Skip to content

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Elections end when all the ballots are counted, not on election night

ballots to be counted

"Mail-in ballots, while safer, take more time to transport and tally than traditional in-person voting," writes Ready.

Saul Martinez/Getty Images

Ready is the democracy program director at the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, the network of state organizations that use research, grassroots organizing and direct advocacy to advance the public interest.

Golden State Warriors take 2016 NBA championship, 3-1. Cleveland Indians win 2016 World Series, 3-1. New York Yankees claim 2004 American League pennant, 3-0.

You don't remember those headlines? Of course not. Nobody ran those stories because, while those three series records all existed at one point, they were not the final results. To the dismay of fans in the Bay Area, northern Ohio and the Bronx, there were more games to be played — and the opposing teams ended up the comeback victors.

While we don't have a final whistle, buzzer or out in our elections, we still need to hold tight until every vote is tabulated. Historically, because the major share of all that counting has happened on Election Day, American's have almost always known the winner of their presidential contests at some point — often very late — the night of that momentous day.

But that's unlikely to be the case next month.

To protect public health, states across the country have wisely shifted toward allowing more voters to cast ballots remotely. But mail-in ballots, while safer, take more time to transport and tally than traditional in-person voting. Election administrators in many states won't even have all the ballots to count by the end of Election Day, much less the final totals.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

So, realistically, the presidential contest won't be over the night of Nov. 3 or even the next day. To keep the sports metaphors going, this series is likely going the full seven games. And yet, recently, there has been a lot of concern about what happens if election results change after election night. What if a Republican lead at 11 p.m. on Nov. 3 is just a "red mirage"? What if there is a "blue shift" in the days following the election?

This is the wrong way to think about the election results. Whatever the numbers are at midnight, they won't be wrong — they will just be incomplete. The results will certainly change as the votes are counted. What matters is how we react to and report on those changes. Americans must be reminded that they will need to be patient and wait longer than usual before we can declare any winners.

Fortunately, most voters already recognize this new reality. In fact, 71 percent of Americans do not expect to know the results of the election on Election Day, and 64 percent are comfortable with that delay.

But ultimately, the public will likely take its cues from our leaders and our media. Given the president's refusal to commit to abiding by the results of the election, and the Democratic fears of another Trump administration, we may not be able to rely on the candidates or parties to act responsibly.

That shifts the onus even further toward the media. There are numerous examples throughout history of journalists jumping the gun and prematurely calling an election. There's no room for that kind of error this time. In a mostly mail-in election, traditional measurements, like percentage of precincts reporting, should be replaced with metrics like percent of ballots received. Overall, America's reporters must be cautious and circumspect in their election night coverage to stave off confusion and potential chaos.

We would all do well to remember that on Election Day, there won't be a "red mirage" or a "blue shift." There will just be an ongoing election. That contest, like our favorite sporting events, won't be over just because one "team" is leading at midnight on Nov. 3. The 2020 election will be over when all the votes are counted, whenever that might be.

Read More

Podcast: How do police feel about gun control?

Podcast: How do police feel about gun control?

Jesus "Eddie" Campa, former Chief Deputy of the El Paso County Sheriff's Department and former Chief of Police for Marshall Texas, discusses the recent school shooting in Uvalde and how loose restrictions on gun ownership complicate the lives of law enforcement on this episode of YDHTY.

Listen now

Podcast: Why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies

Podcast: Why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies

There's something natural and organic about perceiving that the people in power are out to advance their own interests. It's in part because it’s often true. Governments actually do keep secrets from the public. Politicians engage in scandals. There often is corruption at high levels. So, we don't want citizens in a democracy to be too trusting of their politicians. It's healthy to be skeptical of the state and its real abuses and tendencies towards secrecy. The danger is when this distrust gets redirected, not toward the state, but targets innocent people who are not actually responsible for people's problems.

On this episode of "Democracy Paradox" Scott Radnitz explains why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies.

Your Take:  The Price of Freedom

Your Take: The Price of Freedom

Our question about the price of freedom received a light response. We asked:

What price have you, your friends or your family paid for the freedom we enjoy? And what price would you willingly pay?

It was a question born out of the horror of images from Ukraine. We hope that the news about the Jan. 6 commission and Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Supreme Court nomination was so riveting that this question was overlooked. We considered another possibility that the images were so traumatic, that our readers didn’t want to consider the question for themselves. We saw the price Ukrainians paid.

One response came from a veteran who noted that being willing to pay the ultimate price for one’s country and surviving was a gift that was repaid over and over throughout his life. “I know exactly what it is like to accept that you are a dead man,” he said. What most closely mirrored my own experience was a respondent who noted her lack of payment in blood, sweat or tears, yet chose to volunteer in helping others exercise their freedom.

Personally, my price includes service to our nation, too. The price I paid was the loss of my former life, which included a husband, a home and a seemingly secure job to enter the political fray with a message of partisan healing and hope for the future. This work isn’t risking my life, but it’s the price I’ve paid.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Given the earnest question we asked, and the meager responses, I am also left wondering if we think at all about the price of freedom? Or have we all become so entitled to our freedom that we fail to defend freedom for others? Or was the question poorly timed?

I read another respondent’s words as an indicator of his pacifism. And another veteran who simply stated his years of service. And that was it. Four responses to a question that lives in my heart every day. We look forward to hearing Your Take on other topics. Feel free to share questions to which you’d like to respond.

Keep ReadingShow less
No, autocracies don't make economies great

libre de droit/Getty Images

No, autocracies don't make economies great

Tom G. Palmer has been involved in the advance of democratic free-market policies and reforms around the globe for more than three decades. He is executive vice president for international programs at Atlas Network and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.

One argument frequently advanced for abandoning the messy business of democratic deliberation is that all those checks and balances, hearings and debates, judicial review and individual rights get in the way of development. What’s needed is action, not more empty debate or selfish individualism!

In the words of European autocrat Viktor Orbán, “No policy-specific debates are needed now, the alternatives in front of us are obvious…[W]e need to understand that for rebuilding the economy it is not theories that are needed but rather thirty robust lads who start working to implement what we all know needs to be done.” See! Just thirty robust lads and one far-sighted overseer and you’re on the way to a great economy!

Keep ReadingShow less
Podcast: A right-wing perspective on Jan. 6th and the 2020 election

Podcast: A right-wing perspective on Jan. 6th and the 2020 election

Peter Wood is an anthropologist and president of the National Association of Scholars. He believes—like many Americans on the right—that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump and the January 6th riots were incited by the left in collusion with the FBI. He’s also the author of a new book called Wrath: America Enraged, which wrestles with our politics of anger and counsels conservatives on how to respond to perceived aggression.

Where does America go from here? In this episode, Peter joins Ciaran O’Connor for a frank conversation about the role of anger in our politics as well as the nature of truth, trust, and conspiracy theories.

Keep ReadingShow less