FRANZL ELECTION TRACKER (updated as of 7:09 pm, THURSDAY)

[Јas]

So we'll most likely see three courtcases on this... oh my *headdesk*

One wether Barnes and Electoraljew registered on time for their vote to count.

One wether it's okey to register before you get 25 post, as long as you have 25 post seven days before election

and one wether Gustaf's vote should count or not considering the strange things happening in that voting booth.

(and if the court rules in favour of Barnes vote not counting due to him not attaining 25 posts before registring as well as Gustaf's not counting there might be a fourth one, about all those who reposted their vote when their initial ones disappeared.)

My God...   

Doubtful that we'll see 3.
At any rate, the number of cases will depend upon the SoFA's certification.

I presume the disqualification of Gustaf's vote will go by without question, there doesn't seem to be any substantial legal argument to include it.

As to the other two, I think their disqualification is fairly straight-forward, we'll see what the SoFA makes of it. If he proposes to count it, then I'm perfectly willing to work with afleitch on putting forward both our arguments against Barnes's vote, presuming that it is to the convenience of the court to deal with the matters together.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

I think the SoFA was pretty clear about the fact that he intended to count Barnes vote, and if there is a tie between Lief and PiT, most likely Gustaf's vote will become disputed also.

[Јas]

I think the SoFA was pretty clear about the fact that he intended to count Barnes vote, and if there is a tie between Lief and PiT, most likely Gustaf's vote will become disputed also.

The SoFA's statement on Barnes's vote though related only to the argument over his pre-25 post registration; not to the idea that the registration was ill-timed. He may change his mind when he reads my argument. If he doesn't, well then I presume he has his reasons - which will no doubt be teased out in Court.

I don't see why Gustaf's vote would be disputed. It seems fairly clear-cut. Has anyone presented a legal argument for its inclusion?

[afleitch]

I think the SoFA was pretty clear about the fact that he intended to count Barnes vote, and if there is a tie between Lief and PiT, most likely Gustaf's vote will become disputed also.

The SoFA's statement on Barnes's vote though related only to the argument over his pre-25 post registration; not to the idea that the registration was ill-timed. He may change his mind when he reads my argument. If he doesn't, well then I presume he has his reasons - which will no doubt be teased out in Court.

I don't see why Gustaf's vote would be disputed. It seems fairly clear-cut. Has anyone presented a legal argument for its inclusion?

I would hope so. I tend agree with your interpretation of the validity of votes and if it comes down to Court hearing then I will support you. It also means that there are two arguments to be made to not count Barnes' vote.

[Fritz]

By the by, having looked at it, by virtue of the same 24th Amendment, I believe that jewishconservative's vote in the Midwestern Senate election is invalid.

He changed his registration to the Midwestern region from the Mideast after 00.00 (EST) Thursday, 11th. Therefore, his regional vote can only be taken to apply to the Mideastern election. Not sure if this has any real effect though.

Just looked up the law.

I think, if I'm right, that the Midwestern Senate race tied.

The result would now be:
Count 1

MasterJedi	6	(Gustaf, Sensei, jewishconservative, SoS, Mechaman, Vepres, MasterJedi, dead0man, electoraljew2,)
Fritz	4	(GMantis, Fritz, BRTD, Aizen)
Jas	2	(Jas, Lewis)

Count 2

MasterJedi	6
Fritz	6	(+2: Jas, Lewis)

Even if that is all true, MasterJedi still wins by virtue of having more first preferences.

[Јas]

By the by, having looked at it, by virtue of the same 24th Amendment, I believe that jewishconservative's vote in the Midwestern Senate election is invalid.

He changed his registration to the Midwestern region from the Mideast after 00.00 (EST) Thursday, 11th. Therefore, his regional vote can only be taken to apply to the Mideastern election. Not sure if this has any real effect though.

Just looked up the law.

I think, if I'm right, that the Midwestern Senate race tied.

The result would now be:
Count 1

MasterJedi	6	(Gustaf, Sensei, jewishconservative, SoS, Mechaman, Vepres, MasterJedi, dead0man, electoraljew2,)
Fritz	4	(GMantis, Fritz, BRTD, Aizen)
Jas	2	(Jas, Lewis)

Count 2

MasterJedi	6
Fritz	6	(+2: Jas, Lewis)

Even if that is all true, MasterJedi still wins by virtue of having more first preferences.

You may be right - under a strict interpretation of the the Consolidated Electoral Syatem Reform Act (Section 2, Clauses 2 & 3), MasterJedi would win by virtue of your elimination after Count 2, because he had more first preferences. No run-off would be necessary.

Similarly (if I'm correct about the votes of electoraljew2 and JewishConservative) Lief/Bacon King would win by the same reasoning.

[Franzl]

So how many disputed votes are there?

ElectoralJew, JewishConservative, Barnes....

is that it?

[Јas]

So how many disputed votes are there?

ElectoralJew, JewishConservative, Barnes....

is that it?

They're the votes I'm disputing (and I haven't studied all the votes that closely, so I can't preclude the idea that there may be others of questionable veracity).

Though I'd note I'm not disputing the validity of the vote of JewishConservative - just where it counts. I submit that it must be counted as a Mideastern ballot, not a Midwestern one.

[Franzl]

ok...so I assume....in the event that Barnes and ElectoralJew are declared invalid in the presidential race....that Lief then leads in the first count by one vote. I was always under the impression that DC United's vote would then cause a tie in the 2nd count....thereby leading to a run-off. Does the number of first preferences, in fact, determine who wins in a tie?

[Јas]

ok...so I assume....in the event that Barnes and ElectoralJew are declared invalid in the presidential race....that Lief then leads in the first count by one vote. I was always under the impression that DC United's vote would then cause a tie in the 2nd count....thereby leading to a run-off. Does the number of first preferences, in fact, determine who wins in a tie?

