2016 electoral college voting **live commentary thread** (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 11, 2024, 01:25:40 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  2016 electoral college voting **live commentary thread** (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 2016 electoral college voting **live commentary thread**  (Read 21480 times)
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« on: December 19, 2016, 01:41:10 PM »
The happy farmers of SD are a joke. Vote for Clinton in both primaries, but vote for Trump in both stages of the GE.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #1 on: December 19, 2016, 02:19:16 PM »
Quote from: Bigby on December 19, 2016, 02:15:02 PM
North Dakota for Trump. Look, if there's not going to be a faithless elector, why draw so much damn attention to this?!

The Clinton electors drew attention with their calls for briefings and legal assistance.

Ultimately that Suprun guy will be faithless, and WA is just the fine, they don't throw out the vote, so probably someone there will come through. Possible there are others but we'll see.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #2 on: December 19, 2016, 02:26:17 PM »
Quote from: JRoby on December 19, 2016, 02:24:19 PM
So is TX going to be the over the hump state for Trump?

Yes, because Clinton would have won the election if she won TX.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #3 on: December 19, 2016, 03:15:54 PM »
MO - 10 Trump
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #4 on: December 19, 2016, 03:16:36 PM »
Quote from: MLM on December 19, 2016, 03:14:46 PM
270ToWin is down I believe does anyone have any other results maps

It's working for me
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #5 on: December 19, 2016, 03:25:30 PM »
Quote from: Senator LLR on December 19, 2016, 07:21:40 AM
My prediction

Trump: 306
Clinton: 232

Faithless electors: 0

Let's be real here.

ROFL
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #6 on: December 19, 2016, 03:31:19 PM »
NE - 5 Trump
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #7 on: December 19, 2016, 03:39:31 PM »
CO - 9 Clinton
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #8 on: December 19, 2016, 03:43:28 PM »
Quote from: Lok1999 on December 19, 2016, 03:41:14 PM
Quote from: Castro on December 19, 2016, 03:40:13 PM

Kyle Cheney ‏@kyledcheney  30m30 minutes ago
Colorado elector Micheal Baca, leader of anti-Trump Hamilton #Electors, replaced after attempting to cast vote against Clinton. #DEC19
Anti-trumper voting against Clinton?

The whole idea behind the Hamilton electors was that they would vote against Clinton to convince Trump electors to vote against Trump.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #9 on: December 19, 2016, 04:14:23 PM »
Quote from: Representative Carpetbagger on December 19, 2016, 04:11:09 PM
Quote from: Mr. Morden on December 19, 2016, 04:07:15 PM

He'd probably be a better president than Trump.  But I don't think he's eligible, since word is that he was born in Mexico.


Texas was born before 1787.  I think that means the born in America requirement is void.

That clause only applies to those who lived in the US in 1787, but were not born there. Texas was still part of Mexico then.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #10 on: December 19, 2016, 04:15:01 PM »

5, MT is still out.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #11 on: December 19, 2016, 04:20:00 PM »
Quote from: Castro on December 19, 2016, 04:17:41 PM
I believe the timing on the remaining states are:

TX - Happening now, started at 3 PM
MT - Happening now, started at 4 PM
NV - 5 PM
CA - 5 PM
DC - I think I saw 5 PM somewhere
HA - 7 PM


HA? The EC is not funny.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #12 on: December 19, 2016, 04:20:23 PM »
Quote from: Representative Carpetbagger on December 19, 2016, 04:18:34 PM
Quote from: Dwarven Dragon on December 19, 2016, 04:14:23 PM
Quote from: Representative Carpetbagger on December 19, 2016, 04:11:09 PM
Quote from: Mr. Morden on December 19, 2016, 04:07:15 PM

He'd probably be a better president than Trump.  But I don't think he's eligible, since word is that he was born in Mexico.


Texas was born before 1787.  I think that means the born in America requirement is void.

That clause only applies to those who lived in the US in 1787, but were not born there. Texas was still part of Mexico then.

Well, technically part of New Spain.  So were people born in the Louisiana Purchase before 1803 ineligible to be President?

