>

If y'all actually cared about illegal immigrants, how come you guys never go after the ones who hire illegal immigrants?
Don't want to go after your own party I bet
”My legal team will be assessing our options to make sure every vote is counted,” wrote Hamadeh, who hasn’t conceded to Mayes.

For fuck’s sake, THEY JUST COUNTED EVERY VOTE. That’s what a recount is, you absolute fucking DONKEY. >

I was friends with him in college, I guarantee this is an image thing so he can fail upwards in the GOP. He might've gone genuinely crazy since then but he was always a bit too shrewd to be an actual denier by my reckoning. >

Denier of what? the truth? Fact is 40% of the votes from this Arizona election from mail in ballots. How can this be regulated into a safe and functioning system that ensure election integrity. >

It was a recount to confirm her win, but yes, this is what leads to victory in narrow races in hotly contened states. We start from the ground up, and this is promising in a state like AZ. >

Did Kari Lake eat some of the votes? >

A few votes changing isn't uncommon in recounts. Even a 99.999% success rate leads to changes. >

The magnitude of the change is pretty huge though... Usually the overall change is smaller. 
This article explains why they changed so much.
TL;DR: Pinal county fucked up and didn't count about 500 votes.  That county happens to lean right, which is why the totals changed more than expected. >

I’m guessing the “they’re tryna steal our election” folks won’t be talking about this one >

Is that sarcasm? >


Republican attorneys are going to look through the numbers again and see if there's any grounds to do anything going forward

Relentless. >

Ehh.
I support everyone's right to exhaust every legal avenue. If the Republican won by one vote, I'd support the Democrats' right to see if it can be legally overturned, too.
The problem is the extrajudicial bullshit the Republicans are trying, not legitimate legal challenges. >

What legal avenues are there after the recount? Just keep recounting until they get a result they like? >

I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know exactly.
But if--and that's a big hypothetical "if", not something I actually believe happened--for example there were an unusually large discrepancy in the recount, that might be worth challenging. If there's evidence that vote-counters were openly partisan, that might be worth challenging. Hell, if there's evidence that illegal voter suppression caused a significant shift from polling, that might be worth challenging.
The point is, if there are legal avenues, it's everyone's right to explore them. The problem is not challenging the results of the election through established legal means, it's challenging the results of the election outside of those established legal avenues. >

Every time they dig into investigating that stuff, they find more wrongdoing on the Republican side, and then try to brush the whole thing under the rug. >

I'm not denying that. The point I'm trying to make is that the system must hold. If we want to be able to challenge Republican bullshit, we need to let the Republicans challenge whatever it's legal for them to challenge too. The moment we tell them no, we have zero defense against them telling us no too. In the meantime, the courts will throw out the bullshit. >

Oh, I wasn't disagreeing with you at all. The system must indeed hold. I was just pointing out that when they do fight it, it always ends up worse for them. >

My understanding is that this is also the first state level election where the excess death rate of Covid on Republicans likely led to a Democratic victory. The more you know… >

Considering the margin she won by? Yeah, if the Republicans actually pushed their base to embrace proper health measures then they would have won. >

That could probably be said for a wider national look. Hopefully a study comes out in a couple of years on the Covid effect >

I think that the Repubs could lose a substantial number of their older die-hard voters over just the next couple of years based on the resistance of many of them to masking and vaccinations. Plus in any year, you'll always have the expected mortality from heart disease, cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's, accidents, etc. And even some of the younger ones look like health-disasters-waiting-to-happen, i.e. 'Gravy Seals' and 'Meal Team Six.' >

Waiting for either evil or idiots to die doesn't usually go well. I've been hearing that far too long and know too many young conservatives, this is not something that just dies off. They must be fought or taught. >

Arizona has started realizing how much the GOP has screwed them. Unlike Texas, the state has started getting wise and sadly when John McCain died and Trump and company turned on his family and their narrative since he by one vote kept them from repelling the Affordable Health Care Act. When they didn't have a DAMN THING to replace it. Arizona didn't like that and while so many held on with the "Big Lie". Now with Lake and company losing so much and all the former GOP government pretty much trying to scorch Earth as they leave. I can see major change for the state. I know my family down there is very happy. >

