One week later, almost 2 million California primary ballots still must be reviewed

[newthinking]

Source: Los Angelos Times


(Jeff Chiu / Associated Press)

Elections officials across California continue to work through a stack of unprocessed ballots, now totaling more than 1.9 million potential votes in last week's local and statewide races.

About 60% of the unprocessed ballots are in just a half dozen counties. By law, local officials have another three weeks to count votes, a process slowed down in part by the large number of ballots cast by mail.

This is also the first year for a new state law allowing any ballot received 72 hours after election day to be counted, as long as it was postmarked in time.

The latest results haven't changed any of the statewide races. In the closely watched Democratic presidential primary, Hillary Clinton's lead over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders stands at more than 11 percentage points. That's largely the same gap that existed between Clinton and Sanders on election night.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-essential-politics-one-week-later-almost-2-million-1465952696-htmlstory.html

---

http://www.opednews.com/articles/NEWS-FLASH--With-5-Milli-by-Dave-Lindorff-Bernie-Sanders-2016-Presidential-Candidate_Primary-Campaigns_Vote-Suppression_Vote-Theft-160612-972.html

The Los Angeles Times, actually a Hillary Clinton backer, reports that not 3.6 million votes, as reported on election night, but 8 million votes were actually cast in the California Democratic primary -- a turnout of 47%. According to the Times article, the Secretary of State of California, Alex Padilla, concedes that 2.5 million of those votes, mostly mail-in ballots from young people and hispanic voters, both backers of Sanders, have been counted, and another 2 million have yet to be counted by local county officials.

But Padilla has also not reported on what the results were of those other 2.5 million votes that have already been counted thus far since election day. (This even though his office did report the count of early mail-in votes on election day before people had even finished voting.)

All the votes are legitimate and need to be counted. As long as a ballot was received by the end of the day Friday, and were postmarked by election day, they are valid.

The Times said that people should prepare to see the vote totals of not just the presidential race, but also down-ticket races, change dramatically.

[MrMickeysMom]

1. I made sure to read that LA Times article carefully...

You'd almost think that the counting thus far hasn't changed the outcome of Clinton's 11% lead. But, that's not correct. We don't know what the outcome of the complete count is. I'd like to know the real voter turning, as well. Thus far, it looks like it wasn't even 50%

Count them all, I say.

Thanks for the article, new thinking.

On edit: You know, according to the 16th of this month, by rule, I won't have free will to say what I want about the DNC and MSM role in NEVER getting full disclosure of public discourse.

That is pathetic.

[newthinking]

2. They have counted about half but they have not reported them. So there are ~5 Million unreported

[Igel]

25. But we're told that at least for one jurisdiction

where they've counted a bunch, the percentage by which HRC won is "largely" the same.

As for not reporting them, I don't blame them. The early, unofficial results are there for the curious and are assembled the night of the election anyway. Fine.

The times I've seen numbers reported as the in-house totals change have always been disasters. They add a few here, a few there, and it creates suspicion. Somebody adds in numbers, somebody else adds in the same numbers and they correct the mistake--these are still all unofficial numbers, mind you--and it creates more suspicion plus some outrage. Or even worse, they do a human boo-boo and get the numbers backwards, then fix them. "They stole my candidate's votes!"

Meh.

[newthinking]

29. That is the point. It should not be called until the majority of votes are counted

The point is not who won.

[cstanleytech]

3. Nonsense, your free to speak your opinion you just cant advocate and or show support for

someone silly like a Republican or a 3rd party Ralph Nader-ish candidate which could risk throwing the election in favor to the Republican nor advocate people write in a name for another candidate when a Democrat is running for the office and considering you have been a member since 2004 you should know that by now since its not exactly a new rule.

[MrMickeysMom]

4. Thank you for caring...

Of course, you're (yes, that's how it's spelled) free to tell me what I should know by now, thus showing how important these tasks are in YOUR life.

[cstanleytech]

5. Sigh, whatever Mickey, hopefully you will come out of the sulk you are clearly looking forward to

engaging in until then good luck.

[jtuck004]

13. "pathetic." Just FYI - that only removes any interference this place might have brought to your

thinking. Keeps you from wasting time preaching to the choir...but you can still talk about in your sphere of acquaintances, family, and friends, where you are likely to have a lot more influence.

That's likely to help what you are interested in, more so than anything others are doing. Sometimes you just outgrow things.

[L. Coyote]

18. Pacific time here, 11:33 and still have to hold my tongue.

[LiberalFighter]

6. How many of them are Republican ballots or other ballots not Democratic?

[newthinking]

7. Good question: We don't know.

[Hekate]

9. We won't know till they're counted. It's NOT all about Bernie.

[justhanginon]

19. Au contraire. Everything is always about "Bernie".

Just ask him or many of his supporters.