Yes
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #13 on: December 19, 2016, 05:07:21 PM »
Quote from: PeteB on December 19, 2016, 05:00:23 PM
It would be amusing, if TX couldn't successfully convene its EC, and the race gets thrown to the House! Smiley

In that case, The election is treated as if TX didn't exist (so only 500/2 = 250 EVs needed to win), and Trump would win 268-228, no congressional vote needed.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #14 on: December 19, 2016, 05:35:06 PM »
Quote from: Dabeav on December 19, 2016, 05:33:29 PM
So... 6 faithless (2 rebuked) that flipped from Clinton and only 2 for Trump.  Shows you how bad Hillary was as a candidate when that many flipped away from her instead.
Again, the idea was that them doing this would convince Republican electors to reject Trump.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #15 on: December 19, 2016, 05:37:12 PM »
Quote from: Père Ubu on December 19, 2016, 05:33:57 PM
Six faithless electors so far. The first time we've got more than one since 1960, I believe (Kennedy won Alabama, but six of them voted Byrd. Mississippi was actually carried by an unpledged slot).

All the Byrd votes were from unpledged electors - AL wasn't WTA. Same reason 1860 had no faithless electors - NJ wasn't WTA.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #16 on: December 19, 2016, 05:38:14 PM »
Quote from: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on December 19, 2016, 05:35:31 PM
Quote from: SteveRogers on December 19, 2016, 10:33:41 AM
Quote from: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on December 19, 2016, 07:47:06 AM
We're going to have the most faithless electors (faithless is more common for VP) in a couple of centuries, but before anyone gets too excited, there were 2 in 1832 and 6 in 1808. That's it for elections with multiple faithless electors.

There were actually 23 in 1836, but all for VP. The VP election actually got thrown to the Senate for the only time when New York Virginia delegation refused to vote for Van Buren's running mate.

I meant for President. VP is more common. We've now tied 1808 for the most Presidential faithless electors with 6.

Wikipedia seems to indicate 10 in 1892?
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #17 on: December 19, 2016, 05:44:34 PM »
Quote from: Père Ubu on December 19, 2016, 05:40:15 PM
Quote from: Dwarven Dragon on December 19, 2016, 05:37:12 PM
Quote from: Père Ubu on December 19, 2016, 05:33:57 PM
Six faithless electors so far. The first time we've got more than one since 1960, I believe (Kennedy won Alabama, but six of them voted Byrd. Mississippi was actually carried by an unpledged slot).

All the Byrd votes were from unpledged electors - AL wasn't WTA. Same reason 1860 had no faithless electors - NJ wasn't WTA.

Hm, didn't know that. Still it's funny since Kennedy won the state's PV with 56.39% (Dave doesn't list any unpledged voters in Alabama for 1960.)

Where they being allocated via CDs? For since when?

The actual candidates for elector were listed on the GE ballot instead of the candidates, and people could vote however they wanted. So a split delegation served in the EC.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #18 on: December 19, 2016, 05:45:57 PM »
Quote from: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on December 19, 2016, 05:43:29 PM
Quote from: Dwarven Dragon on December 19, 2016, 05:38:14 PM
Quote from: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on December 19, 2016, 05:35:31 PM
Quote from: SteveRogers on December 19, 2016, 10:33:41 AM
Quote from: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on December 19, 2016, 07:47:06 AM
We're going to have the most faithless electors (faithless is more common for VP) in a couple of centuries, but before anyone gets too excited, there were 2 in 1832 and 6 in 1808. That's it for elections with multiple faithless electors.

There were actually 23 in 1836, but all for VP. The VP election actually got thrown to the Senate for the only time when New York Virginia delegation refused to vote for Van Buren's running mate.

I meant for President. VP is more common. We've now tied 1808 for the most Presidential faithless electors with 6.

Wikipedia seems to indicate 10 in 1892?

I just see 1 for 1892 here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector

See the main article for the 1892 election.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,991
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P
« Reply #19 on: December 19, 2016, 06:27:54 PM »
Why hasn't 270towin added Nevada yet?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.038 seconds with 9 queries.