Well most people agree that the Affordable care act is a good thing. Even the red Republican. That's if you call it the ACA. But call it Obama Care no it's bad.  What these people are doing is playing on the uneducated not knowing anything. The good thing is things should be going into the right direction. Especially after lake lost her election and election lawsuit. >

I’ve literally seen people say Obamacare is bad but they’re glad they have the ACA to provide them health insurance
The cognitive dissonance in republicans is astounding >

I work at the University monitoring classes. One the them was a history instructor. She said that they did a  survey and highlighting everything that the ACA did. But what they did was changed the name. People viewed ACA more favorably when it was called the ACA over Obamacare. It is astonishing. >

Well that was basically the point of that branding, wasn't it? 
By branding the ACA as "Obamacare," the GQP had a very easy time energizing and enraging their voters. They spent so much time to basically hammer in "Obama bad" so that by getting people to associate something fundamentally good with someone they hate, the GQP could gain power.
There are and were content-oriented critiques of the ACA. But those didn't matter much to the GQP because those critiques would require explaining nuances and their audience having a rudimentary understanding of healthcare law. It is much harder to get a primal reaction with that than it is to get one from saying "this person bad and evil, this come from bad and evil person." >

Terrible headline. The Democrat won BEFORE the recount, and framing the story the way they did implies the recount was responsible for the win. >

Well that's encouraging. Maybe AZ is rounding a corner and coming to it's senses? >

Naw, shits gonna hit the fan now >

How so >

Republicans are going to raise holy hell >

Lol who cares, they get mad about fictional characters being the wrong race. Impotent outrage is their addiction. >

Would help if the media quit covering their outrage as news. >

AZ lookin a Lil purplish nowadays >

Republicans there are losing oxygen…. >

Because they all have Covid >

Get in here, we’re using Republican tears to salt our margarita rims. >

she was also the winner before the recount:
>Mayes (D) finished 280 votes ahead of Hamadeh (R), down from a lead of 511 in the original count. The reason for the discrepancy was not immediately clear.
I only added the D and R for distinction in the above quote.  So the recount narrowed her lead, but not enough to change anything. >

I’m no conspiracy theorist, but if I were, I’d think the Biden administration backed off on Covid regulations knowing that it would cause a disproportionate number of republicans to die. >

If I were a conspiracy theorist, I’d speculate that democrats have been pushing idiocy on republicans for about 50 years, ensuring that democrat kids will outsurvive and outcompete republican kids. But I’m not, and in reality republicans did that for some reason. >

at that point you are just admitting to being stupid and gullible with extra steps lol. >

"StOp tHe sTeAL!!!1!!!" >

One step at a time is how we move away from the brink. >

I know it's really picky but she didn't win "after" the recount. She'd already won. The recount affirmed the victory. >

I mean, she won it before the recount as well. >

Have the snowflakes on the right started crying about a stolen election yet? Of course they have. >

All the usual bots are in Hamadeh's feed crying and accusing everyone of everything... So, typical GQP loss antics.  I wonder if the SC didn't insert themselves into the Gore/Bush results, if the GQP would've adopted this as a strategy to every loss >

she wrote a while op-ed on this >

They now have a Democratic governor, attorney general, and Secretary of State, plus a Democratic Senator.  Beautiful for a state that used to be considered a Republican stronghold. >

They won before the recount. The recount just confirms it. >

How is Arizona becoming better than Texas now?! Congrats AZ. From a jealous Texan. >

I did my part but my district still has Gosar >

I’m sorry for your loss >

Misleading headline.
She was already ahead by 511 votes before the recount.  After the recount she was 208 votes ahead.
So she had already won, but due to how Arizona's election laws are, the small margin prompted a recount to affirm the winner. >

This is good news. Unfortunately it's only more imaginary ammunition for right wing nutjobs >

As good as that news is, what a shame that the state’s new superintendent of public instruction is a raving right-winger who “promised to shut down any hint of ‘critical race theory’.” >

Those of you who don't vote because you think it doesn't make any difference need to wake up! >

What about Second Recount? Or Recountsies? Do they know about mid afternoon Recounts? >

Cue republican shrieking >

Now go prosecute the fake electors and their abettors. >

good less power republicans have the better >

Whoohooo! >

Good on you Arizona. >

Won before it too >

I worked on some of her television ads! Good for her! >

Thank god >

This last election gave me a little hope that our country isn't yet sliding into fascism. >

