I'm just a no-name schnook, but I study elections for a living and have a few concerns about this piece signed by a long roster of former presidents of the American Political Science Association: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/07/us-media-election-night-apsa

1. The piece claims that it's a "near certainty" that we won't know the presidential winner "for days or weeks." I disagree: much more likely than not that the winner will be apparent by the end of the evening. In most states, mail-in ballots are processed prior to election day.

2. Authors claim that media have an incentive to make calls too quickly, citing premature Florida calls in 2000, but I don't think that's right anymore. 2000 changed things. The networks are now less aggressive than they were—nobody wants to risk an embarrassing mis-call again.

3. They propose that no election be called until the number of uncounted votes is less than the margin between the candidates. But non-close outcomes can be safely projected based on exit polls/precinct analysis. CA takes weeks to count all ballots, but we'll still know who won.

4. Authors want a blue-ribbon commission of "former presidents" (?) & other big shots to approve media election calls. But networks already employ experts (including political scientists!) on their decision desks who boast specialized knowledge, though perhaps not fame or status.

5. Finally, I was struck by this sentence: "The contest will be won not only at the ballot box and in the courts but in the court of public opinion." That's a *strong* claim to make about the American electoral system, and I fear it was made without sufficient substantiation.