Shocking: Kamala Harris Won Votes Counted After Election Day by 20 Points
Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris has won late votes counted after election day by a huge margin – which has been the case 100% of the time when ballots take weeks to count. Interesting how that works, isn’t it?
Harris beat Trump by nearly 20 points after receiving an additional 8.3 million or 55.3% of the votes counted overtime, while Trump added another 5.65 million or 37.8% of the total late votes.
Too big to rig, indeed.
Harris didn’t flip a single country in the 2024 election, something that hasn’t happened since 1932.
While Trump’s victory remains intact, the abnormal margin in the opposite direction between the two candidates raises serious questions.
States lagging in counting votes include California, with 63% of votes uncounted after the election day, Arizona (52%), Utah (51%), and Washington (51%).
Those with the least number of votes counted overtime include Florida, Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Tennessee, each with a margin of between 0.1% and 0.5% of late votes.
Others, such as Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin, had margins of between 0.5% and 1.0% of votes counted overtime.
Despite the country’s tech capital, California’s slow vote counting is one of a kind. In comparison, Florida, the third most populous state, technically finished counting votes within four days – though it was actually quicker. During the last election, Florida reported 99% of all votes within a few hours of closing the election, while California’s were still trickling in a month later.
Then there is the question of Harris winning by nearly 20 percentage points in states with the slowest counting processes while losing nationally by about 2%.
Some have called for the harmonization of national elections across the states to ensure uniformity in ballot casting and tallying, while allowing states to handle their local elections.
This is because differences in voting systems, ballot designs, and counting methods often lead to delays and confusion, which usually erode public confidence in elections.
This is especially the case when the losing candidate like Harris makes sudden gains in late votes, especially in Liberal states with lax voting laws such as California. Nonetheless, proponents of the slow electoral processes say they increase accessibility and participation.
“Our priority is trying to maximize participation of actively registered voters,” says California’s Democratic Assemblymember Marc Berman.
“What that means is things are a little slower. But in a society that wants immediate gratification, I think our democracy is worth taking a little time to get it right and to create a system where everyone can participate.”
California vote counting is also tedious because of the widespread use of mail-in ballots, which require close inspection as each vote is opened individually and processed, usually without proof of identification.
The process is vulnerable to human errors and ballot stuffing, risks that outweigh the advantages of increased voter turnout. Thus, any candidate who records unexpected gains in late votes from such states is likely to be treated with suspicion.
Interestingly, lawmakers from states with the most inefficient electoral processes have been fighting to introduce similar systems federally.
Post a Comment