Kamala Harris managed to rake in a massive share of late-counted votes following the 2024 election, a phenomenon that conveniently seems to happen 100% of the time in elections where ballots drag on for weeks to be counted. Isn’t it fascinating how the longer the count takes, the more the margin swings in favor of one side? Harris ended up beating Donald Trump by almost 20 points in the late vote tally, adding 8.3 million ballots to her column compared to Trump’s 5.65 million. For a candidate who didn’t flip a single county in the election—a feat unseen since 1932—that’s quite the “miraculous” turnaround.
While Trump’s overall victory remained intact, the striking discrepancy in late-counted votes between the two candidates has raised more than a few eyebrows. States notorious for their snail-paced ballot counting included California, where an embarrassing 63% of votes were still uncounted after election day, along with Arizona, Utah, and Washington, each hovering above the 50% mark. Meanwhile, states like Florida and Tennessee, known for their efficient processes, had a negligible margin of late ballots, with less than 0.5% of their votes counted overtime. The contrast isn’t just stark—it’s a glaring red flag.
California, the supposed tech capital of the nation, continues to baffle with its inability to count votes in a timely manner. Florida, for example, managed to wrap up its tally within four days, reporting 99% of votes just hours after polls closed. Meanwhile, California was still trickling in results weeks later, giving Harris a nearly 20-point lead in these late-counted votes. For a candidate who lost nationally by roughly 2%, these delays and the corresponding margins have naturally led to skepticism. Some argue it’s time to harmonize election processes nationwide to avoid the delays, inconsistencies, and inevitable suspicions that come with these disparate systems.
Critics of California’s sluggish vote-counting system point to the liberal state’s loose election laws, particularly around mail-in ballots, which are a significant factor in the delays. Each mail-in vote is painstakingly processed without the safeguard of ID verification, opening the door to human error and other vulnerabilities. While proponents of this method argue that it boosts voter participation, opponents contend that the risks, including ballot stuffing and other irregularities, far outweigh any benefits. When a candidate like Harris makes sudden, dramatic gains in late votes from states with such lax systems, it’s hard not to question the integrity of the process.
Adding to the frustration, lawmakers from these slow-counting states are now pushing to impose their inefficient systems on the rest of the country. The idea of federally adopting the chaotic processes seen in California and other liberal strongholds has drawn sharp criticism. Skeptics argue that instead of exporting these problems nationwide, the focus should be on streamlining and securing elections. For now, though, the Harris late-vote miracle stands as a glaring example of how delays and questionable practices erode public confidence in electoral outcomes.
RUNNING COUNT OF "OVERTIME VOTE"
— John Couvillon (@WinWithJMC) December 4, 2024
11/6 AM:
Trump 51.1%(71.6M)
Harris 47.6%(66.7M)
Others 1.3%(1.9M)
TOTAL:140.2M
12/4 AM:
Trump 49.8%(77.3M)
Harris 48.3%(75M)
Others 1.9%(2.9M)
TOTAL:155.15M
"OVERTIME VOTE"
Harris 55.3%(8.3M)
Trump 37.8%(5.65M)
Others 6.9%(1.03M)
TOTAL: 14.9M
