2020 Texas Early Voting Numbers

[SizzleChest 8302]

They're saying it's an equal protection clause violation.  Which is funny because not only do other counties have drive-up voting in Texas (the Secy of State authorized this during primary season), but Abbott also violated the equal protection clause by declaring each county have only one dropbox.  

It's a baseless pile of legal pretzel logic.

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

6 minutes ago, immamac said:

That's actually not true. stop being a dumbass. Legislators make the laws, Judges decide if laws are constitutional. 

This isn't a question of federal opinion. The Texas Supreme Court has already declined the case and SOS has signed off on it. This is 100% states rights and if this is the hill the SCOTUS decides to die on with regards to states rights and elections then you have a broken ass fucking brain.

If they pick some random law and say we interpret this to mean no drive up voting, what’s to stop them?

nothing except a challenge of the ruling in the future when the court makeup is different, right?

Edited November 1, 2020 by Pato del Muerto

[immamac 44199]

1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

If they pick some random law and say we interpret this to mean no drive up voting, what’s to stop them?

I'm really glad you aren't a judge. You have little to no understanding of how this works.

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

Just now, immamac said:

I'm really glad you aren't a judge. You have little to no understanding of how this works.

Inform me, mr aggy computer nerd. 

[Bama Chick 28596]

If you voted drive through and want to be part of the legal fight -

[immamac 44199]

7 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Inform me, mr aggy computer nerd. 

if the SC decides that this is unconstitutional then all laws regarding how states govern elections become unconstitutional. This isn't just a "Texas" thing once they intervene, it's an everywhere in the US thing. They aren't going to dictate to all 50 states that it is unconstitutional to do anything regarding voting. 

Everyone that says the SC decided the election in 2000 has their head buried in the sand, they said that Florida couldn't change the rules for how they counted votes after they had already started counting the votes. (hanging chads and how they were counted) They didn't say "Bush wins Florida lolol" or "throw away ballots that were previously ruled as valid under the written rules" they said you can't change the rules for what a valid ballot is after the rules were already set and the election was held. They didn't take Florida's right to do anything away, they said you can't fucking change the law after the events take place. 

This is like saying the google v oracle lawsuit only has impact on google or oracle if google wins (new legal precedent). The case is radioactive and isn't strong enough of one to upend the entire US Federal and State separation of powers.

[mchookem 16728]

16 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

16 hours ago, Paper_jam said:

They have a "Contact Us" section of their website that allows users to send in questions. I have some questions.
http://woodfilllaw.com/contact-us/
 

Founding partner is a Texas Ex.

have you BEEN to the DT board? 😆

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

None of that addresses what some people feel is the issue, and bush v gore was like a 5-4 decision was it not?  Now there’s several new justices, 3 of which were appointed by trump. 
the difference in our arguments is you are telling me what they won’t do, not what they can’t do. 
They can do what you say they won’t do, and if they do so there’s no backstop. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

None of that addresses what some people feel is the issue, and bush v gore was like a 5-4 decision was it not?  Now there’s several new justices, 3 of which were appointed by trump. 
the difference in our arguments is you are telling me what they won’t do, not what they can’t do. 
They can do what you say they won’t do, and if they do so there’s no backstop. 

Yeeeeah, I'm getting a literal that was then, this is now vibe with this new court. Trump has been calling them out in his rallies, we'll see if any of the majority folks have allegiance to him or to their donors. I cannot imagine their donors want complete chaos, but then again I don't think like they do either.

[atomheartbevo 90546]

Holy Fucking Shit.  Keep in mind that, while it's not public record who you voted for, it is public record if you voted in a D or R primary.  These people did not vote in any previous primaries.

 

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

Holy Fucking Shit.  Keep in mind that, while it's not public record who you voted for, it is public record if you voted in a D or R primary.  These people did not vote in any previous primaries.

 

Is that an unusually high number?  How many people bother voting in a primary?

[immamac 44199]

1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

Holy Fucking Shit.  Keep in mind that, while it's not public record who you voted for, it is public record if you voted in a D or R primary.  These people did not vote in any previous primaries.

 

I wonder where that influx of voters is coming from... It is almost like gen Z and Millennials are voting... The splits there are very bad for the GOP

[immamac 44199]

1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Is that an unusually high number?  How many people bother voting in a primary?

