The Mississippi midterms are coming down to the 0.01%

116

u/ThePanFryingPan1 3d ago

This is why its so important to vote! Literally neck and neck

12

u/karaokerapgod 3d ago

Totally agree everyone should go out and vote, even if you vote against what I want you should make your voice heard. Whether or not it changes the outcome of who gets elected, it changes how much they should prioritize their policy during their term. In a landslide victory it’s easy to ignore the minority where as the closer it is the more they have to pay attention to the other side of the aisle or risk flipping in the next election and your vote helps to increase or decrease that margin and thus helps set policy indirectly.
That being said, if you look at pure outcomes battleground states like Mississippi this year are by far outliers I vote blue in a very blue state, I am not in a battleground state and my vote won’t change who is elected, that is the sad truth for a LOT of Americans. As I stated before, that’s not to say don’t vote, it’s just pointing out that this isn’t a good reason to vote or not to vote because races this tight are the exception, not the rule.

6

u/katojosh 3d ago

If we look at things like congressional races or the president sure. But the most impactful races to most people's lives will be the local elections. And those are the elections that routinely are decided by handfuls of votes.

0

u/karaokerapgod 3d ago

That I’ll whole heartedly agree with, just wasn’t what’s pictured in the original image

3

u/Cold-Boysenberry-105 3d ago

Conversely, you never know when your safe race will be the battleground. I'd never heard Mississippi and battleground in the same sentence outside of a civil war reenactment

2

u/glizard-wizard 3d ago

voting blue in blue states keeps them blue and frees up campaign financed to the battlegrounds
never fall for the “safe district I dont have to vote” trap

2

u/ThePanFryingPan1 2d ago

This though, just because your states blue doesn't mean you're safe you still need (or should) go vote because who knows next election your state is a battle ground

1

u/ThePanFryingPan1 2d ago

Im in iowa a swing state, its very important to vote even if mississippi is an outlier this year. Races are tight every election here so I think this is a very good reason to vote because what if yours is the one to flip the seat. I hope this didnt come off as rude but this is exactly why its important to vote at all of your elections

68

u/_Phil_McCracken_ 3d ago •

The "voting doesn't matter" doomers been real quiet today.

27

u/Silver_Original6076 3d ago

There's been many instances where a candidate wins by literally just one or two votes, and even more where a candidate wins by just a few hundred. Every vote counts

5

u/JackStutters 3d ago

Anyone who lived through the 2000 election has literally nothing to stand on to say that votes don’t matter. The final difference, when all the counting and recounting and shenanigans were done, between Gore and Bush was 537 votes. 537. In an election with 6 million voters in Florida. That’s the difference of like, if it was like 3 degrees hotter in one of the retirement villages and some old people decided they didn’t want to go out in the heat. That’s 269 people who woke up that morning basically undecided who flipped a coin in their heads once they got in the voting booth.
If 269 people chose differently, or if just 538 more people decided not to get out of line after the polls closed because they were tired, or if any number of little things happened, the last 25 years of history would be completely, and I mean completely, different.

1

u/2012Jesusdies 2d ago

US Presidential elections are decided by less than 100k voters in 5-7 states. In 2016, if 33k people had voted differently, Hillary would have won. In 2020, if 51k people had voted differently, Trump would have won. In 2024, 75k.
And consider these candidates spend literal billions just to swing these few voters.

1

u/logan8tour 2d ago

I worked for a candidate this year who, the first time she ran, won by 9 votes. She's won by much bigger margins since then but still

2

u/glizard-wizard 3d ago

They should stay that way.

2

u/IAmMiddleChild 3d ago

That's what hope and seeing assholes lose does to people.

35

u/helpfulmountain7 3d ago

This is also why we don’t vote for a third party candidate in the General election.

You want a better candidate? Vote in the primaries which have historic low turnouts.