[cstanleytech]

20. How about we stop the jabbing guys and girls?

We could be potentially looking at a situation where Congress is still controlled by the Republicans after the election in which case whichever one be it Bernie or be it Clinton that gets the Democratic nomination and wins and becomes President (hopefully one of them does because otherwise we are screwed if Trump wins) will need our full support.
I mean I get it, you are all frustrated by some of the supporters for the two candidates who have been bashing each other and taking jabs at the candidates and then threatening to take their ball and go home if the candidate they want to win doesn't win (I know from experience since I have served on multiple juries and ended up voting to hide posts on the DU including both the Bernie and Clinton groups) but it doesn't help build any bridges rather it just helps tear them down and it helps the Republicans.
So how about we all take a step back and get our eyes back on the the real problem of making sure Trump does not win the office by supporting whichever Democrat wins the nomination and that we take back Congress and our government back from the Republicans, ok?

[Just reading posts]

15. Good question.

[Night Watchman]

8. Ugh!

[86derps]

10. Observer

I was an observer of the vote counts today for provisional ballots and others which I wont get into as it is complicated. However, in my vote count for a democratic area of California the vote count was as follows:

Democrat - 41
Republican - 6
Peace and Freedom - 1

Partial Votes

Democrat - 5
American Independent - 1

[Jopin Klobe]

11. Isn't it just freaking amazing ...

... that this Democratic Republic cannot guarantee the sanctity of the American vote? ...

... that we know this now and we've known this for multiple decades? ...

... and that the minorities of opinion on 'both sides' (a correct variable, this time) are promoted by masses compelled by fear instilled by taxpayer supported media airwaves controlled by a very, very small group of neo-CRAPitalists? ...

... anyone wanna invest in Torch & Pitchfork Futures? ...

[elljay]

14. Your average first grade class

Could have a more efficient and fair election by dropping white or red marbles in a bag. This is hardly rocket science. It's obvious they just don't want to do it

[Igel]

21. Yeah, but then it would get complicated.

The kids who weren't there or who forgot their marbles.

So they vote on Tuesday, but have until Friday's dismissal bell to drop it in. And the kids who nobody recognizes or who forgot to register get provisional marbles--they're beige or pink. There are drop jars in a dozen locations, including at some fast food places to make it easier to vote.

Then there are the marbles for the two other races, red/pink or white/beige marbles with a black spot for one and a black cross for another. And the kids who say they got the wrong marbles, they wanted spots instead of plain or cross instead of spot, and they can vote but somebody will have to check to make sure they really did request the kind of marble they said.

On the other hand, the kids could have dropped off their marbles any time the week before at any school event, and those have to be pulled together and counted, as well. But they couldn't be counted early, and every classroom reported their own totals for the election on Tuesday. Followed by securing the marbles, collecting the jars, getting out awards to the volunteer jar monitors, etc., etc.

So then they have to separate out the pink and beige marbles by plain, spot, or cross, and make sure they get those counted after verifying that they should be.

It could be simple. But if anybody cries, "Unfair!" it gets a bit more complicated.

[Crash2Parties]

16. Yet we can ensure that every ATM & wire transfer txn is completed accurately & with an audit trail.

[nikto]

12. How many uncounted votes are PROVISIONAL?

I figure, 80% or more of those provisional votes are for Bernie.

[L. Coyote]

17. Some people are not adjusting well to the changes in voting, especially Republicans

because the more open the process and the more ways to vote and more time allowed to vote the worse they fair. I don't mind at all if votes are coming in days later as long as people have every possible opportunity to vote. People are flipping out though over the fact everything wasn't counted on election night.

[peace13]

30. All of the confusion is by design.

How many recounts or audits to verify machine counts have we seen this primary? The confusion is to distract from the process. How are the votes being counted?

I have observed recounts before and even that process has questions that remain. We need to get rid of the machines!

As then Ohio Secretary of State Brunner said ....our machines are easily hackable. But she did nothing to correct the situation! NOTHING!

[L. Coyote]

31. Part of the voter suppression and part of the effort to divide Dems

I got the impression the efforts was intended to sour Berners, to get new activists to go back to ignoring politics entirely.

[Darb]

23. The weird part is that they were all Bernie votes.

[RogerM]

24. Brenie still losing CA by 12 points

1 week later Bernie is still losing by 12 points. Not that it will matter but the writing has been on the wall long before CA.

[stopbush]

26. God bless Bernie!

He made the decision to go on to yesterday's DC primary, where he lost in one final, humiliating landslide.

That should drive away any hope the BSers have that the results in CA will change in his favor. Even if they did, Hillary took all but 2 of the DC delegates.

[beachbum bob]

27. 500,000 were counted since last report on 6-10-2016

with little difference made in the gap between sanders and hillary....the end result will still remain a double digit victory for hillary.....which doesn't mean a lot in terms of delegates and vote lead and why she has secured the nomination

[newthinking]

28. From the reports I saw they are not yet reporting the results of them

Do you have a link where they did?