Posts by Andrew Geddis
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Elizabeth Warren just called the winner of the Massachusetts senate race.
-
Hard News: The Big 2012 US Election PAS Thread, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
Everyone should be voting on the same basis with the same information.
Which is why Canada has a law prohibiting the announcement of any election results until the polls close in British Columbia. Couldn't do it in the USA, but. That pesky 1st Amendment (as interpreted and applied by the Supreme Court, of course).
Plus, you have the Hawaii problem. Do you try and keep a lid on results until it closes its polls?
-
Hard News: The Big 2012 US Election PAS Thread, in reply to Steve Barnes,
Looking at the results map I have noticed that those called for Romney tend to be the larger States whereas those called for Obama are smaller ones.
Purely coincidental. Note that these calls are being made without any votes (or, only a small proportion) of votes being counted at all ... it's being done on exit poll information. It just so happens the states with data showing a certain Romney win are in the South/mid-West (which happen to be large geographically), while those for Obama are in the Northeast (which happen to be small).
Watch what happens when the polls close in California - the biggest state in the nation. It'll immediately get called for Obama.
-
Hard News: The Big 2012 US Election PAS Thread, in reply to Miche Campbell,
I’m beginning to wonder what’s going on with that map. They’ve coloured Oklahoma for Romney and given him the Electoral Votes, but they’re at 0% reported.
It's done on exit polling - the data from talking to people who've actually voted (as opposed to asking people how they plan to vote) is so overwhelmingly in favour of a candidate that you can predict the result without even counting a vote.
Note it is illegal to conduct such polls in NZ ... which means we don't know for sure how things will turn out until we see how they turn out.
-
Hard News: The Big 2012 US Election PAS Thread, in reply to Russell Brown,
I cannot understand how the “World’s Greatest Democracy” can be so bad at the basic provision of voting.
To understand this, you have to understand how incredibly decentralised the process is. You are dealing with 50 different states, each of which can (by-and-large) make their own rules around how the vote will be held. Then, within those states, the actual mechanics of holding the vote is devolved down to the very local level, so that responsibility for setting up polling places/staffing them/running the process lies with a local election board (often consisting of members of a particular party). This, quite obviously, can create wide discrepancies in the basic competence of those involved.
Why do this? Well, if running an election were centralised under a single agency (like it is here in NZ), someone would get control of that agency and manipulate it to get themselves (or their guys) elected. (This is not a fear, it is treated as being a given.) So, it is thought better to have lots and lots of local folks doing an often incompetent job than one big agency competently screwing the process in someone's favour.
-
Hard News: The Big 2012 US Election PAS Thread, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Craig,
Not sure you can say Brown has "bungled" Massachusetts - it's more that he performed well against a poor candidate in the 2010 special election, while this time around the State has returned to form in favouring the Democratic candidate (who happens to be a very strong one). It's worth remembering that prior to Brown's victory, Massachusetts hadn't elected a Republican to the Senate since 1979!
As for other Senate races to watch, Salon has a list of them here: http://www.salon.com/2012/11/06/ten_senate_races_too_close_to_call/
-
Checking in from Arizona, where the result of the Presidential vote is not in doubt - there's not quite enough Hispanic votes yet to turn the State into New Mexico ... but wait until 2016! - but the Senate race is still considered a bit of a toss up. Which is where the real suspense will be today, I suspect - will the Republicans keep/pick up enough seats to get parity (or even control) there?
Probably not ... but it might help to keep things interesting, if Nate Silver's predictions are right. (Or, rather, if the more highly probably outcome that Nate Silver points to eventuates.)
-
"Although Mr Key was not allowed to make eye contact with the stars, his new press secretary Solomon Weintraub (R-Cali) said the meetings ..."
Hang on ... a REPUBLICAN congressman is acting for Hollywood interests? I thought satire was meant to maintain some connection with reality in order to be effective!
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom vs. The Teapot Tapes, in reply to Sacha,
Sacha,
A quick google of "solicitor general prosecution guidelines New Zealand" should work. As for case examples? Well, there is the Tea Pot Tapes decision ... .
-
@Joe Wylie: "Remember how Harry Duynhoven was briefly outed as a Dutch double agent, despite being NZ born? I think it took a bit of quick retrospective legislation to avoid a by-election and allow MPs to hold dual citizenship."
MPs were allowed to hold dual citizenship ... provided they held it when they got elected. Duynhoven's problem arose when he tried to (re)claim his Dutch citizenship whilst an MP. The retrospective legislation said that MPs could do this without vacating their seats - a legal rule then made permanent.
@Deep Red: "And. of course, United Future’s Kelly Chal, who spent a grand total of 17 days as an MP ... . "
Chal never was an MP - she resigned after the election but before the Chief Electoral Officer made the official declaration of list MPs. Had she not resigned before that declaration and it subsequently was found out that she wasn't a citizen, it is arguable that there would have been no legal way to oust her from the House! Fun and games then certainly would have commenced ... .