STOP THE COUNT! (OR MAYBE SLOW IT DOWN, WE'RE STILL DECIDING)

California Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber, Ph.D. — because those letters after her name are crucial for explaining basic arithmetic — took a brief break from whatever it is she does to remind us all that votes don't just magically appear on Election Night. Apparently, in the Golden State, it takes an eternity to tally ballots, which is reassuring for anyone who thinks elections should be decided with anything resembling promptness.

The Santa Barbara Independent, ever vigilant in its duty to reprint government press releases verbatim, dutifully informed us that the Secretary wants everyone to manage their expectations. So, if you were hoping for a swift and decisive outcome, perhaps you're just not progressive enough to appreciate the intricate dance of ballot processing. We're talking extended periods of 'curing' ballots, which sounds more like a trip to the emergency room than electoral integrity, and then, of course, the painstaking task of counting all those late-arriving mail-in ballots that somehow always lean one direction.

It makes one wonder: if California can innovate with bullet trains to nowhere and endless environmental regulations, why can't it figure out how to count votes before the next harvest season? Could it be that the extended timeline conveniently allows for 'adjustments' as results trickle in? One might be forgiven for cynically connecting the dots between painstakingly slow vote counts and the consistent last-minute surges for preferred candidates. It's almost as if the process is designed to keep everyone guessing, allowing for maximum suspense and, perhaps, 'clarification' of the people's will. After all, why rush perfection, especially when perfection involves prolonging the agony of democracy?

The Whipping Post advises our readers to grab a comfy chair, a gallon of coffee, and perhaps a history book – this election's 'final count' will likely be in by the time our grandchildren are old enough to vote.