Extremely high. It's not that they haven't voted in a primary it's that they have never voted before period, including in a primary. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 34079]

Beto (and team) doing fucking work:

 

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

Just now, immamac said:

Extremely high. It's not that they haven't voted in a primary it's that they have never voted before period, including in a primary. 

That’s not how I read it. 

[Guest]

nm

Edited November 1, 2020 by slorch

[immamac 44199]

Just now, Pato del Muerto said:

That’s not how I read it. 

It's a combo of those things that's telling. Not each of them individually. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

Beto (and team) doing fucking work:

 

If I got a call from someone claiming to be Beto ORourke, I'd just figure it was a prank call.

 

Edited November 1, 2020 by slorch

[immamac 44199]

Just now, slorch said:

If I got a call from someone claiming to be Beta ORourke, I'd just figure it was a prank call.

 

Fuck him.

Did you vote already? I hope you did

[bolverk 30231]

The map below is based off data taken from the Texas Secretary of State Election Return webpage, showing the early voting turnout for each county in Texas. Incredibly, McCulloch County (Brady) recorded a turnout of 92%. That's the one at the dead center of the state (they don't call themselves the "Heart of Texas" for nothing. No other county registered a 75% or greater turnout and none were lower than 25%. I scaled the map between those two percentages because McCulloch kind of screwed up the county shading and made it difficult to determine small differences in turnout.

More or less, the big metros with their suburbs and exurbs were overachievers, except for the Valley and El Paso. The Hill Country did really well. West and South Texas performed pretty poorly overall, and East Texas was kind of meh. If it's true that the 'burbs are indeed turning from Red to Blue, I think this bodes fairly well, unless the vast expanses of rural Texas come out like crazy on Tuesday.

Edited November 1, 2020 by bolverk
clarified Hill Country language

[Bama Chick 28596]

If I got a call from someone claiming to be Beto ORourke, I'd just figure it was a prank call.
 

Quick deletion of your “nm” post above.

I guess even you recognized that your veiled threat of violence over someone “coming to take” your guns wasn’t all that veiled.

[wildcat09 29556]

47 minutes ago, immamac said:

I'm really glad you aren't a judge. You have little to no understanding of how this works.

Actually you’re the one that clearly isn’t familiar with how it works for a lot of Republican judges. I get that you’re trying to counter the doomers but it’s a real concern.

Edited November 1, 2020 by wildcat09

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, immamac said:

Did you vote already? I hope you did

Yes, sir 10 days ago.   I can still go again if duty calls...

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Quick deletion of your “nm” post above.

I guess even you recognized that your veiled threat of violence over someone “coming to take” your guns wasn’t all that veiled.

It wasn't at all, however, trying to keep it clean in this thread. Thanks for the supervision. 

Get out the vote.   I'm cool with that.   I was all about voting, and others voting, way the fuck before it was cool. Always have been.

Edited November 1, 2020 by slorch

[immamac 44199]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

Actually you’re the one that clearly isn’t familiar with how it works for a lot of Republican judges. I get that you’re trying to counter the doomers but it’s a real concern.

You get me. I'm not saying it can't happen, I'm saying the likelihood of it happening is near 0 because of the implications it would have and this being a pretty flimsy case. Strong cases are what make the supreme court call into question constitutionality not weak conspiracy theory ones amidst the worst global pandemic in the last 100 years. 

[wildcat09 29556]

Just now, immamac said:

You get me. I'm not saying it can't happen, I'm saying the likelihood of it happening is near 0 because of the implications it would have and this being a pretty flimsy case. Strong cases are what make the supreme court call into question constitutionality not weak conspiracy theory ones amidst the worst global pandemic in the last 100 years. 

It’s literally happened before. They based their opinion in Bush v. Gore on an equal protection argument.

[Hank Scorpio 17924]

It would be ridiculous for a Republican hack like Hanen to toss the votes out, have the decision affirmed by the 5th circuit 2-1 with Edith Brown writing the opinion, and going up to the Supreme Court where it’s upheld by a 5-4 Court with the principled John Robert’s voting with the liberals because he has coverage. That could never happen. 

