12.52pm ET. Clinton grimly hanging on in New Hampshire on the NYT projection, with Trump having a slight edge on the vote. It also has also all but called it for him in Pennsylvania.
12.20pm ET. A tightening has been evident in Pennsylvania and Michigan, but the big shock of Wisconsin looks all but sure to win it for Trump. However, Clinton looks no less sure of winning the popular vote, by a margin currently projected at a bit over 1%.
11.54pm ET. The NYT at least has Clinton back ahead in Minnesota now.
11.46pm ET. A point of interest for Australians: Maine is holding a ballot initiative for “ranked choice voting”, what we would call preferential voting. Yes leads narrowly on 52.8%.
11.40pm ET. Also a big night for people who were pushing Brexit parallels. Decaying industrial areas have performed the same role as their English counterparts in Sunderland.
11.33pm ET. NYT now has Minnesota slipping over the line to Trump, holding steady in Pennsylvania and Michigan, home and hosed in Wisconsin.
11.27pm ET. If Clinton does win Michigan and Pennsylvania, it starts to come down to Maine CD-2 and Nebraska CD-2, and FiveThirtyEight has Trump the favourite in both.
11.26pm ET. Dan Rosenheck of The Economist: “I think HRC still has a prayer in MI and PA, though the Upshot is very bearish. But WI, which polls had as safer, looks like her Waterloo.”
11.12pm ET. NYT effectively calling the election for Trump; the always more cautious FiveThirtyEight has him at 61%. Former says Trump is a 72% chance in Michigan and 63% in Pennsylvania, but I gather the ladder is essentially treating any “too close to call” state as 50-50, where NYT is mostly projecting Trump as favourite.
11.01pm ET. So anyway, the big shock is that the industrial rust belt states have responded heavily to Donald Trump. It makes perfect sense when you say it like that, but the polls missed it. Whatever the final result, losers of the night include polls and forecasters, with a qualified exception for Nate Silver, whose cautious projection has been vindicated (and left Wired and Huffington Post looking silly).
10.58pm ET. Some rare PB brickbats for the ABC. Out driving just now, I have five ABC stations on offer, and not a hint of election news from any of them. Had to listen to commercial talk radio. And ABC News 24 has underused Antony Green and been taking upwards of half an hour to notice what’s going on.
10.26pm ET. You can probably read the NYT projection as well as I can, but it says there’s nothing at all in it in Pennsylvania, and Trump can get there anyway with Michigan and Wisconsin, both of which are looking good for him. FiveThirtyEight now has Trump at a 55% probability. The Senate will stay Republican: they are all but sure to hold Missouri, home and hosed in New Hampshire, Indiana and North Carolina.
10.16pm ET. Trump keeps moving to victory on the NYT projection amid an unexpectedly strong performance in the rust belt, now being credited with narrow leads in Wisconsin as well as Michigan. FiveThirtyEight still has Clinton at 60%, but I gather that’s based on an arbitrary 50-50 probability split in Michigan.
9.56pm ET. The latest update from Michigan has nudged the count from 21% to 23%, and increased Trump’s projected lead at NYT from 1.1% to 1.2%.
9.48pm ET. Looks like everything hinges on Michigan. New York Times projects a 55% Republican win probability.
9.41pm ET. The New York Times projection is increasingly tipping to Trump, and now has him leading in Michigan, with Clinton grimly hanging on in Pennsylvania. Its Electoral College projection is Trump 275, Clinton 263.
9.37pm ET. Richard Burr (R) home in North Carolina; Kelly Ayotte (R) with her nose in front in New Hampshire; too early to tell in Missouri, but overall the Senate is looking difficult for the Democrats.
9.26pm ET. Time to close the door on Florida, I gather.
9.21pm ET. Michigan though is close for comfort. New York Times has Clinton at only a 58% probability, owing to the fragility of her leads in Michigan and Pennsylvania.
9.20pm ET. However, Colorado is looking good with 25% counted, suggesting it will join Virginia as a Trump roadblock.
