There now appears to be something of a breakout in Hillary Clinton’s favour on the presidential tracker, which is showing up clearly in the trend chart below. This has caused her razor thin lead on recent readings of the electoral college projection to blow out to 317 to 221, with Florida and North Carolina now in her column. Still absent from it, by the barest of margins, is Nevada, where the Democrats have been greatly buoyed by the pattern of early voting turnout, with one noted local observer all but calling the state for Clinton. This has led to suggestions that pollsters have been coming in low for Clinton across the board by underestimating turnout among Hispanics. The latest interactive map of the results below can be viewed here.
| State | Margin | Swing | EV |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | Safe | 9 | |
| Alaska | Trump 10.5 | 3.5 | 3 |
| Arizona | Trump 2.7 | 6.4 | 11 |
| Arkansas | Trump 21.6 | 2.1 | 6 |
| California | Clinton 21.9 | 1.2 | 55 |
| Colorado | Clinton 2.8 | 2.6 | 9 |
| Connecticut | Safe | 7 | |
| D.C. | Safe | 3 | |
| Delaware | Clinton 18.3 | 0.3 | 3 |
| Florida | Clinton 0.3 | 0.6 | 29 |
| Georgia | Trump 5.0 | 2.8 | 16 |
| Hawaii | Safe | 4 | |
| Idaho | Trump 20.9 | 11.0 | 4 |
| Illinois | Clinton 13.8 | 3.1 | 20 |
| Indiana | Trump 10.0 | 0.2 | 11 |
| Iowa | Trump 3.1 | 8.9 | 6 |
| Kansas | Trump 20.0 | 1.7 | 6 |
| Kentucky | Safe | 8 | |
| Louisiana | Trump 14.8 | 2.4 | 8 |
| Maine | Clinton 6.9 | 8.4 | 4 |
| Maryland | Clinton 33.4 | 7.3 | 10 |
| Massachusetts | Clinton 27.0 | 3.9 | 11 |
| Michigan | Clinton 6.0 | 3.5 | 16 |
| Minnesota | Clinton 7.7 | 0.0 | 10 |
| Mississippi | Safe | 6 | |
| Missouri | Trump 10.9 | 1.5 | 10 |
| Montana | Trump 15.1 | 1.5 | 3 |
| Nebraska | Trump 18.9 | 2.9 | 5 |
| Nevada | Trump 0.1 | 6.8 | 6 |
| New Hampshire | Clinton 2.0 | 3.6 | 4 |
| New Jersey | Clinton 11.3 | 6.5 | 14 |
| New Mexico | Clinton 5.0 | 5.2 | 5 |
| New York | Clinton 18.7 | 9.5 | 29 |
| North Carolina | Clinton 0.1 | 2.1 | 15 |
| North Dakota | Safe | 3 | |
| Ohio | Trump 2.6 | 5.6 | 18 |
| Oklahoma | Safe | 7 | |
| Oregon | Clinton 6.8 | 5.3 | 7 |
| Pennsylvania | Clinton 4.4 | 1.0 | 20 |
| Rhode Island | Clinton 21.9 | 5.6 | 4 |
| South Carolina | Trump 8.3 | 2.2 | 9 |
| South Dakota | Trump 13.7 | 4.3 | 3 |
| Tennessee | Trump 14.2 | 6.2 | 11 |
| Texas | Trump 8.9 | 6.9 | 38 |
| Utah | Trump 9.1 | 38.9 | 6 |
| Vermont | Clinton 26.2 | 9.4 | 3 |
| Virginia | Clinton 5.8 | 1.9 | 13 |
| Washington | Clinton 12.6 | 2.3 | 12 |
| West Virginia | Safe | 5 | |
| Wisconsin | Clinton 4.7 | 2.2 | 10 |
| Wyoming | Safe | 3 |
Every US election features queues to vote. For some reason their electoral system doesn’t permit easy or quick voting.
News of long lines – this one in Arlington, just after 6 am:
https://twitter.com/SydneyAnnSmith/status/795958225044697088/photo/1
I am actually impressed that this many people are out to vote in the cold air, when dawn is just a glimmer.