Incoming republican firestorm of ‘sToLEn ElECtiOns’ in 3-2-1 >

Before the recount too. >

Republicans are figuring out what we've known for ages, everything trump touches turns to shit. >

We can all thank COVID-19 for this as the margin of Republicans vs. Democrats who unnecessarily died from the virus due to their suicidal politics is far larger than the margin here.
COVID-19 is the ultimate Republican self-own. >

The shucky ducky margin. >

The one race that was definitely decided by Republicans intentional antipathy to Covid vaccines. >

Yeah, well check out the founder of “body for life” bill Phillips. I have friends that train almost everyday, and almost died. Yes, being obese is a co-morbidity, but there are fit people that got hit hard also.  I know orca-fat people that had mild symptoms also. >

Phew! That should slow down their GOP's march to the middle ages. >

Recounts. So hot right now. >

Lawsuit in 5...4...3... >

Once again, no bamboo ballots were discovered. >

Now root out the treason and traitors in your state >

Who was she running against? A trump backed republican or? >

Arizona today, texas soon... >

It's going to be too late for a LOT of women/LGBTQ folks in Texas :( >

Sadly, too true. >

Was that recount #1,2,or 3 ? >

HAH! I was buds with the loser, Hamadeh in college and I have no idea what happened to him. It was a pleasure to vote against him and I like to fantasize I and my family may have been the ones to tip the race. 
Glad to see him lose but like most wealthy I'm betting we're going to see him fail upwards. >

Damn those Italian satellites are still working >

Another win for the good guys! >

Winning it twice. She was ahead in the OG count too >

Everybody should thank Kari Lake for the win. >

This drama would have not happened if they just used modern counting systems instead of people who looked like they haven’t been outside in days. >

This is BS! Obviously the loser Kari Lake won, election fraud is everywhere how can't you see it?!?? >

Does this mean the student debt forgiveness lawsuit will get dropped? >

I’m glad at the result, but I have to admit it bothers me a bit that we apparently suck so much at accounting for votes that our tally can change by hundreds during a recount.
Especially since a system that detail-blind could create opportunity for electoral fraud or other hanky panky. >

Most places have automatic or offer recounts when the results are very close.  Otherwise it doesn’t really matter.  100 of votes out of 100,000 or a million votes is a very low percentage.  This is proof of the dedication to accuracy. >


100 of votes out of 100,000 or a million votes is a very low percentage

(1) It doesn’t really matter how low a percentage it is if you have majority races that are decided that narrowly. It will change an outcome in a race that’s 200 votes apart if you can’t keep track of votes to the nearest 200.
(2) That’s not actually good accuracy compared to what should be reasonably achievable from moderately competent people running a well designed system.
A house costs >$100,000. If your mortgage company charged you an extra hundred here or there would you think that was good accounting on their part? Would you be satisfied with their service if they kept reporting different numbers each time you asked your remaining balance for the month? It’s not like the technology doesn’t exist to be more accurate. >

It actually didn’t change the outcome in this case.  It only confirmed the victory.  2.4 million people voted in Arizona in the last election, 100 votes is 0.000041666666667%.  Its an imperfect world which is why we have recounts when it’s very close.  It’s also important to note that very seldom do recounts change the results. >


It actually didn’t change the outcome in this case. 

You can’t possibly know that.
The recount didn’t flip the result from the previous count. That’s not at all the same thing as saying error didn’t pervert the result of the vote. 
We know there is at least an error margin of 231 votes, since that’s how much the count changed. That’s the bare minimum amount of error possible with the results we see. But it could easily be more than that, and the vote was only decided by 280. >


You can’t possibly know that.

I do know that because there was a recount.  

The recount didn’t flip the result from the previous count. That’s not at all the same thing as saying error didn’t pervert the result of the vote.

Are trying to make the argument that because they found inaccuracies,  that they corrected from the first count, that is evidence that there are other error?  I see it differently as they reviewed 2,400,000 votes and only found only 231 errors.   I mean couldn't also be suspicious if someone determined that they pre-recount number and post-recount numbers were exactly the same.  You are just a glass half empty kind of person.   

We know there is at least an error margin of 231 votes, since that’s how much the count changed. That’s the bare minimum amount of error possible with the results we see. But it could easily be more than that, and the vote was only decided by 280.