9.18pm ET. Numbers coming in for Michigan and Pennsylvania, both showing with Clinton with moderate leads.
9.16pm ET. About 70,000 votes have been added in Broward, and they’ve perhaps been less favourable for Clinton than required, going 55.0% to 40.0% her way.
9.14pm ET. Virginia still looks like Clinton’s firewall: the New York Times projects her for a 91% probability and a margin of 3.2%.
9.10pm ET. The New York Times has Clinton a 69% chance, which tends to suggest this is another presidential election where Nate Silver has ended up looking pretty good.
9.10pm ET. Still slow progress in Broward.
9.08pm ET. The New York Times now has Trump with his nose in front in all the close states, and betting and financial markets are rushing to price in a higher risk of a Trump win.
9.02pm ET. Trickles of votes coming in now for Broward county, which will need to be plentiful to get Clinton over the line in Florida.
9.01pm ET. Clinton continues to firm in Virginia, which closes a lot of pathway for Trump.
8.59pm ET. In North Carolina, Richard Burr has his nose in front to retain the Senate seat for the Republicans, but Clinton retains a slight edge in the presidential vote.
8.48pm ET. Clinton looking good in New Hampshire.
8.43pm ET. New York Times has Clinton maintaining tiny leads in North Carolina and Iowa, but Trump slipping ahead in Ohio and holding firm in Florida. That Virginia is not absolutely nailed down, and a number of important states further west are yet to report, means there is still a theoretical path for Trump.
8.42pm ET. A lot seems to hinge on Broward county in Florida, which has only reported its early voting results to this point.
8.39pm ET. FiveThirtyEight gives Republicans 69% chance of retaining the Senate.
8.38pm ET. Evan Bayh fails to win Indiana Senate for the Democrats.
8.36pm ET. Florida back to Trump +0.6% at New York Times, nothing in it in North Carolina, Clinton still with her nose in front in Ohio.
8.35pm ET. Now I’m hearing less encouraging talk on North Carolina, for both presidency and Senate.
8.34pm ET. NBC News projects Republican House majority.
8.32pm ET. New York Times projection on Florida drifting slightly to Clinton: Trump’s lead down from 0.6% to 0.3%.
8.25pm ET. Wise heads on Twitter sound doubtful that Trump is doing as well as New York Times projections suggest: “Someone tell me how Trump overcomes what’s still out in Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach”.
8.21pm ET. And Ohio better than anticipated for Clinton as well.
8.20pm ET. But Clinton appears to be performing well in North Carolina.
8.19pm ET. The New York Times model is projecting a 0.5% lead for Trump, so some mixed signals there.
8.17pm ET. New York Times projects early lead for Clinton in Ohio, which is good news (I won’t pretend to be impartial here).
8.13pm ET. More indications of Clinton outperforming Obama in North Carolina, which Romney won 50.6% to 48.4%.
8.10pm ET. Really good results and projections display from New York Times.
8.09pm ET. Republican Marco Rubio’s anticipated re-election to Florida Senate confirmed.
8.08pm ET. No one’s calling any battleground states, but encouraging indications for Clinton in Florida and North Carolina, and betting markets moving her way.
8.07pm ET. NBC News confirms anticipated Democratic Senate gain in Illinois.
8.03pm ET. Could be wishful thinking, but Daily Kos sounds encouraged about North Carolina Senate race, where persons of good conscience will be hoping Deborah Ross ousts Republican incumbent Richard Burr.
7.56pm ET. Hugely important Miami Dade county in Florida swinging 3% to Clinton compared with Obama’s winning performance in 2016.
7.53pm ET. Clinton just shot to the lead in the raw count in Florida. Probably just goes to show you the limitation of looking at raw results, particularly in such an electorally diverse state.
7.49pm ET. Republican Senator Rob Portman’s re-election in Ohio confirmed. Always looked a disappointing race for the Democrats.
7.45pm ET. Australia’s ABC (i.e. Antony Green) is calling Democrats 182, Republicans 94, but none of the calls are in battleground states.