[immamac 44199]

That is anti this. In Florida they were doing fucking crazy shit that was actually in violation if the equal protections. Then the revised thing which had uniform rules for recount was ruled on because they ran out if time to do it feasibly and even asked for an extension which would have violated Florida election law (rewrite law for election after election)

Second, the Court ruled 5-4 against the remedy, proposed by Justices Stephen Breyer and David Souter, of sending the case back to Florida to complete the recount using a uniform statewide standard before the scheduled December 18 meeting of Florida's electors in Tallahassee. The majority held that no alternative method could be established within the discretionary December 12 “safe harbor” deadline set by Title 3 of the United States Code (3 U.S.C.), § 5, which the Florida Supreme Court had stated that Florida intended to meet. That deadline arrived two hours after the release of the Court's decision. The Court rejected an extension of the deadline for recounting on the ground that it would have violated the Florida Election Code.

I mean was it awesome? No and having the SC involved sucked. Florida also didn't have it's shit together and either way this was ruled would have been ass tier garbage. 

This is not that. There is only one way this can be ruled as ass tier garbage and that is throwing out valid and legally cast votes. The whole state could do this. Not just Harris. 

[CooterBrown 18272]

More or less, the big metros with their suburbs and exurbs were overachievers, except for the Valley and El Paso, as well as the Hill Country. West and South Texas performed pretty poorly overall, and East Texas was kind of meh. If it's true that the 'burbs are indeed turning from Red to Blue, I think this bodes fairly well, unless the vast expanses of rural Texas come out like crazy on Tuesday.

I’d guess it doesn’t mean dick what rural counties do. Urban and suburban counties ARE Texas. The rural counties would have to be damn near 100% GOP to even dent Harris County’s Dem lean.

[gmr548 16681]

Holy Fucking Shit.  Keep in mind that, while it's not public record who you voted for, it is public record if you voted in a D or R primary.  These people did not vote in any previous primaries.
 

Like 10 percent of the electorate votes in primaries. The majority of voters having no primary history is true in any given general election.

[SaucyJack 3517]

25 minutes ago, immamac said:

Extremely high. It's not that they haven't voted in a primary it's that they have never voted before period, including in a primary. 

Wrong.

"General Election / No Primary History 30.0%" = 30% previously voted in a General Election, but have no primary history in Texas. 

[gmr548 16681]

It would be ridiculous for a Republican hack like Hanen to toss the votes out, have the decision affirmed by the 5th circuit 2-1 with Edith Brown writing the opinion, and going up to the Supreme Court where it’s upheld by a 5-4 Court with the principled John Robert’s voting with the liberals because he has coverage. That could never happen. 

Yeah these judges weren’t specifically appointed because of how they’d rule in this exact situation or anything. Can’t believe anyone would even think the Grand Ol’ Party would stoop to such levels given their sterling history.

[immamac 44199]

Yeah...70% have never voted period. That's enormous. 

[bolverk 30231]

12 minutes ago, CooterBrown said:

 

I’d guess it doesn’t mean dick what rural counties do. Urban and suburban counties ARE Texas. The rural counties would have to be damn near 100% GOP to even dent Harris County’s Dem lean.

 

Agreed. You may recall this map I posted a week or so ago, showing that the combined population of all these red counties is about equal to that of Harris (blue) alone. So, the fact that their turnout hasn't been so great to date could spell a lot of trouble for the GOP unless either a) they turnout at an incredible rate on Tuesday or b) the GOP has a lot more voters in the suburbs than we think.

I'm not going to count my chickens before they hatch, but it's this factor that tells me this election should be really close in Texas.

 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13707]

22 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

Beto (and team) doing fucking work:

 

I did this for a while today. It's not difficult work at all. You stayed dialed into one call, and you're just continuously connected to people. You can take a break anytime. BUT the experience is people just hanging up on you again and again and again. Maybe 1 out of 15 calls will talk to you. And then maybe 1 out of 10 who will talk, will state they're  voting on Tuesday.  In ~1 hour, I had 2 people to agree to vote but they were already going to vote.  

The script on the screen is easy. You click their answer and the next statement from you is displayed. simple.

But I also was able to classify phone numbers as wrong numbers, the person does not want future calls, or if the person only spoke Spanish. Presumably a Spanish speaker would eventually call them later. 

When Beto says they may make a million calls, that doesn't mean they're talking to a million people. In my brief experience, they might be lucky to talk to 75K people out of 1m calls placed. Still it can make a difference.

[mchookem 16728]

6 minutes ago, immamac said:

Yeah...70% have never voted period. That's enormous. 

i'm reminded of the looks on the faces of many of my co-workers that didn't vote in 2016 because 'they were both terrible'. i heard numerous variations of 'i didn't think he would win!'

perhaps many of those folks realized the actual consequences of their non-action.  

