Wouldn't it be nice if Americans' need for instant gratification got a bit of an adjustment?

[Roland99]

There really should be NO nationwide race results broadcast until polls close in Hawaii

Anyone else agree?

State/local results? Sure. But the rise of the 24-hour news channels has spoiled people and those same news channels push to claim this or that first so they can garner more ratings

[catbyte]

1. I agree. I remember the Carter/Reagan election in 1980 where they called it around 9:00 pm

that tanked things 2 hours before the polls closed out west. Hawaii and Alaska, to a lesser degree, must feel like second class citizens, even though the outcome in both states are no big surprises. But I must admit I was selfishly elated in 2008 when they announced Barack Obama the 44th President of the United States at 11:00:01 EST. I could go to bed happy and not be bleary-eyed at work the next morning.

[Wicked Blue]

2. TV created this situation

We've come to expect instant information about anything and everything. And Twitter has made it worse.

The broadcast stations race to beat each other with the latest updates and whip the viewing audience into a frenzy. To them viewership is more important than reporting responsibility.

If Joe wins and we take the House and Senate, I'd like to see some changes mandated by the FCC. And the Fairness Doctrine restored. Broadcasters must be made to realize that their broadcast licenses carry responsibilities that go beyond ratings and advertising revenue.

[Drunken Irishman]

25. You mean radio created this problem...

Because calling races early has been going on long before tv. When FDR beat Hoover, the radio programs announced his victory before polls had even closed in Hoover's home state.

Here's a good segment on it:

https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2020/09/14/radio-diary-how-americans-came-to-expect-fast-election-results

[FakeNoose]

3. It's the news media that drive this, not the voters

I'd say most of us Baby-Boomers can remember the days when election results were announced in the newspapers on the next day, and sometimes later.

[Codeine]

16. As a voter I disagree.

I don’t need information withheld for “my own good.” I want to know how the votes are breaking as they come in. It isn’t 1960, and there’s no need to pretend that it is.

[FakeNoose]

27. They can't announce the winner when they don't know

I guess it goes without saying. There's nothing worse than watching these political pundits all trying to stretch out the time because they don't have the results yet.

The worst thing they can do is call it for the wrong candidate.

I don't have a problem with going to bed not knowing who won. But I do have a problem when I'm told the wrong person is the winner. Remember what happened to Al Gore?

[Codeine]

29. They can certainly announce states.

And Al Gore did win. The problem wasn’t election night coverage.

[Codeine]

4. Why?

Withholding information just for the sake of it? Because we’re spoiled?

Not seeing the upside.

[Roland99]

7. Because it can act as a suppressant to states where polls are still open

It treats them, as someone mentioned above and with which I agree, as second-class citizens.

Calling a nationwide race for president while multiple states are still actively voting is quite a disservice

[Codeine]

9. There is no nationwide race.

They call state races as they become clear. If your state hasn’t closed then your race is still to be determined.

And only an idiot decides not to vote based on results elsewhere. You still have other races on your ticket. Anyone dumb enough to avoid voting because Florida got called an hour after their polls closed probably shouldn’t be voting anyway.

[Roland99]

14. president is a nationwide race

[Codeine]

15. No. It's 50 statewide (plus a few extra) races. nt

[Roland99]

17. nationwide position

the president isn't president over states east of the Mississippi

[Codeine]

18. And yet every race is individual and separate.

The outcome of one has no bearing on that of another.

[Roland99]

19. you're completely missing the point

wonder why

[Codeine]

26. Because your premise is inherently flawed.

You’re just wrong.

[Roland99]

28. ok, sure

[obamanut2012]

20. It isn't -- we have zero national races

The Electoral College makes it a fifty-state race, not a national one.

[Roland99]

22. national implications. Why is no one getting this?

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/it-right-report-results-polls-close

[TwilightZone]

13. That's a myth.

The presidency isn't the only race on the ticket and there's no evidence that early calls in some states affect other states. If it were true, turnout in blowouts would be much lower in western states, and that's not the case. Look at Reagan/Mondale, which was called about 30 seconds after polls closed in the east.

Besides, the presidency isn't really a nationwide race. It's a series of state and territory races. It's only called when enough states with enough electoral votes are called.

[obamanut2012]

21. not true

[Codeine]

30. Is there empirical evidence

that announcing state totals from one half of the country suppresses votes in the other?

[Roland99]

32. not on a scale of half the country but there are valid concerns that have been raised for 40 yrs

https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1048&context=ylpr


https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/it-right-report-results-polls-close

Moreover, after the knotted 2000 results, the TV networks and the Associated Press have been rightfully cautious in making Election Night projections. I am hard pressed to see why walling off the exit-poll analysts from the network news teams on Election Day has undermined journalism or anything else.

I agree with Issenberg that voters should understand how presidents interpret their mandate. But I am baffled why voters need to have that information -- on a precinct-by-precinct basis -- at 2:38 on the afternoon of Election Day. The data analysis from VoteCastr will be just as valuable to voters, political scientists and campaign professions on the morning of November 9.

And do you not recall the confusion (and partly justifying legal actions) the back and forth in FL caused in 2000?

[Codeine]

33. 2000 was straight up theft

aided and abetted by incompetence. Media calling races one way or the other is irrelevant. Should a state be called while poll are open in that state? No, obviously that impacts voters. But what some hillbillies in Arkabama decide will not, and should not, impact my vote on the West Coast.

[Baitball Blogger]

5. The only reason I want to know that my vote has been counted, is because

I assume there's less chance of someone in the county office to open the absentee ballot and swap ballots.

I just think it's odd that they aren't showing that it has been counted, when I dropped it off on the 13th. Didn't they start counting them on the 19th?

[Lars39]

6. Isn't it illegal in other countries to call a winner before the polls close?

[Codeine]

31. They're calling the winner for states

that have already closed. Enough of those results come in and the outcome is clear.

[Silent3]

8. This need for instant gratification has to stop RIGHT NOW!!! n/t

[Statistical]

10. LOL.

Nice one.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

12. .

[SKKY]

11. The need for instant gratification is why so many American me suffer...

...from pre-mature e.... Um. Never mind.

[Drunken Irishman]

23. Why Hawaii and not Alaska, whose polls close at 1am ET?

[Roland99]

24. wasn't aware they were open that late. then by all means

the following morning isn't going to change anything if that's when we all learn the results.