7.41pm ET. Enjoy footage of Nevada judge dressing down douchebag Trump lawyer over “voter fraud” lawsuit here.
7.36pm ET. Trump camp talking head on ABC News 24 talking tosh about “oversampling” by lying pollsters.
7.35pm ET. Jonathan Swan of The Hill: “In the presidential, Clinton looking strong in Pa., Colo., N.H., Mich., Wis., per exits. Florida she’s a squeak ahead. Ohio tied.” Colorado and New Hampshire would close any path to a Trump victory.
7.31pm ET. More good signs for Clinton in Florida, from Duval county: “Clinton over Trump 49-47 w/ 300K votes in. If that doesn’t change, it’s over. GOP can’t win statewide w/o Duval.”
7.28pm ET. Latino Decisions reports: “Latino vote in Florida now posted: Clinton 67 – Trump 31 (+36) 2012 was Obama 58 – Romney 40 (+18)”. Also talk of particularly strong turnout in Latin areas of Miami.
7.20pm ET. Stephen Bush at the New Statesman notes there is “a swing towards Clinton in Kentucky, though Indiana looks bad for both rural Ohio and Evan Bayh’s chance of taking the Senate seat back for the Democrats”.
7pm ET. Polling stations close in the first of the key states around about now, so here begins live coverage of today’s momentous US elections. See here for my final poll aggregation and Senate review.
Australia, Britain and America have all voted to restore the imaginary privileges of the Anglo-chrome Imperialist order – of a lost order. Someone should point out the arrow of time flies in just one direction on this Earth, even for the pink-and-white-skinned peoples of North America.
Who says romantic idealism is dead in America? Even Billy the Kid can rise again and become a Marshal.
The worst lies – the most shrewd and persistent lies, the lies with whom we cohabit – are invariably the ones we tell ourselves. Americans have just lied to themselves again in very great numbers. So sad. The truth is too much, it seems.
I have a question I ask fairly frequently, as I contemplate our story. I ask “Is it quest or is it escape?”
I think Americans have voted for escape and hence for futility. They have chosen the irrational. It’s obvious to the rest of the world that American Exceptionalism is extinct. But they have yet to catch on. The agonies are not over – not by a long shot.
TRICOT – The Rich in the US were selfish well before the Trump supporters got selfish.
Why choose the truth when lies are so much more comforting?
By the time a vestige of the truth permeates the information fog, another liar will come along with a new set of lies.
It’s not as though Clinton was a speaker of truth, just that her lies were more palatable.
Antonbruckner11
I have the feeling that Americans without jobs and in the bottom class were alert to Trump’s messaging about getting the wall and giving the warning to Mexico registered to them.
I also think that the family dynasties on the round about every four years does not win their approval.
According to the exit polls, the old voted for Trump and the young for Clinton. Really, the old voted to reprise the past and the young to enact the future. The fissures in American society run deeply and in all directions. So hard for them.
Increasing military; Trump policy.
Boerwar
If one wrecks one’s economy—Britain did worse in the 20s than in the 30s, despite worldwide depression in the latter decade—one loses the ability to “keep killing” people around the empire. I am not saying it was a bad thing that Britain lost the Empire; instead I am saying that losing the Empire was unlikely to have been intention of those who instigated austerity after WWI, but was its inevitable result.
MTBW – I really don’t think that many of Trump’s voters actually expect him to build a wall. They take that as a rhetorical flourish to signify that he will help them. I have no idea how all of this will pan out. But if Trump is a real agent of change (God forbid, he might destroy the Republican Party from within or fracture the hegemony of the major parties) then something good might come of all this. I never cease to be surprised, in life, about how good presents often come in shabby wrapping. But we will see.
Antonbruckner11
I don’t think the wall was of any importance but it told the voters that he would look after them and I agree that the comment was saying he would help them as you say.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/cory-bernardi-says-donald-trumps-victory-is-a-validation-of-all-i-have-been-warning-about-20161109-gslxbd.html
Bloody Bernardi gloating!
