Relevant because at the time of posting to statewide senate racebis separated by less than 100 votes.

  • Flames5123@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 hours ago

    You also can’t make a citizen lead constitutional amendment vote in Mississippi anymore.

    When I lived there, MS when from 5 districts to 4 districts in 2000. The state constitution says to get equal signatures from all 5 districts (12% total of the total vote in the last gubernatorial election). Voter ID and gay marriage restrictions were among the ones that passed.

    Then come an amendment in 2020 to legalize medical marijuana for anything a doctor says is allowed. This passed with 70% of the popular vote. They also got signatures of 25% in all the new districts and 20% in the old districts (with much room for error). This was challeneged by the richest county mayor in MS, and the state Supreme Court sided with the mayor saying that “oh yea, you can’t get this because we no longer have 5 districts” rather than going with the heart of the law.

    Did they immediately repeal the voter ID one? Hell no. They even said they’d pass one legislatively if it was challenged. It’s been 6 years. Do you think they have gotten a new constitutional amendment process on the books? Hell no! MS government hates its citizens with a passion, mostly because it’s 30% African American.

    I’m so glad I left in 2022.

  • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    11 hours ago

    This is a crazy standard process. Miscounts happen, small variances are expected, and most elections aren’t so close. That’s why so many states have recounts at like .5 -1% mandatory just to verify. They’re going to request a recount for such a close race anyway, might as well just make it the standard.

    Yet again Mississippi proving they don’t know how to operate an effective government.

  • seat6@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    105
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Currently there’s just 65 votes separating them; that’s nuts

    • Ghyste@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      83
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Where’s the “YoUr vOtE DoEsN’t cOuNt!!” crowd at?

      My house district race is separated by 63 votes. Same deal.

      • Stolas@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Where’s the “YoUr vOtE DoEsN’t cOuNt!!” crowd at?

        Don’t say that too loud. I really don’t want them to show up. I already know that the “election is rigged” crowd is out there waiting and I’m not sure if I have the sanity for it.

      • MelodiousFunk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Where’s the “YoUr vOtE DoEsN’t cOuNt!!” crowd at?

        Cackling over the 20,000 votes for the spoiler candidate.

        • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Unfortunately those 20k votes likely would have gone to the democrat candidate instead had he not ran, simply on the grounds that he was registered as a democrat as recently as 2024.

        • sorghum@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          36
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Some of us like voting for the best person for the job, not a choice between a shit sandwich or a shit burger.

          • Gerblat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            13 hours ago

            That’s why I always write in the name of the person I think would do it best, even if they aren’t running 😤

            Absolute clown

            • sorghum@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              20
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Absolute clown

              Won’t vote for that shit burger either. Besides, he’s currently in the white house

              • Gerblat@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 hours ago

                Ok, but if you had to choose between:

                Trump again, or someone from his inner circle,

                a Democrat that isn’t ideal but that is at least saying they want to undo the damage he’s caused and try to remove him, or will at least work with the more progressive Democrats that will,

                or a pie-in-the-sky candidate that, while perfect for you, has essentially zero net-appeal to most people, and doesn’t actually have a chance in hell to win?

                Because I’ll tell you, in the end there are really only two options there, and only one of them is actually against Trump

                • sorghum@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  19
                  ·
                  11 hours ago

                  I wouldn’t vote and instead shift my focus to reducing the power that the pile of shit elected would have.

                  I think that’s why all the tribalists are so afraid of ranked choice voting

      • Sundray@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Where’s the “YoUr vOtE DoEsN’t cOuNt!!” crowd at?

        Since violence didn’t win a single seat this year, presumably in shambles.

    • BassTurd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Last election in Iowa Mariannette Miller-Meeks won her district by 6 votes to get Republicans a house seat.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    14 hours ago

    just to be clear they have specific rules in state law that allow challenging the election in court if they want to.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Seems like that “no recounts” rule is probably gonna be challenged up to the Supreme Court (of the US, not MS), regardless of who technically wins the election

      • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        The same way any case gets to them. The loser sues and the civil case gets appealed repeatedly.

        • zoloftt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          14 hours ago

          I guess anything can get to the supreme court that way. The supreme court has been rejecting all election cases though

          • xtr0n@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Bush v Gore was a notable and shameful exception. They are ignoring Trump’s recent temper tantrum filings because he’s asking for way too much for even the crazy corrupt Alito and Thomas to abide. But don’t kid yourself, they will forsake what few principles they have in a heartbeat if it suits them.

    • GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Didn’t that happen once already and it was decided that there wasn’t enough time in the 2 months between the election and the candidate taking power without leaving the citizenry in uncertainty over who was elected?

    • Cort@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Adding to the others: it’s also ranked choice, so they have to wait for all the ballots to come in before they start redistributing losing votes

      • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        11 hours ago

        This is more the reason than anything else. Ranked choice requires working in stages. You have to finish the first count before you can then shift votes from candidates that didn’t meet the minimums.

    • Pistachio@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Their polls closed the later than the rest (except HI), its a massive state, and the infrastructure isn’t the best. So it takes time. Also its a close race, so they want to be right when they call it.

    • its_kim_love@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Lots of mail in ballots plus a close election. Usually by the time you get to this point the election is decided before they even have to count the letter ballots.

    • 13igtyme@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Since both the senator and governor are under the majority, it goes to the special ranked choice vote. I’m not sure the process, but I imagine it takes time.

    • just2look@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      It is a very close race, and logistically difficult to collect and get all the votes counted considering how large and rugged much of the state is.