No worries D&M! I’m not up just for this, but it’s certainly breaking the tedium of late-night coding
Just as a reminder, even after the votes are counted, the electoral college vote count is merely a presumption. One that assumes each states electors will honour the popular vote and not misspell the candidates names, which may render an electoral vote void. There are systems in place to negate these eventualities of course, but if the possibility doesn’t terrify you then you have a lot more faith in people then I do.
I have a lot more faith in people then you do, BC 🙂
Irish Central (an Irish American Newsletter that I came across when researching an authentic recipe for colcannon) has a take all of its own, blogging the US election live:
http://www.irishcentral.com/news/politics/live-blog-election-day-2016-for-the-irish-in-america?utm_campaign=Best+of+IrishCentral+-+2016-11-08&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=Mailjet
After Brexit, I thank Dog every day that I am a dual Australian / Irish citizen, rather than having a British type EU passport.
LU@103
😀
I am working with people in Europe and the US, and so trying to get everything done at a reasonable time their day.
My US friends are pretty much on edge.
BC@104
The Gore Vidal historical novel 1876 is a great read in how the election can be turned round by the Electoral College.
Some may find this useful:
https://youtube.googleblog.com/2016/10/us-election-results-live-on-youtube.html
Haven’t decided how I’m going to follow the count yet.
Ahuh, mine too.
@Douglas
I’ll have to try and get to it at some point.
I have no special insight into forecasting such a primitive electoral system but my expectation is about 323 ECV to Clinton. In theory Trump can win if there’s a degree of polling error but it seems more likely that could go the other way. The 98-99% win chance estimates doing the rounds for Clinton even a few days ago should be ignored, it’s not that clearcut.
Gore Vidal would have been appalled at the rise of Trump.
He would have also claimed to have seen it coming, and could have pointed to some number of his novels making such a prediction. And no doubt he would have had a few pithy put-downs for Trump too.
Night all
Kevin Bonham@112,
My guess is that Clinton will become president, but that it will be a comfortable but not resounding victory.
My bigger concern is with the Senate. At the moment it is at best a coin toss, and at worst leaning a little to the Republicans.
I was in the US for the Federal Shut Down, in 2013. I went to visit collaborators at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, and the National Radio Astronomical Observatory, next door to the School of Physics there. While it all seemed like high farce, I *really* was not able to meet formally with my collaborators at NRAO. The shut down was very real, and enforced. I was just lucky that some of the people I was working with were 0.5 U Va, and so we could still meet and collaborate.
My guess is that the 2013 shut down is just a dress rehearsal for what we can expect if the Republicans get control of the senate.
So, KB, I am begging you, tell me that the Democrats will take the senate, please….
FiveThirtyEight live coverage:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/2016-election-results-coverage/
Good night all.
See you on the other side, and may the Dogs be with us!
a r @ #74 Tuesday, November 8, 2016 at 11:18 pm
Democrats tend to vote early, Republicans later. According to the West Wing anyway.
Well, I signed off for the night, because my work stuff is done, well enough of it anyway.
But in perusing the media while winding down before sleeping, I came across this shocker from Nick O’Malley reporting on behalf of Fairfax:
http://www.smh.com.au/world/us-election/stars-come-out-for-philadelphia-rally-as-obamas-deliver-final-boost-to-hillary-20161108-gskliu.html
My take on this is that some “stars” feel strongly that they want a Democrat president, and they are knowingly, as consenting adults, there to give HRC and the Democrats a boost.
For O’Malley to use the words the Clinton machine ruthlessly took advantage of Democratic unity and their pronounced advantage in star power is to really devalue the efforts of people who got out to support HRC and the Democratic party. This includes Obama and his family. Why does O’Malley think that the willingly given and enthusiastic support of these people is being “ruthlessly explored” by the Clinton campaign?
Is he saying that they were not really there to support Clinton and the Democrats?
Is he saying that even if these people were misguidedly there to support Clinton that she should know what a corrupt and defiled candidate she is, and that she should not have been there to accept their support?
Please Explain..
New thread.