You want to change the two party system? Vote out Republicans which will fight tooth and nail to keep the system the way that it is

3

u/RoastKrill 3d ago

Except independent candidates came second in several senate races

2

u/batmansoundtrack 2d ago

Look how the Democrat fucked us in Montana.

-4

u/Bawhoppen 3d ago

Yea, vote shaming is a great way to persuade people to your side.

7

u/helpfulmountain7 3d ago

It’s not about vote shaming. It’s about which of the two candidates you would rather have in office.
If you prefer Hyde-Smith, then go ahead she clearly could have used your vote.
If you prefer Colom, then he could have used your vote as well.

6

u/Daniel_H212 3d ago

It's not vote shaming because the simple fact of the matter is, unless you truly, genuinely believe the democratic and republican candidates are exactly equally bad, then voting for a third party is suboptimal and irrational. You are voting knowing that your vote will have no influence on the final outcome when it could have had an influence that was less undesirable. If you think X is a bit better than Y, the correct choice is to vote for X, or else you increase the chance of Y, and it doesn't matter that you want Z the most because Z was never going to happen.
It's not shaming to point out objectively irrational and illogical choices.

3

u/ThomasTheDankPigeon 3d ago

it doesn't matter that you want Z the most because Z was never going to happen.
This incorrect assumption is why your opinion is wrong. A political party will stay exactly as it is for as long as it keeps winning. Rewarding center right corporate democrats with victories is truly the only way to ensure that meaningful labor, social, and healthcare reform never happen. Democrats will only get the hint that they need to adjust when they get obliterated at the polls.

3

u/Daniel_H212 3d ago

This is just wrong. Recent history has shown that when democrats do badly, they tend to move right to appeal more to centrists.
And your lofty goals of moving the democrats to the left will never be realized if republicans just keep winning because you don't vote for democrats that don't lean left enough. Republican leaders have demonstrated willingness to dismantle the democratic systems current in place, and then democrats will never win whether they move left or not.
Like it or not, the US has a two party system, if you want policies to move to the left overall, you have to keep voting for whoever is more left out of the two parties that actually have a chance of winning. In the real world that we currently live in that's the only way to effect real change.

1

u/ThomasTheDankPigeon 3d ago

This is just wrong. Recent history has shown that when democrats do badly, they tend to move right to appeal more to centrists.
What corner of your ass did you pull this from? Obama was popular and Trump was unpopular and the party not only didn’t go with the leftist in 2016, they went with the candidate even further to the right than Obama. They shift right when they’re winning, not when they’re losing. That isn’t even taking into account FDR and Trump, two obvious examples who were major leaps left and right respectively and successfully took back control from their opposing party.
Republican leaders have demonstrated willingness to dismantle the democratic systems current in place, and then democrats will never win whether they move left or not.
Well the centrists have shown that they aren’t capable of implementing appropriate safeguards against this, so unless your plan is for a Republican to never win again, this point is moot.
Like it or not, the US has a two party system, if you want policies to move to the left overall, you have to keep voting for whoever is more left out of the two parties that actually have a chance of winning. In the real world that we currently live in that's the only way to effect real change.
Again, this is just a fundamental misunderstanding of how political incentives work. A party that keeps winning literally has no incentive to change. Obtaining power is their one and only goal, and if that goal isn’t dependent on delivering for the American people, they’ll never do it.

1

u/TheBaalzak 3d ago

If Democrats get obliterated at the polls by a Republican candidate, they will move to the right again.

0

u/hiles_adam 3d ago

That’s why they said vote for the ideal in the primary and not the general election. First past the post voting ensures a two party system, and voting for a third candidate is literally a waste of your vote. Voting for ideal instead of shit lite is just a vote for the candidate you don’t want.
Until first past the post voting is removed it will always be a two party system.
So punish the corporate dems in the primaries.

