Users' election-related queries, addressed
CNN received numerous questions following their inquiry about the confusing aspects of the current system and what to anticipate in the upcoming weeks. Although some of these queries appeared as angry criticisms of the presidential candidates, others presented constructive and intriguing perspectives. These queries spanned a wide array of topics, from Electoral College intricacies to specific explanations for why ballots in certain areas exhibit peculiar appearances.
I have taken the liberty of editing and condensing some of these queries for style and brevity. I have incorporated initials and state of residence based on the provided submissions. If your question was not addressed in this round, please stay tuned or pose a new query. We will continue to provide answers to new queries on a weekly basis until the election, as well as distribute them to our What Matters newsletter subscribers.
Depending on the number of mail-in ballots cast in some states and the tightness of the race, the process may take an extended period. CNN did not project President Joe Biden's 2020 election win until four days after Election Day, and if the election is close in one or more pivotal states, it could last even longer. In 2000, for example, the disputed Florida results persisted for 36 days until the Supreme Court intervened, halting a recount.
In contrast, the 2016 election saw a relatively close result in several essential states, and Hillary Clinton conceded the day after Election Day. Trump is unlikely to ever concede, whereas Vice President Kamala Harris has emphasized the significance of a peaceful transition of power.
The 2000 situation, when Republican and eventual winner George W. Bush maintained an advantage after the initial count, raises an important point. If Trump loses, we should anticipate that he will challenge the results, as he has claimed voter fraud in every election he has participated in. In the event of a close result in which Harris trails, Democrats may also pursue legal avenues.
Rules regarding when and how a recount can be initiated or requested vary by state. In 2020, according to a new law, states have until December 11 to assemble a winner and ensure their electoral votes are counted.
When I posed these concerns to CNN's election analytics director, Jennifer Agiesta, she highlighted the improvements made by two states from 2020 to expedite the counting process.
In Georgia, changes to pre-election voting laws have led to an increase in early in-person voting, which means fewer mail-in ballots and a speedier counting process.
In North Carolina, mail-in ballots are no longer accepted after Election Day, providing clarity regarding any remaining ballots. Additionally, fewer people are expected to vote by mail, which should expedite the process.
However, Pennsylvania's lack of assistance in preparing mail-in ballots before Election Day will likely prolong the count.
It is unlawful for noncitizens to participate in this election. This prohibition was enacted by Congress in 1996. If a noncitizen does vote, they will have broken the law and may face deportation. Despite Trump's long-standing claims of widespread noncitizen voting, there is no concrete evidence to support this assertion.
All states, except for North Dakota, mandate voter registration. Each vote is connected to a registration, and states regularly purge their voter rolls of any errors. There have been a few instances of noncitizens inadvertently registering to vote, but these occurrences are rare and result in their prompt removal from the rolls.
The conservative Heritage Foundation has recorded 25 instances of noncitizen voting prosecutions over the past 20 years. Critics argue that Trump's persistence in promoting the notion of noncitizen voting is a scare tactic.
California, Maryland, Vermont, and Washington, D.C., are among the exceptions, allowing noncitizens to participate in certain local elections. However, no noncitizen may vote for the presidency.
RELATED: A look at the data on noncitizens actually voting in US elections
To address Sheila's query, I contacted Nicole Unzicker, director of the Board of Elections in Butler County. She revealed that the in-person voting system used in her county, the Dominion system, features large, lengthy text for the first ballot question. As a result, in-person voters must scroll to view all of the presidential candidates.
However, Unzicker assured me that historically, the order of candidates has always been alphabetical, with the position being rotated between the county's 300 precincts to ensure an equal distribution of candidates on the scroll for both Harris and Trump.
When it comes to lengthy and large-print ballot initiatives, the scroll becomes an issue, according to Unzicker. Her office has resolved this by providing voters with a video explanation while in line and placing instructions at each voting station.
It is essential to remember that ballots differ within states and even counties based on the offices up for election. For more information on your state, consult CNN's Voter Handbook.
There were numerous questions about the Electoral College, which is likely to frustrate both sides of the political spectrum. The Electoral College system ensures that Trump will receive more votes in California than in Texas, while Harris will garner more votes in Texas than in New York.
To alter the U.S. Constitution and abolish the Electoral College, you'd need to surmount a demanding two-phase process.
Initially, an amendment can materialize due to a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and the Senate, or by obtaining approval from two-thirds of the states through a request for a constitutional convention.
Following the proposal, the amendment must be ratified by either three-quarters of the state legislatures or by conventions in each state.
This endeavor is so challenging that the latest amendment, the 27th, was ratified 32 years ago. Its focus was on congressional compensation. The 26th Amendment, which lowered the voting age to 18, was ratified over half a century ago in 1971.
Historically, numerous attempts have been made to remove the Electoral College in U.S. history, with one of the most recent occurring in 1969, when a bill was passed in the House with overwhelming support but was stalled in the Senate due to a filibuster.