Anton:
Something happened to the rich in the 1960s:
– previously they were willing to serve in the military but from the 1960s and started to concoct deferments by any means available
– previously they had regarded it as “shameful” if a corporate president was paid more than 20 times the salary of the average worker, but from the 1960s they started to demand what the (rigged*) market would bear.
*The market for executive salaries is run by executives and (now) for their benefit and to the detriment of everyone else (including non-executive shareholders). The so called “agency problem”. Hence it is “shameful” for executives to exploit this situation, and in the 1960s they mostly did not.
EGT – I think that, by the 60s, the collective mentality of WW2 and the early cold war started to wear off and we got back to a more usual (greedy) society
EGT
I am not arguing your economic analysis.
My view is that empires get to a stage where the murderous impulse, literally, is lost in the metropolitan power.
Two world wars assuaged most the British blood lust, although there were still some very willing killers on the loose in Kenya, for example.
When the impulse to maintain empire with blood goes, so does the empire.
Excuses, excuses, excuses and continuing with the holier than thou lecturing of the deplorables.
You people just don’t get it.
UK, Australia, BREXIT, US and yet you keep banging on with the same boiler plate cultural Marxism.
Please don’t stop. You keep losing.
When has a losing candidate ever not fronted after a loss? I can never recall that happening in all the Australian, US or U.K. elections I’ve followed in over 40 years – and Clinton gets a pass to such poor behaviour? Just more media bias. Imagine if Trump lost and did that? He’d be crucified.
At least she didn’t do a Rudd on Losing.
Democrats strangely silent about big money campaign spending- not surprised seeing they were beaten by a campaign that vastly underspent them and was fighting the Democrats, the Republican organisation and the Independents.
CC
Give me a break. He told her she would be put in jail AND said he wouldnt accept the result if he lost. He forced her to debate in front of her husbands mistresses. For christs sake man, you’re a numbnut.
So she needed a few hours of rest to take the bitter pill and summ up the grace to help reunite the country. She has taken the loss a hell of a lot better than Cruz did.
Only one thing worse than a bad loser Crank, and that’s a bad winner.
Trog, Nicholas, Dan Gulberry and Guytaur might just want to have a look at today’s Crikey:
‘Rundle: progressives will blame everyone but themselves for this mess’
I suppose that Dan will now get himself all worked up to start accusing Rundle of being mentally unwell.
After all, how could any sane person have the temerity to question the superior intelligence and wisdom of Dan Gulberry?
Lots of people are going to say that the polls got it wrong (with Trump). I think it is more likely they got their interpretations wrong. And ultimately, there is a reason why we need to combine quantitative analyses with qualitative ones; as polling needs to be placed in is political context.
The polling average at the end (including poll bludger) had Clinton at around 47% of the vote, she ended up winning 47%. It was correct.
The problem was that there was a high number of undecided voters (more than any other election) up until election day; and it was assumed by pollsters and pundits that these would fall 50/50 to Trump/Clinton. They were stupid to think this.
My interpretation is, that after hearing the entire misogynist, racist dribble coming from Trump’s mouth, if you were still undecided about your vote, then there was a good chance you just didn’t care and were likely to vote for him anyway. If hearing that wasn’t a game breaker, then Clinton was always going to struggle to gain your vote.
Of the 100 biggest US newspapers (by circulation) 57 endorsed Clinton, 4 endorsed Johnson and only 2 endorsed Trump. It shows how impotent the media has become, especially when the media is viewed as part of the problem by being elite and establishment.
Mortlock,
people these days are more impulsive. That why high sugar/low fibre diet is in my troika of things to blame.
The terrorist have won.
Keith Olbermann’s latest:
https://thescene.com/watch/gq/the-closer-with-keith-olbermann-the-terrorists-have-won
compact crank @ #1517 Thursday, November 10, 2016 at 12:38 pm
Does the fact that they won make them somehow less deplorable? That’s a very American attitude.
boerwar @ #1520 Thursday, November 10, 2016 at 12:52 pm
ROFL.