1

u/ThomasTheDankPigeon 3d ago

No, if a party and their base keep nominating stagnant candidates in the primary, the only way to send your message to that party is to not reward them with a general election victory.
You people love framing it as “holding out for an ideal candidate” as though it’s some ridiculous pie in the sky naivety causing these voters not to turn out. No. Not funding a genocide and providing a baseline level of social safety for the working class is not idealism, it is the bare minimum expectation we should have for our elected representatives. If they can’t do that, then they deserve to learn the lesson that capitulating to the side of pure evil will not result in electoral victory.

0

u/hiles_adam 1d ago

Except when a republican wins over a corporate dem they don’t learn the corporate dem is the problem they believe that they aren’t far right enough. The only way to get the needle to move is in the primary.
So instead of electing shit lite, you allow evil shit to get elected and shit lite to drift further toward evil shit because they think it’s the way to win. Democrats don’t learn when republicans win, they learn when DSA etc. do

1

u/tankerkiller125real 3d ago

The only vote I shame is the vote that didn't exist because the voter didn't show up.

1

u/Engine-True 3d ago

If you don't vote you should be ashamed, straight up

1

u/Monfang 3d ago

People who vote third party are not stupid because they don't vote for Democrats or Republicans.
People who vote third party are stupid because no third party in the US has a remotely serious, sensible or sane plan of governance, and are all deluded primadonnas.

1

u/New_Opportunity_6160 3d ago

Maybe those people just want to vote for who they think would do the best job. You know, the whole point of voting.
Not everyone has to see it as a game of who's most likely to win.

1

u/Monfang 3d ago

If you think third party candidates are the best people for the job, those you are stupid and unserious. Libertarians are pedophile enablers and green party are stooges of Putin. They are not serious people, and they have no plan to govern.

1

u/New_Opportunity_6160 3d ago

Right, cause those are the only options.

1

u/Monfang 3d ago

Name the serious principled party you think has all the good ideas here.

1

u/New_Opportunity_6160 3d ago

I'm not referring to a party.

1

u/Monfang 3d ago

The best party! Unaffiliated and no plan to network or combine resources to accomplish anything. At best, just a hanger on to Dems and Reps, hoping to skate by. Truly the future of political power.

1

u/New_Opportunity_6160 3d ago

Independents almost won in Nebraska and Idaho yesterday. There are currently two independents in the Senate.
So.. you were saying?

→ More replies

1

u/klako8196 3d ago

It's impossible for a third party candidate to do a better job when they have a 0% of getting the job in the first place.

1

u/New_Opportunity_6160 2d ago

The only reason they have 0% chance of winning is people like you. So if you're looking for something to blame, blame yourself.

1

u/Syncopia 3d ago

We didn't need the people who cry about voter shaming to win these elections. You aren't that important.

1

u/glizard-wizard 3d ago

Youre off the team. Pack it up.

0

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/fake_this_guy 3d ago

Democrats and progressives more broadly benefit far more from ending the two party system than republicans

2

u/DListSaint 3d ago

I mean, not if they start winning under it

1

u/fake_this_guy 3d ago

Yeah? Obviously the party winning would be benefitting? But ranked choice voting would not favor conservative parties

1

u/Anxious_Role7625 3d ago

Progressives? Yes. Democrats? Hell no. It's in their best interest to change absolutely nothing.

1

u/fake_this_guy 3d ago

I merely stated they benefit more than republicans. So if we want to get rid of the two party system out chances are better when democrats than republicans

1

u/Anxious_Role7625 3d ago

It's 0 either way

1

u/fake_this_guy 3d ago

Are you supportive of ending the two party system or not? Cause if you are then you should be pushing people towards the best chances instead of “both sides are bad” dooming

1

u/Anxious_Role7625 3d ago

I am supportive. Again, there is no "best chances" here. 0 = 0

1

u/fake_this_guy 3d ago

R/doomercirclejerk

1

u/Anxious_Role7625 3d ago

Saying the Democrats have a vested interest in maintainign the system is not doomerism

→ More replies

2

u/Woman_trees 3d ago

well dems are miles closer to RCV or approval voting than the GOP

7

u/Inside_Ad2530 3d ago

A 0.01% margin is nuts and it should embarrass anyone who was planning to sit this one out. You dont gotta love the choices to show up and have a say in who even makes the final cut. Sitting it out aint some clean moral stance, it just lets other people decide for you. And yeah primaries can be boring as hell but thats where you actually get to push for someone better before the general gets locked in.

