Regarding the recount legislation, are you referring to Mesnard's bill from 2022? Lots of people voted for that bill. As I remember, the math was such that it would have sparked a few recounts in 2020, including Biden- Trump. It replaced a nuanced statute and applied an across the board percentage for recounts. Most people didn't do the math before voting.
Yah that one. I actually thought it wasn’t a bad idea because the old law was soooooo low. Like I think leg races came out to like <50 vote difference sparks a recount. But .5% might be a bit high. And more importantly, we need more time to do the recounts or just to do them faster
"Beyond that, the secretive, closed-door meetings through which Hobbs’ hand-picked election experts developed their recommendations don’t inspire confidence and instead feed the narrative that the election elitists don’t want us to know what they’re doing."
Alternative view: Holding meetings in public makes it nearly impossible to negotiate and to create policy.
I know I know. And the nutters would find conspiracies either way. I just don't believe that policy can only be crafted in secret or is any better if crafted in secret. Like, the press barely even covers these things anyway. What would someone have possibly said that would actually matter long-term? That Bennett wants cast ballot images to be public? That All Voting is Local wants same-day voter reg? That Fontes thinks America First is American fascism? Oh bless my ears, what a scoop! You know? I think most of the time the closed doors reflect more on the egos in the room. Like, this isn't national security here and you're not that interesting or important anyway. Just do it the right way.
Maybe. The trade off is that cameras in the room turn a policy meeting into a performance. Since we're living in zero-sum politics, I understand the hesitancy to have a normal give and take turned into a total capitulation by an opponent.
I'm good with total transparency of outcomes, but I'm less sure of total transparency of process. You hear a lot from frustrated (and not terribly well informed) people who say about complicated problems, "They just need to get in a room and figure it out," which implies a closed-door negotiation is the best way to reach a deal. Yet when the principals get in a room and figure it out, the same people start with the conspiracies. I don't know the best way.
Regarding the recount legislation, are you referring to Mesnard's bill from 2022? Lots of people voted for that bill. As I remember, the math was such that it would have sparked a few recounts in 2020, including Biden- Trump. It replaced a nuanced statute and applied an across the board percentage for recounts. Most people didn't do the math before voting.
Yah that one. I actually thought it wasn’t a bad idea because the old law was soooooo low. Like I think leg races came out to like <50 vote difference sparks a recount. But .5% might be a bit high. And more importantly, we need more time to do the recounts or just to do them faster
There was also a bill about requiring the vote tallies be accurate within a 99% Confidence Interval. How many Legislators knew what that meant?
Sounds like Anthony Kern doing his best Fredo Corleone. Look at that face. A guy in need of a Porta-Potty.
One fake elector for another. 🙄
"Beyond that, the secretive, closed-door meetings through which Hobbs’ hand-picked election experts developed their recommendations don’t inspire confidence and instead feed the narrative that the election elitists don’t want us to know what they’re doing."
Alternative view: Holding meetings in public makes it nearly impossible to negotiate and to create policy.
I know I know. And the nutters would find conspiracies either way. I just don't believe that policy can only be crafted in secret or is any better if crafted in secret. Like, the press barely even covers these things anyway. What would someone have possibly said that would actually matter long-term? That Bennett wants cast ballot images to be public? That All Voting is Local wants same-day voter reg? That Fontes thinks America First is American fascism? Oh bless my ears, what a scoop! You know? I think most of the time the closed doors reflect more on the egos in the room. Like, this isn't national security here and you're not that interesting or important anyway. Just do it the right way.
Maybe. The trade off is that cameras in the room turn a policy meeting into a performance. Since we're living in zero-sum politics, I understand the hesitancy to have a normal give and take turned into a total capitulation by an opponent.
I'm good with total transparency of outcomes, but I'm less sure of total transparency of process. You hear a lot from frustrated (and not terribly well informed) people who say about complicated problems, "They just need to get in a room and figure it out," which implies a closed-door negotiation is the best way to reach a deal. Yet when the principals get in a room and figure it out, the same people start with the conspiracies. I don't know the best way.
That’s fair