The Unofficial Election 2016 Results Thread PLEASE

Agreed. I refuse, on principle, to cast a vote in any unopposed race, regardless of party. Seems undemocratic.

This year was even worse. Many ran unopposed in August's primary too. What's the point of that? How do they even get on the ballot?

Maybe the sole qualifying step - the discriminator and filter - is who is able to fill out the paperwork correctly.
 
I'm wondering if we'll make it through the day without at least one newsworthy (as in being a story in and off itself not just mentioned in passing when talking about the election) scuffle or incident at a polling place.
 
Reports from Philadelphia so far indicate abnormally long lines in the city. Several friends and friend-adjacent's in different areas of the city have posted about having to wait 40+ minutes in supposedly abnormally long lines.

My polling place, which I normally just walk right into and am done within a couple minutes apparently has a line 3 blocks long. Granted, I vote after I get home from work, which is usually about an hour before most other people get home. So I am not sure how unusual that is.
 
That surprises me. It would be illegal in the UK. Candidates aren't allowed to reveal the results of postal votes, for example, before the constituency is finally counted and announced.

Just to be clear, the "results" that are being released are actually projections based on polls.

When the real polls close, i.e. the actual voting is over, local officials start reporting and tabulating, and the media can report those as soon as local officials release them.

So, what we might see is at 7:02 pm, an announcer come on saying, "NBC News projects that Donald Trump has won the state of Indiana." Then there will be a graphic underneath that showing that with 0.5% of precincts counted, Trump has 37% of the vote and Clinton 60% of the vote.

What that means is that the polls have closed in Indiana, and based on the media's exit polling, and the fact that Indiana darned near always votes Republican, they are confident that Trump will win after all the votes are counted. At the moment, hardly any real votes have been counted, so pay attention to those numbers.


The real results can only come from state and local officials, but the media can project all they want, whenever they want. Since 1980 there has been a sort of gentlemen's agreement that they won't project a state until after the polls close, but that's kind of a fiction to keep people in suspense and provide election night drama and ritual. The truth is we could project Alaska and Hawaii right now, even though the polls wont close for another 12 hours or more.
 
I usually take about 10 minutes to vote. Today took 20. Heavily Democratic suburb.
 
Ha! Sister texted again, still in line. Volunteers handing out snacks. Some are bags of Cheetos, and people are asking if that constitutes campaigning for Trump.
 
Just to be clear, the "results" that are being released are actually projections based on polls.

When the real polls close, i.e. the actual voting is over, local officials start reporting and tabulating, and the media can report those as soon as local officials release them.

So, what we might see is at 7:02 pm, an announcer come on saying, "NBC News projects that Donald Trump has won the state of Indiana." Then there will be a graphic underneath that showing that with 0.5% of precincts counted, Trump has 37% of the vote and Clinton 60% of the vote.

What that means is that the polls have closed in Indiana, and based on the media's exit polling, and the fact that Indiana darned near always votes Republican, they are confident that Trump will win after all the votes are counted. At the moment, hardly any real votes have been counted, so pay attention to those numbers.

I thought that was a mistake. Then I remembered we were talking about television reporting and realized it wasn't. :blush:
 
Indications are that heavy turnouts are expected all over the country. Historically, high turnout is good for Democrats, but this year a lot of people think that Donald Trump is so different that a lot of the new voters are people he inspired to vote.

But did they inspire him to vote for him, or against him? Stay tuned.
 
Ha! Sister texted again, still in line. Volunteers handing out snacks. Some are bags of Cheetos, and people are asking if that constitutes campaigning for Trump.

Only if you have to pay for the Cheetos. Free handouts are a Hillary thing.
 
I thought that was a mistake. Then I remembered we were talking about television reporting and realized it wasn't. :blush:

Nope. I did that on purpose. And I've seen it happen in the past. Basically, they call it as soon as the polls close but in Indiana, the first few precincts that come in might be from Gary, which is heavily Democratic. As the rest of the state rolls in, they know it will change.


ETA: Historically, Indiana and Kentucky had the earliest poll closings in the country, so they were announced first. However, I think Indiana has extended their voting hours in recent years, so they might not be as early as they used to be.
 
Last edited:
And they are the lowest by far, with the next closest predictor that I've seen giving her an 86% chance of victory.

Which still gives Trump a 1 in 7 chance (or with U.S. Presidential terms a once-in-a-generation) of winning - rather too high for comfort IMO.
 
Seriously? The media can report polling results while the polls are still open elsewhere in the country? :eek:


Generally, the networks will not call an election before California closes at 11 p.m. Eastern. Four years ago, they had to vamp for a while because Obama had more than enough electoral votes for California to put him over the top, but California wasn't officially closed so they couldn't call the race.

Today's environment is going to include coverage by lots of cable and online shows and websites. Those outlets aren't traditional "journalists," may not respect the networks' "gentlemen's agreement," and may do whatever they can to attract viewers.


Hillary Clinton wins Dixville Notch!

A full 50% more votes than Donald Trump.

Clinton - 4
Trump - 2
Johnson - 1
Romney - 1

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/08/politics/dixville-notch-results-2016/index.html


And Dixville Notch is usually reliably Republican. So, um, draw whatever conclusion offends you least.
 
I voted just over a week and a half ago; my state offers early voting. I went to one of the closest polling places and was pleasantly surprised to see quite a few people there voting. I live in a largely democratic state (although we oddly flipped Republican for our last governor's election, so make of that what you will); I'm fairly confident it will go for Hilary. I'm just glad it will be over soon. Right now my only dilemma is whether or not to stay up late for the voting results; I have to get up super early to come in to work a couple hours before my normal time due to a product we've got that goes up to our leadership that the person on night shift can't cover, so it all depends on how much sleep I want to get I guess.
 
Agreed. I refuse, on principle, to cast a vote in any unopposed race, regardless of party. Seems undemocratic.

How is that undemocratic? If only one person meets the requirements and enters the race for his party, then what should a democracy do? Force someone else to run? Leave the seat vacant?
 
How is that undemocratic? If only one person meets the requirements and enters the race for his party, then what should a democracy do? Force someone else to run? Leave the seat vacant?
Voting when there is only one choice is a farce.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 
Are there any prediction markets that are selling "futures" live during the day today?

I wonder if turnout is causing Trump or Hillary stock to move.
 

Back
Top Bottom