually only a reason for me to vote when something serious is on the ballot.

This last election seen republicans running completely unopposed in every position. My state usually ends up blue, but if it were up to my district we’d have Hitler cloned and raised on Natty Daddy and Busch Ice on a cattle farm with a Pentecostal Holiness church in his back yard. Donald Trump got 82% of the vote in 2016 and 83% in 2020.

[–] lazynooblet@lazysoci.al 15 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Sheriff. Republican.

Why is the sheriff described by it's political membership? Is everything political in the US?

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago

Apparently, seeing as he lost to a Democrat.

[–] chatokun@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 9 months ago

Look up constitutional sheriff movement. I'm not sure if this guy is one of them, but a lot of Republicans seem to want to bring back feudalism, with sheriffs being the highest law in their lands. Little dictators who don't have to follow the law etc. They're terrifying, as a non-white person. That's speaking from the prospective of someone whose skin is the only thing I need to be scared about (ok, maybe non religious takes a distant worry too).

People who aren't cis males generally have even more to worry about, especially if you check multiple boxes (like say a non white trans woman).

[–] joel_feila@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

They are elected and so can have oarty affiliation

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

select count(*) from votes group by candidate;

[–] BananaTrifleViolin@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

The headline is also dumb. Any election can be won by 1 vote. Doesn't matter that 43000 people voted.

[–] ryven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The more people you have voting, the less likely it is for the difference to be exactly 1. In an election with 3 voters winning by 1 isn't notable; in an election with tens of thousands of votes, it's pretty unusual.

[–] gianni@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago

I think it would also depend on the number of candidates, to a lesser extent, too.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 2 points 9 months ago

I think the real tragedy is that 21,500 people voted for something and didn't get it. This is my biggest problem with FPTP voting: The losers get fuck all.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Seems like the larger the sample size, the less likely it would be.

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 49 points 9 months ago (1 children)

This is why voting is so damn important

Don't let apathy towards voting take hold and if you see your friends being apathetic to the idea of voting convince them to vote

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 30 points 9 months ago (2 children)

The latest batch of tankie propaganda is that it doesn't matter if you vote because no election is ever decided by a single vote. Ignoring the hilarity of the people using collective action as an argument saying that, this is why it matters. Because local and even state elections often have ridiculously small margins

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Tankies have been on that one for awhile now

They'll straight up mock you for even suggesting that voting is effective at anything

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I just say to them, "so don't vote. Not my problem." They don't know what to do about that.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I too don't know how to respond when someone tells me to do exactly what I had planned to do and was advocating for others to do?

We can't have another 2016.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You are advocating for others to not vote?

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

No. But by not disputing stupidity, you are

Your witty response is to agree with them

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -2 points 9 months ago

It's not a witty response. I honestly don't give a shit if they don't vote. If they do vote, it will be for someone like Jill Stein or whatever dumbass the Libertarians are running this year, so fuck them.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 5 points 9 months ago

"you're stupid if you think that will accomplish anything" and "they are the same party" is pretty old hat.

Haven't seen the argument that individual votes don't matter so individuals shouldn't vote until recently. Is kind of a step up since it plays to the smug factor

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Voting is the only thing that changes the rules. Protests, donations, volunteering, etc. are all meant to influence voting. Voting is the only thing that works.

No, money can't buy everything. It can only influence. You are not going to bribe a Republican to raise taxes, or a (real, not fake) Democrat to vote for Trump.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 9 months ago

...voting is very much not the only thing. Sure, it's important, but there's far far more to politics than just voting.

[–] MBM@lemmings.world 3 points 9 months ago

Protests are definitely not just to influence voting, unless you also mean "influencing politicians to propose and vote for law changes"

[–] whereisk@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

Tankie = nice useful idiot for effective pincer maneuver from the right.

While the right galvanizes their voters with "these very limited interventions is communism"

Tankies undermine the left's enthusiasm: "Not left enough" to make a difference.

Oh yeah? Enjoy the current supreme Court.

[–] wavebeam@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Remember that Kevin Costner movie “swing vote” where he was courted by the two presidential candidates because he was somehow the deciding vote in an election? I don’t remember how they rigged it that way in the story, or what the outcome was, but the premise of one guy being a deciding vote always stuck with me because it can happen in every election; we just don’t know who that guy is because it’s everyone

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

If memory serves he was dissolutioned with voting and his daughter tried to convince him to vote. She eventually tried to cast his ballot herself (that she filled out) but ended up damaging the ballot trying to put it into a machine. She told him but he kept it secret throughout the movie.

So because his ballot was damaged they had him recast it so they could count it.

At one point in the movie one of the candidates literally tries to bribe him with a job offer.

And in the end I believe the movie ended with him sitting down in front of the presidential candidates and having them do a debate right there in front of him on national TV. They never said who he votes for. They just leave it there which I think was a more powerful ending than I'd they said who he voted for.

Edit: I remember enjoying that movie but never remembering the title, so thank you.

[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago

Surprisingly, this isn't the first time this has happened in recent memory. I think in 2018 there was another race decided by a single vote, and it remained a 1 vote lead after multiple recounts.

Voting matters, and every vote counts.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 4 points 9 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


(AP) — In the northwest corner of Louisiana, a candidate for parish sheriff demanded a recount Wednesday after losing by a single vote in an election where more than 43,000 people cast ballots.

The tight race shines a spotlight on Louisiana’s recount process and its outdated voting machines, which do not produce an auditable paper trail that experts say is critical to ensuring election results are accurate.

“This extraordinarily narrow margin ... absolutely requires a hand recount to protect the integrity of our democratic process, and to ensure we respect the will of the people,” John Nickelson, the Republican candidate who trailed by one vote in last week’s election for Caddo Parish Sheriff, posted on social media Wednesday.

Caddo Clerk of Court Mike Spence said he has seen close races during his 46-years of experience, but none with such a sizeable number of voters.

The current system, used by virtually every in-person voter in Georgia, prints a paper ballot with a human-readable summary and a QR code, a type of barcode, that is read by a scanner to count the votes.

Secretary of State-elect Nancy Landry, a Republican who takes office in January, said implementing a new voting system is a top priority.


The original article contains 720 words, the summary contains 203 words. Saved 72%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!