Pennsylvaniva Primary Thread

The wait is almost over for Pennsylvania's Democratic presidential primary Tuesday, but voters may have to wait a little longer to find out who won the most delegates to the party's national convention. As in other Democratic contests, Pennsylvania awards delegates based on the statewide vote and the vote in individual congressional districts.

Unlike most states, Pennsylvania has a large number of counties split into multiple congressional districts. That could delay results by a day or more as election officials work to assign votes to the appropriate districts.

On Tuesday night, you will be told who the winner of the Pennsylvania Primary is. You will accept it. You will have no choice. No matter who the winner really is. Or isn't.

This Tuesday's crucial contest will be primarily run on 100% faith-based, Direct Recording Electronic (DRE, usually touch-screen or push-button) e-voting machines across the state. There will be no way to determine after the election whether the computers have accurately recorded, or not, the intent of those voters who voted on them. As VerifiedVoting.org summarizes the crucial contest, it "will be essentially unrecountable, unverifiable, and unauditable."

Most of the votes, more than 85%, will be cast on such DRE systems which do not provide so-called "Voter Verified Paper Audit Trails" (VVPATs), as their use has been found unconstitutional in the state, since its been determined, accurately, that ballot secrecy cannot be guaranteed when using such paper trail systems. Not that it matters.

With or without a so-called "paper trail" printer, all touch-screen/push-button/DRE voting machines are equally unverifiable and antithetical to American democracy. Period.

FearTheReaper said:
It's going to be fucking retarded.

Clinton will win by 8-10%

And it's one of those "no paper" voting machine states.

So, expect a lot of "stolen election" stuff.

FearTheReaper said:
It's going to be fucking retarded.

Clinton will win by 8-10%

And it's one of those "no paper" voting machine states.

So, expect a lot of "stolen election" stuff.

FearTheReaper said:
McCain will win the Democratic nomination by 8-10%

And it's one of those "no paper" voting machine states.

coyotemike said:
I predict that by the end of the day, we will be no closer to having a candidate than we were yesterday; that the analysts will be at each other's throats for about a week; that each side will call for the other to give up; and on SG, at least 2, possibly 3 trolls will throw their unsolicited, uneducated, and completely wrong opinions into the mix to try and start trouble.

Oh, and at least one person (outside of this prediction) will mention Ron Paul.

Cash said:

Hey...did I mention....RON PAUL!!!!!

coyotemike said:
Voting on Earth Day, which is better: paperless voting that uses electricity, which wastes coal and produces pollution, or paper ballots, which kills trees and creates waste.

YOU DECIDE!!!

emotedcreations said:

I'm guessing more energy actually goes into cutting down trees, making paper, and shipping then it does to run the paperless voting booths. My only problem is what's the fail-safe? Is it downloaded to a hard drive that can be accessed if the things breakdown? Or is the information lost?

NicoleLee said:
I wish that our primaries were earlier in the "voting season," but at least we know that all this hubbub will be OVER soon and we can get on track with one candidate for each party.
But who am I to complain, this is the first time I'm voting EVER.

bald_eagle said:
The over/under is Clinton by 8%.

Eight or more, she's still (barely) in the race.

Less than eight, and she'll get a lot of pressure to quit.

NicoleLee said:
But who am I to complain, this is the first time I'm voting EVER.

FearTheReaper said:
This Tuesday's crucial contest will be primarily run on 100% faith-based, Direct Recording Electronic (DRE, usually touch-screen or push-button) e-voting machines across the state. There will be no way to determine after the election whether the computers have accurately recorded, or not, the intent of those voters who voted on them. As VerifiedVoting.org summarizes the crucial contest, it "will be essentially unrecountable, unverifiable, and unauditable."

commonman said:
As for Hillary, she will win no matter what really happens. Examples:

(1) Hillary actually wins Pennsylvania by a large margin: "We have shown that we are the only campaign that can win in the large states that will decide the election. Obama should quit now to save the party."

(2) Hillary barely wins Pennsylvania: "We have shown that, even though Obama outspent us, we can still win in the large states that will decide the election. Obama should quit now to save the party."

(3) Hillary loses Pennsylvania: "We have shown that, even though we were outspent 2 to 1 by the Obama campaign, we are the only campaign that can win the important voting blocks that will be decisive against McCain in November. Obama should quit now to save the party."

The Clintons are arrogant spinmeisters. They will drag this out long after it should have ended just to stroke their own egos. And McCain will laugh all the way to November and perhaps beyond.

emotedcreations said:

What's the difference between two and three? It's not a big deal, they just seem like the same thing to me.

Subrosa said:

Nice! Let's make it a habit now, shall we?

I, for one, am fucking tired of Pennsylvania. No offense to Pennsylvanians. But Jesus, this felt like the most excruciating month and a half ever.

commonman said:
Two is for when they actually win when the odds are against them (i.e. we can win against all that republican money) while three is a bullshit rationale to convince people that, though they lost, they really won, because old people and women voted for Clinton in higher numbers than for Obama, and old people and women will vote for McCain instead of Obama in November (Because he's young? Because he's black? They never really say).