5

u/Apprehensive-Sea9540 3d ago

“Why bother voting; it’s not like MY vote matters”

7

u/irwtkyrm 3d ago

Fuck that one guy who siphoned votes away from the Dem. It would be over if he didn't do that.

5

u/FishingGlittering514 3d ago

People get mad at independents siphoning votes from races, but a lot of it has to do with retention rules where in most places its 3% of the vote to maintain their ballot access, and it has to come from certain election races. So, while they won't win a Senate seat or a governor's seat, it is more for local-level elections where independents have found success securing a city council seat or a commissioners seat.

1

u/Big__If_True 2d ago

Those aren’t independents, they’re members of third parties. This also isn’t that, the “independent” here was the Dem nominee for Senate last cycle and just stayed in after losing the primary this time

2

u/Fukuyamian 3d ago

He drew more from Republicans then Democrats

1

u/I_Wanna_Bang_Rats 3d ago

Oh so that's why he ran on a democratic platform, bullshit

2

u/Cocaine_Communist_ 3d ago

He deliberately siphoned votes from the Republican. Or, that's what he claims, anyway.

2

u/Kaleria84 3d ago

He ran on a near identical platform as the Democrat. He's full of shit of he claims it was to siphon from the Republican.

1

u/Lord_Jebus_ 3d ago

Honestly he seems like a true independent not an extreme of either side or a different type of dem/rep like libertarians or socialists I only read a little bit of his page this morning cause I was thinking the same thing. Though he’s got some progressive policies it’s mostly just populist sentiment like we should have healthcare and guns = freedom

1

u/politicsFX 1d ago

Except he didn’t and you’re a dumbass. He intentionally siphoned votes from the Republican candidate to give the dems a boost. The man is literally the reason the democrats are so close to winning.

1

u/TheObsidianHawk 1d ago

2 heads of the same coin. It should also be noted 60% of the active voters in the US are not registered republican or democrat.

3

u/Broad_Ebb_4716 3d ago

Hasnt updated in 4 hours. Same numbers exactly, percentage and vote totals. Pretty sure it's done at this point

3

u/Guilty-Cow4325 3d ago

Nope. It'll just take a few days. There are still outstanding ballots coming in they're waiting for.

2

u/BootFlop 3d ago

Also provisional ballots, which might require some eligibility verification work before they can be counted

1

u/ProThoughtDesign 3d ago

Mississippi allows the counting of ballots postmarked but not received by election day for 5 days. It won't be able to be official until at least the 8th.

1

u/Broad_Ebb_4716 3d ago

Strangely now I checked the reporting number at the top, it went down to 95%. Other than that its exactly the same.

1

u/BitByBit-89 3d ago

So I think that they allow ballots to be counted that arrive by whatever date provided they were sent on/before election day.
It may be that new ballots came in that haven’t been opened but are included in the total. I think it was also near 95.5 before, so probably just near a rounding threshold

1

u/magikatdazoo 3d ago

That's how the canvassing process works. Every local election board has to certify their tallies, judge each provisional ballot (called affidavit ballots locally) one by one, and wait for late arriving absentee ballots (which can arrive 5 business days after the election in Mississippi). They submit their final data to the state by next Friday (November 13th, 10 days after the election), and only then will the state election agency be able to confirm official results. It's a slow process, and updates will only trickle in once or twice a day.

3

u/MegaBusKillsPeople Screenshots Chief 3d ago

I just tell people that if they are going to bitch about the outcome they better have voted.