The count changed, but the distribution of votes did not.   That's why recount almost never switch the results. >


I do know that because there was a recount

No. You don’t know that, because you’re not psychic.
A recount rectifies the errors they are aware of. It doesn’t magically eliminate all errors from the system.
We know now that at least one error occurred the first time around, in Pinal county, that they didn’t catch before certifying the vote, that when rectified changed the net result by 277. The margin of victory was 280.
To be certain that errors did not pervert the ultimate result of the vote/recount, you would have to know that there are no more similarly sized errors that have not yet been caught. It would only take 1ish. >

Owned Republicons! >

And the losers just keep losing.  Love it. >

Truth does Prevail >

I’m so proud of my state >

Yes Democrats still winning!! >

I'm so tired of all this winning. >

The Meth politicians loose again.  Yay! >

Oh, that won’t be the end of it. Lawsuit incoming in ten, nine, eight… >

We could probably get 200 people here on reddit who have voted for her, including myself.
It's so crazy it was that close. >

Still crazy to me that you guys in the US get to elect state attorneys. >

The real problem with electing state attorneys is that they are completely independent and report to no one. An attorney is supposed to represent clients - but these elected attorneys get to pick what cases they want to be involved with and can act independently, even if everyone else in the state government disagrees with the positions they take. >

Yeah that makes sense… >

Where are the Q ninjas? >

Take the w, now pay close attention, you team sport Republican voters- think about what you actually care about and focus on what gets done with these slimy Q fuckheads at the helm, and how much is addressed. This isn’t a fucking game. >

Based on the title, I’m predicting “massive voter fraud that must be investigated exhaustively” >

The original results had her win by about 500 votes, but the recount brought it down to about 280. Both sides gained votes in the recount but the republican gained more. Still though it wasn't enough for him to overtake her. 
Whats funny is that all the Kari Lake lawsuit bullshit came from suspicion that Maricopa County, a recently turned blue county, conducted a fraudulent election. 
And yet it was Pinal county, a heavily red county, that fucked up. Now they obviously didn't do it on purpose as the recount brought their guy closer but it's still funny. >


no one cares who one it is or what they’ve done.

No, I'm pretty sure people are happy a trump endorsed moron didn't get the spot. >

Did you expect anything else? >

“That recount was rigged, we are going to do a re-recount to confirm that we actually won in the initial count” - whoever lost that attorney general race
Edit: I didn’t read the article and assumed that the result was changed after the recount. But it was just reconfirmed. And if anything it was closer than it was before. Title is misleading. Could also say “democrat almost loses Arizona attorney general race after recount” >

Nah, title is accurate. I mean, it could also say "democrat solidifies victory over political opponent who lost the initial count and the subsequent recount," but that'd be as uselessly editorial as your version. >

Because they cheated >

this is a perfect example of what’s wrong with american politics. no one cares who one it is or what they’ve done. people just care about weather they are a democrat or a republican >

I assume that Arizona cared enough to NOT elect a whacked out fascist, but ya know... reality and all that >

Fucking wink wink, I’ve been to Arizona, I know they didn’t vote Democratic >

Yeah well I live here and I think that trumps your shitty narrative. There are a LOT of young Democrats in Phoenix/Maricopa county and a lot of elderly folks in more rural or Republican strongholds and a good chunk of people probably died off due to conspiracy theories about masks and vaccines. Phoenix is the 5th largest city in the country population wise. Do the math.
Oh wait, you don't have to. They already did it twice for you! >

Pray tell why it was that I traversed the entire state via Route 66 and saw 100x the amount of Trump material than I did Biden or anyone democratic? >

Because putting political shit on your car is super cringe. Sounds like you answered your own question there? >

I don’t recall saying anything about a car >

So just to make sure I'm on the same page here... you drove along route 66, saw a lot of road signs for Trump and thus believe the election was stolen based on the amount of signs you saw?
You didn't count the signs, you just feeeeel like you saw too many road signs for the results you're seeing.
So based on this feeling, you're willing to call into question other people's honor and decency because of some road signs... despite multiple recounts and no evidence of fraud.
Not the most scientific method I've ever heard of... >

Just what AZ needs:  More support for illegal border crossings.   But hey, it’s their state.