States have also altered the system by choosing their electors based on the popular vote in their respective states instead of as a collective group that can vote freely.
There's an ongoing initiative to disregard the Electoral College altogether and back the popular vote winner. Multiple states have signed on to a National Popular Vote compact, which would grant their electoral votes to the national popular vote winner once states representing a majority of electoral votes join the compact. At present, they're around 61 electoral votes short.
While I won't advocate for the Electoral College here, it's important to mention that your vote appears insignificant only because of a dominant majority in your state. States evolve.
Remember when Florida was a crucial swing state? It wasn't too long ago.
Remember when Ohio was a significant swing state? Both are now largely Republican-leaning.
Democrats have long coveted transforming Texas and North Carolina into Democratic strongholds. Although two of the past six elections saw a Republican candidate obtain fewer votes but win the presidency, there's a considerable debate this year that Trump could win the popular vote and still lose the Electoral College.
This scenario would make for an intriguing twist in his conspiracy theories.
None of this is intended to endorse the Electoral College or advocate for using a system rooted in a bygone era in contemporary America. However, it's undeniable that politics continually evolves.
Instead of employing the derogatory term "uneducated," we should acknowledge the obvious divide in this country between voters based on their educational attainment. Those with college degrees may be more inclined to support Harris. In contrast, those without college degrees may lean towards Trump.
Recently, I wrote about Democratic strategist Doug Sosnik's contention that educational level is the most reliable predictor of a person's voting behavior. We'll have to observe if this theory holds true in the upcoming election.
A recent report by the Lumina Foundation revealed that around 14% of Americans hold a graduate or professional degree, with 23% having attained a bachelor's degree. Only 9% have an associate degree, while 8% have earned some sort of post-high school certification.
As a side note, Congress members are limited to two terms due to the Supreme Court.
In 1995, the Supreme Court ruled that imposing term limits on Congress members would necessitate a constitutional amendment. Consequently, states were barred from implementing their own term limits for their Congress members.
There have been discussions about lawmakers reforming the Supreme Court and imposing term limits on justices, but this idea is still in its infancy and lacks substantial support.
When Congress attempted to propose a term limits amendment for Congress members during a Republican-led majority in the mid-'90s, it consistently failed.
There are various viewpoints on this matter, either from a popular vote or an Electoral College perspective.
In the Electoral College, the closest election in recent memory was in 2000, when Bush secured 271 electoral votes, with a single vote more than required to clinch the White House. Gore garnered over 500,000 more votes in total. The narrowest possible margin in Florida, 537 votes, essentially decided the election. However, Bush also achieved a narrow victory in New Hampshire. Every vote counts!
The 1876 election pitting eventual-winner Rutherford B. Hayes against Samuel Tilden was decided by a single electoral vote, but only afterwards, after the electoral votes of three states were contested. Eventually, the commission assigned them to Hayes, despite Tilden accumulating more popular votes.
Tight popular vote margins include the 1960 election, with Kennedy defeating Nixon by approximately 119,000 votes, and the 1880 election, where Garfield triumphed over Gen. Hancock with fewer than 2,000 more popular votes. However, neither of these contests was particularly close in the Electoral College.
I won't include the 1800 election, although it resulted in a tie in the Electoral College. In those early American elections, many state legislatures selected electors, so it's challenging to determine who garnered more popular votes. Additionally, the tie occurred between vice-presidential candidates, as they did not collaborate effectively in the Electoral College.
According to CNN's report, the allegations that special counsel Jack Smith levied against Trump and his campaign following their 2020 loss are still relevant for the 2024 elections. These claims include the unsubstantiated assertion of numerous undocumented immigrants casting ballots, a notion without any concrete proof. Furthermore, they're filing numerous pre-election lawsuits, laying the groundwork to file lawsuits challenging the results if they don't favor Trump. Explore more about the Republicans' challenges to mail-in voting here.
On the other hand, Trump supporters have a distinct perspective regarding strategy. Although the overall sentiment towards the economy has improved, it remains relatively dismal. As per a recent Gallup poll, over half of the country, approximately 52%, expressed feelings of being worse off than they were four years ago.
It might not be politically astute for a candidate to tell individuals grappling with financial hardships that they're mistaken about their sentiments. Harris, for instance, does acknowledge improvements in inflation trends, but she also seeks to engage with the American public struggling with rising food prices, unable to afford homes, and feeling that more effort is required in various sectors.
The upcoming political landscape is filled with anticipation, as the confusing aspects of the current election system continue to be scrutinized. CNN's audience is eager to know how these issues might impact the upcoming weeks, particularly in relation to mail-in ballots and the potential for a drawn-out election process (if necessary).
Regardless of the results, it's expected that political tensions may remain high, with both Trump and Democrats potentially challenging the election results if they perceive voter fraud or misconduct. In fact, Trump has made claims of voter fraud in every election he has participated in, and the 2000 situation serves as a salient reminder of this possibility.