[Nice Guy Eddie 13707]

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

Agreed. You may recall this map I posted a week or so ago, showing that the combined population of all these red counties is about equal to that of Harris (blue) alone. So, the fact that their turnout hasn't been so great to date could spell a lot of trouble for the GOP unless either a) they turnout at an incredible rate on Tuesday or b) the GOP has a lot more voters in the suburbs than we think.

I'm not going to count my chickens before they hatch, but it's this factor that tells me this election should be really close in Texas.

 

I hear you but the red and blue here do not offset each other. With the exception of the southern counties in Red, many of these counties will be 70 or 80% voting for Trump. Democrats will be ecstatic if they get Harris to go 60% blue.  Harris won't offset those counties because it's more diverse. Other blue counties will be needed.

[Covri 6366]

52 minutes ago, immamac said:

Extremely high. It's not that they haven't voted in a primary it's that they have never voted before period, including in a primary. 

Looks like he added two groups to get to his number, those who have voted but not in the primaries, and those who have not voted at all. Yellow and green groups. 

 

[Ghost of LL 15664]

I just have to appreciate the definitive legal takes from immamac on a board filled with lawyers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3873]

1 hour ago, immamac said:

You get me. I'm not saying it can't happen, I'm saying the likelihood of it happening is near 0 because of the implications it would have and this being a pretty flimsy case. Strong cases are what make the supreme court call into question constitutionality not weak conspiracy theory ones amidst the worst global pandemic in the last 100 years. 

Plus the SC has already cited state laws for giving different rulings in WI from NC and PA.

[immamac 44199]

48 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I just have to appreciate the definitive legal takes from immamac on a board filled with lawyers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lawyers apparently don't need to know the law anymore. Neither do doctors need to know medicine and football coaches anything about football.

 

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

1 minute ago, immamac said:

Lawyers apparently don't need to know the law anymore. Neither do doctors need to know medicine and football coaches anything about football.

 

How does this forward your argument that judges won’t do something that they shouldn’t do?

[RayDog 682]

The 11 largest counties lead the total vote percentage with nearly 62% to 38% for the other 243 counties. The turnout in those 11 counties was 10% higher than the others. Those 11 will probably vote for Biden by something close to a 62 to 38 margin, since they were roughly 60/40 for Beto.

[TexLonghorn 5737]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I hear you but the red and blue here do not offset each other. With the exception of the southern counties in Red, many of these counties will be 70 or 80% voting for Trump. Democrats will be ecstatic if they get Harris to go 60% blue.  Harris won't offset those counties because it's more diverse. Other blue counties will be needed.

The red and blue counties on that map only represent 32%  of the state's population.  The grey counties are the other 68%, and that includes Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, and El Paso.

[immamac 44199]

8 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

How does this forward your argument that judges won’t do something that they shouldn’t do?

As I said before. If this happens America is cooked and the country is done.

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

2 minutes ago, TexLonghorn said:

The red and blue counties on that map only represent 32%  of the state's population.  The grey counties are the other 68%, and that includes Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, and El Paso.

Yeah in the past, it’s been the counties surrounding Travis, Dallas, and Harris that claw back enough votes for the huge swath of rural Texas to overtake. That may not be there this time- Williamson, hays, tarrant, Denton, Collin, ft bend, and brazoria may be close enough to even that the virus can carry over the other 230 rural counties. 

[gmr548 16681]

FWIW, in the scoop on Trump's plan to declare victory before the votes are counted and sue for the win, Axios reported senior Trump campaign advisers feel they're doing better than expected in TX based on their internal EV analysis. No context or numbers to that. Could just be that they expected to lose EV, but R areas turned out too, and we may not see a ton of votes on Tuesday.

Edited November 2, 2020 by gmr548

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, gmr548 said:

Trump campaign advisers feel

They’re lying 

[gmr548 16681]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

They’re lying 

I should've clarified that meant in Texas (as well as some other places mentioned). I didn't get that sense only because they were campaign folks speaking anonymously and willingly conceded not performing well elsewhere. But without further info it's impossible to tell.

Edited November 2, 2020 by gmr548

[Rimbo 26853]

5 hours ago, mchookem said:

i'm reminded of the looks on the faces of many of my co-workers that didn't vote in 2016 because 'they were both terrible'. i heard numerous variations of 'i didn't think he would win!'

perhaps many of those folks realized the actual consequences of their non-action.  

I think this can't be understated. People realized, between then and now, that their vote actually matters.