On October 25, OneVote announced partial results for its Mock Vote. The Mock Vote is conducted in many schools around the U.S. This year, almost 300,000 votes were cast. The results: Hillary Clinton 47%; Donald Trump 41%; “other” 12%. Perhaps there is a breakdown of “other”, but I have not found it. It appears that Gary Johnson and Jill Stein, at least, were on all the Mock Vote ballots.
OneVote has been doing this starting in 1992. The winner of the student vote has always matched the identity of the actual winner.
I went to the site. While they do not show details for the “other” votes I did notice there were eight students chosen called Team OneVote whose evolving political opinions were followed over the election process. One of the eight is shown having voted for Gary Johnson.
Also, for those interested there is a place to type in your zip code and then select a school in that zip to see how your local school voted. My local high school was 75% Trump 25% Clinton and 0% Other. That result did not surprise me knowing the area where I live.
My high school in rural Georgia went 50/50.
Early Civil WAR II stats ???
My High School went: Zero Clinton, 50% Trump and 50% Other.
This makes no sense at all. I enjoy the 50% other, but find this odd.
Apparently my high school didn’t participate.
I know there are many more things to be worried about right now, but for some reason this was really bothering me. I emailed them, and they were kind enough to respond. Not the answer I expected…
—-
To whom it may concern,
Thank you for coordinating the “OneVote” student mock election this year.
I was wondering why the 12% “Other” results do not indicate a breakdown by candidate? It is not even clear which “Other” candidates were given as an option in your mock election anywhere on your website.
Will you be publishing this detail on a later date? Why did you decide to combine all non-Republican/Democrat votes into one “other” category? I find this to be a troubling precedent, especially for an effort meant to be an educational experience for young people about the political process – lumping all third party votes into one “other” result is not representative of our electoral system and marginalizes these future voters even further.
Thank you for any insights you can share.
—
Hi,
Thank you for taking the time to write to us! We always appreciate and value feedback from our audience.
Unfortunately, we do not have additional breakdown to provide for our “Other” category. The ballot allowed for students to check the box and write-in the candidate. It’s definitely a note we’ll consider in the future for our next mock election.
Apologies for the confusion! Thanks again for your feedback.
Best,
Cassie Hudson
Associate Producer
Channel One News
A Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Company
132 W. 31st Street, 14th Floor
New York, NY 10001
O: 646-564-4600
M: 954-778-8302
channelone.com
As plausible as the popular vote share seems to be from the mock election, the electoral college map looks quite implausible. Texas and Mississippi for Clinton while Minnesota and Michigan for Trump?
How many LIAR votes by really scheming teenagers — learning how to LIE to moron pollsters in future elections ???
A university professor is claiming he has accurately predicted the winner since 1984.He is claiming Trump will win based on his methodology.I personally think it will be close or maybe thrown in the house of Representatives.The electors can vote against Trump.Maybe California Governor Jerry Brown should be a comprised candidate if that happens.He is more qualified than either Clinton or Trump.