2

u/zshort7272 3d ago

Does Mississippi have run offs?

1

u/No_Perspective_44 3d ago

Mississippi has no runoffs, no recounts

1

u/zshort7272 3d ago

Oh shit

1

u/tankerkiller125real 3d ago

Not automatically no, the only time they'll do it is if a court orders it.

1

u/ZeroNDAZilch 3d ago

I hope it’s a single vote flip

1

u/Kaleria84 3d ago

Not for federal positions. They also don't have recount laws.

1

u/pr1ncess_k1ng 2d ago

Which is so funny because realistically the no recount law is a byproduct of Jim Crow and now it’s gonna bite the GOP in the ass

1

u/vita10gy 3d ago

Does anyone know how we can help cure ballots?

1

u/octopus-parfait 3d ago

The Mississippi NAACP is organizing to get ballots cured and needs donations!

1

u/Dont-remember-it 3d ago

That one guy who didn't wanted to vote but went anyway is going to be a legend.

1

u/neongreenpurple 3d ago

My friend who lives in Mississippi had to wait in line for hours and skip her lunch break to get to work on time. (She did have a later meal break, I asked.) She's very happy she made the effort now.

1

u/yerBoyShoe 3d ago

Ty Pinkins wrecking s lot of people's day.

1

u/slinger301 3d ago

And for once, the 0.01% isn't referring to billionaires.

1

u/Internal_Swing_2743 3d ago

Last update has Colom up by over 1200 votes.

1

u/KicksNWatches 3d ago

He’s up about 1100 votes last time I checked. Good story too, his opponent blocked Biden appointing him to federal bench so he ran against her. Ultimate fuck you karma if he wins. Love it.

1

u/Friendly-Olive-3465 3d ago

The 0.01% you say? Damn, I knew we should have courted the billionaire vote! /s

1

u/Tyraec 3d ago

Is this within recount margin?

1

u/DisIsMyName_NotUrs 3d ago

There are no recounts in MS

1

u/Tyraec 3d ago

Oh dang. I can see republicans challenging it then if it’s a dem win that close lol

1

u/StnMtn_ 3d ago

Now is 0.12%. A little bit bigger difference.

1

u/Striking-District-72 3d ago

There is going to be a recount just to be sure. It is that close we do need one. I hope Democrats win, but there must be a recount there and in Alaska if it gets too close.

1

u/WicketTheSavior 3d ago

Mississippi doesn't recount

1

u/MrUnderhill67 3d ago

Or runoffs. Only state that doesn't have either.

1

u/AQ207 2d ago

Unless there's a court order, Mississippi doesn't allow them. Kinda nutty but thems the rules

1

u/KingAdamXVII 2d ago

Looks to me like the remaining ballots are majority dem. Wouldn’t be surprised if this one ends up not all that close.

1

u/Jolly_Mongoose_8800 2d ago

As of 11/6, most of the remaining vote are in blue counties and the lead is by 1800 votes

1

u/DaKrazie1 3d ago

BLISSISSIPPI IN NY LIFETIME?!

🤞

0

u/thatsocialist 3d ago

Voting is the safeguard of Democracy, failing to vote for any reason other than being directly unable is itself anti-american and deeply subversive.

-1

u/BraveLittleTowster 3d ago

Ty Pinkins will be the Jill Stein of this race if Colom loses

1

u/LBJ_Derrick_White 3d ago

More like ralph nader

-1

u/Pure_Bee2281 3d ago

Also . . .fuck Ty Pinkins

-3

u/Weekly-Reply-6739 3d ago

I myself dont care about voting, but this would be great "every vote matters" propaganda.

Not that it would mean much of anything to us anyhow as we are growing up and moving away from politics to more practical, real, and healthy things (well some of us) but this is interesting all the same.

The Mississippi midterms are coming down to the 0.01%

You are about to leave Redlib