Here are the presidential vote tallies as of Saturday, November 26: David Leip’s U.S. Election Atlas is here.
Here is the Cook Political Report tally, which seems not quite as up-to-date as the Election Atlas.
Here are the presidential vote tallies as of Saturday, November 26: David Leip’s U.S. Election Atlas is here.
Here is the Cook Political Report tally, which seems not quite as up-to-date as the Election Atlas.
Has Darrell Castle and the Constitution Party broken 200K yet?
Darrell L. Castle Scott Bradley Constitution 193,125 0.14%
Looking at the results from just the 24 states in which Castle was on the ballot, without updated results from NJ, I can only count 185,495 votes for him.
Going to six states in which there is a break-down of write-in votes, I can count 6946 more votes for Castle, so apparently he has not yet broken 200,000. It’s pretty close, though, and several states have not provided a break-down of write-ins (if they ever will).
Does anyone know why David Leip chose to give Evan McMullin his own color (green), but grouped Johnson, Stein, “OTHER”, and all Write-Ins together in one (yellow)?
I’m guessing that McMullin got green because there was a chance in October that McMullin could win Utah or at least win a county in Utah. Neither of which happened.
Leip’a color assignments are made a little bit before the contests start. Hence his color selections for the primaries in 08/12/16
A couple of impertinent, but interesting facts:
1. Even with her large popular vote lead, Clinton only has 48% of the total vote.
2. Even with 46% of the popular vote, Trump still has a larger percentage of the popular vote than when Bill Clinton first won in 1992: 43%
One of the things that makes me hesitant to endorse the popular vote election of the President is that whether or not to have a runoff if no one gets 50%. This problem isn’t addressed either by the National Popular Vote Compact proposal, or by Pelosi’s proposed constitutional amendment.
It’s Senator Barbara Boxer’s amendment. Probably if the national popular vote plan got close to having enough states to be enacted, the entire political establishment would turn its attention to how to plan a new presidential election system. There would be plenty of attention paid to runoffs and Instant Runoff Voting.
@Richard Winger:
I thank you for your correction and comment.
As I understand Senator Boxer’s proposal, it’s very broadly written, and pretty much empowers Congress to work out all the details, which might or might not include a runoff.
The NPV Compact appears not specify any voting system, such that, if a sufficient number of states adopt it, whatever voting system they use will be accepted. This creates some problems. For instance, if a swing state adopts instant runoff voting with NPV in place, them, presumably, they will contribute more votes to a candidate after 2nd votes are added to 1st votes for a candidate.
McMullin did get 22 percent in Utah (placing 2nd in 15 out of 28 counties), and 7 percent in Idaho (placing 2nd in 7 out of 44 counties).
MAJOR waste of time and effort to look at stats before about Dec. 10 — when they *might* be final -final- final —
except perhaps Prez stats — right up to the meeting of the gerrymander Electoral College and all of its EVIL rotted machinations.
Are the SCOTUS appointed HACKS ready for stuff in the next about 3 weeks by the vast leftwing and rightwing conspiracies ???
Dave Leip has assigned the color green to Strom Thurmond in 1948, to “Unpledged Elector” in 1956, 1960, and 1964, to George Wallace in 1968, to John Schmitz in 1972, to Eugene McCarthy in 1976, to John Anderson in 1980, to Ron Paul in 1988, to Ross Perot in both 1992 and 1996, to Ralph Nader in 2000, 2004, and 2008. I can’t fathom what is the reasoning behind when he assigns the color green to someone and when he doesn’t.
Let us remember in CA there were 108 nominees for Presidential & Vice Presidential Electors try for 55 slots on those Statewide Offices of Profit under CA Election Code section 6909. They are all pledged to the ticket of
Trump/Pence.
However, there is no why to determine how many votes these nominees for electors received. Therefore, the
XIV Article, Section 2 of the Constitution will come into play. It states in part: “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their
respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians Not Taxed. But
when the right to vote at any election for choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United
States,… is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such
State, being twenty-one years of age, and a citizen of the
United States, or in any way abridged,… The basis of Representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion
which the numbers of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.”
Next step will be a filling under 28 USC section 2284 in
a United States District Court in CA for a three judge panel. The voter in California did not get a choice to
vote for 55 electors in any of the 58 counties of California
if they wanted electors pledged to the ticket of Trump/Pence, because none of the ROV followed the terms of CA Election Code section 13109 as it related
to the nominee electors for both the Repubican and American Independent slates.