They were never deplorable to start with and Clinton apologised through gritted teeth for being caught out.
And the old win because the young don’t show up to vote. Really makes you appreciate Australia’s mandatory voting in elections. If America had the same thing, this mess would never have happened.
Michelle Obama 8/1 to be the next president.
Condelezza Rice for POTUS.
Sorry, you’re going to have to deal with Trump for now.
dan gulberry @ #1551 Thursday, November 10, 2016 at 1:08 pm
I think Rundle is referring to progressive here as anyone who is
Clinton is 5 millions vote short of Obama, and Trump was won despite getting 1.5 million votes less than Romney (final number pending completion of counting).
Dio
Yep.
Fortunately the progressives had nothing to do with the election of POTUS Trump.
Having washed their hands they can now enjoy the crucifixion of the United States.
Raara – when you’ve finished your outrage over the difference between the popular vote and the Electoral College system no doubt you’ll call for the SA ALP Government to resign? No?
I never said I was outraged. Trump won fair and square.
I was having a go at the idea that compulsory voting analysis just doesn’t apply in an election where enrolment is optional.
And I just realised my earlier post was cut short. I meant to say Rundle in that article refers to progressives as anyone who is left of the Republicans.
Trump won BECAUSE he was not endorsed by the media or the Republican party. The more the media and his own party railed against him the more of an outsider he was and the more people voted for him. They voted for him because he was the least qualified. How do you run a campaign against that?
compact crank @ #1552 Thursday, November 10, 2016 at 1:11 pm
They were deplorable then and they are deplorable now. And Trump will be as deplorable a president as Abbott was Prime Minister. Hopefully, he will suffer the same fate and be impeached by his own party before he can do too much damage.
“Progressive” morons who wouldn’t know progressive economic policy from a bar of soap chose to prioritize identity politics over the livelihood issues that matter most to voters. All Americans have to pick up the pieces after “progressives” screwed up.
MORTLOCK – Very perceptive
RM – Totally right. Hopefully now Trump will run against Congressional Republicans. I live in hope.
The problem with Clinton’s “deplorables” is not whether it’s right or wrong, it’s that she doesn’t know who will believe she’s referring to them. Only half, so the other half should not feel insulted, right? Who is in which half, though? It would be a good bet that more than half the basket felt she was referring to them, and that even some outside of the basket – who were feeling tempted to jump in – also believed she was referring to them and took offence.
Negatively labeling some vaguely specified group and betting people will self identify and take offence is a favourite troll tactic. Her comment would have had a similar effect, even though her intent surely can’t have been to alienate the non-deplorable half of the basket.
In many ways Trump will be the least powerful and least effective president ever. The republican House and Senate will trample him. He will do what they want because he will have no alternative. The evangelicals were right. They voted for an ungoddly sinner on the basis that the god botherers would hold the reins.
Has this been posted already?….
538 —
Overall turnout among women was only 1 percentage point higher than in 2012.
Clinton did very poorly with the white women non-college graduate demographic.
Simon Katich
Very interesting!
Player,
Trump doesn’t have an obstructionist Senate to deal with. He is also not driven by political weather vanes so I don’t expect he and his Cabinet to make the same mistakes Abbott and his Cabinet made in trying to be all things to all people. And Trump does have Turnbull white anting him. So I expect he will achieve a great deal – in particular rolling back many of Obama’s Executive orders, dissembling the Obamacare disaster and increasing security screening of arrivals from high risk back grounds. The Left will play the gotcha game on any campaign comments that aren’t carried out to the letter but pragmatists won’t let that bother them. How’s Obama going with closing Gitmo and stopping the rise of the oceans?
raaraa @ #1557 Thursday, November 10, 2016 at 1:40 pm
Boerwar obviously didn’t read the article he cited as backing his theory up.
ROFL.
Trump campaigned on being an outsider, “drain the swamp”. His government will be stuck deeper into the swamp than any in living memory.
We see this in relation the Malcolm Bligh Turnbull’s bizarre “sore winner” performance on election night, and since: he has been unable to let go…