My reading of Section 2 of the Consolidated Eelctoral Reform Act would suggest that a run-off is not necessary.
Per the Act:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If my disputes are accurate, then the election went as follows:
Count 1
Lief 41
PiT 40
gporter 1

Nobody has a majority, therefore per clause 2 (above), gporter is eliminated.

Count 2
Lief 41
PiT 41 (+1)
gporter 0 (-1)

Again, nobody has a majority.
Per section 3, after the implemntation of section2 (in this case that's the gporter re-distribution), and no majority exists (it doesn't), then we look back to section 2.
Per section 2, as no candidate has attained a majority, we remove the candidate who received the fewest 1st preferences - in this instance PiT.

With the elimination of PiT/HW, then Lief/BK would be declared the winners. (A run-off would only be necessary is the tickets were also tied on 1st preferences.)

[HappyWarrior]

However I think both are valid considering they did register ON June 11th, the last day they could.

[Јas]

However I think both are valid considering they did register ON June 11th, the last day they could.

Out of interest, which element of my analysis do you believe is at fault?

[Hatman 🍁]

Oh dear, I have egg on my face now. I was thinking the earliest possible commencement of the election was 24 hours later than it actually was. Jas is correct in his analysis, I would like to apologize for my confusion.

[tmthforu94]

Here's where the situation get's sucky.
Let's say, all the controversial votes are counted invalid. Leif would become President, but here's my issue. More Atlasians wanted PiT to be President. That's a fact, if you look at the totals, adding all invalid booths. And both sides had several un-educated Atlasians voting for them, so that card shouldn't be played by either side.

[Franzl]

Here's where the situation get's sucky.
Let's say, all the controversial votes are counted invalid. Leif would become President, but here's my issue. More Atlasians wanted PiT to be President. That's a fact, if you look at the totals, adding all invalid booths. And both sides had several un-educated Atlasians voting for them, so that card shouldn't be played by either side.

Tough for us.

[Keystone Phil]

Here's what we'll do - I'll cast the deciding vote and end all of this (not as Attorney General but as a typical, lazy voter who forgot to vote).

[Хahar 🤔]

Way to go, guys.

FTR, I would've voted PiT, but either one is really fine with me.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They'd win George Bush style. The court deciding who actually should be president and not the people.   

If Leif somehow comes out the winner of this we should take to the streets Iran style. Barnes, electoraljew, and Gustaf could lead the procession chanting "Where's my vote? Where's my vote?" I mean if people doesn't even respect the rules of democracy on internet forums about politic, what's the world coming to?

[tmthforu94]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They'd win George Bush style. The court deciding who actually should be president and not the people.   

If Leif somehow comes out the winner of this we should take to the streets Iran style. Barnes, electoraljew, and Gustaf could lead the procession chanting "Where's my vote? Where's my vote?" I mean if people doesn't even respect the rules of democracy on internet forums about politic, what's the world coming to?

lol
Voting rules are so much more confusing on here. Like, over 5% of votes cast will be invalid. I'm sure in the 2008 election, it was a lot lower.
We must remember that this is all "Fantasy". We shouldn't get too seriously and legal about this.

[JerryBrown2010]

It's stupid actually how you can just make votes invalid, I want my vote to count! If I make one mistake on here my vote doesn't count! GOD it's like Florida in 2000!

[HappyWarrior]

Either way Gustaf's vote should be counted.  First Earl was going to count it considering Gustaf's explaination as he did for Andy's, BK's, and Marokai's, then there was like one objection to this?  How is that fair?

[Associate Justice PiT]

I think the SoFA was pretty clear about the fact that he intended to count Barnes vote, and if there is a tie between Lief and PiT, most likely Gustaf's vote will become disputed also.

The SoFA's statement on Barnes's vote though related only to the argument over his pre-25 post registration; not to the idea that the registration was ill-timed. He may change his mind when he reads my argument. If he doesn't, well then I presume he has his reasons - which will no doubt be teased out in Court.

I don't see why Gustaf's vote would be disputed. It seems fairly clear-cut. Has anyone presented a legal argument for its inclusion?

     Yes, I did as a matter of fact.

     EDIT:

     Her reasoning was that if Gustaf's story is correct, he could claim mistake of fact as a defense for having voted twice. Considering his reputation as an honest person, & that the observed facts are not inconsistent with his account of events, he should be given the benefit of the doubt that he made a legitimate error based on the information that he received suggesting that his first post did not go through.

[HappyWarrior]

However I think both are valid considering they did register ON June 11th, the last day they could.

Out of interest, which element of my analysis do you believe is at fault?

I was just going by the SOFA's statement in the voting booth.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You made your vote invalid by voting twice for no good reason. That's a big diffrence from registring, suppousebly 10 hours too late, or voting twice when your original post seems to disappear within the 20 minute margin. I don't even think anyone was arguing the fact that your vote is invalid. Too bad you did vote twice, otherwise PiT would still have ended up winning no matter what the court say.   

But yes, it's like Florida. Of course stealing elections is only wrong when conservatives do it     

 

[JerryBrown2010]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You made your vote invalid by voting twice for no good reason. That's a big diffrence from registring, suppousebly 10 hours too late, or voting twice when your original post seems to disappear within the 20 minute margin. I don't even think anyone was arguing the fact that your vote is invalid. Too bad you did vote twice, otherwise PiT would still have ended up winning no matter what the court say.   

But yes, it's like Florida. Of course stealing elections is only wrong when conservatives do it     

 

I DIDN'T KNOW! I thought it was a second vote, which you think when you hear round 2 and my first vote should count anyways because I voted! If I vote twice just ignore the second vote! It's as simple as that!