Remaining votes (Update: about 500K ballots left to count nationwide)

[StateBoiler]

and with that, republicans lose the PV in 6 of 7 elections, historic margins afaik.

that split happening 2 times in 20 years is something very rare too.....

I have an issue with saying you lose the popular vote when the winner is under 50 by a significant amount. The further away from 50 you are, the less "winning the popular vote" means, and this election more than any other recent election saw a larger dispersal of votes to multiple 3rd party candidates as opposed to just one main one. If Clinton had won 50% of the vote, she probably would've won the Electoral College. That makes 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2016 -four of the past 7 elections - where the person that received the most votes did not achieve a majority.

A Democrat has only gotten a majority of the vote twice in the past 10 elections.

[StateBoiler]

and with that, republicans lose the PV in 6 of 7 elections, historic margins afaik.

that split happening 2 times in 20 years is something very rare too.....

I have an issue with saying you lose the popular vote when the winner is under 50 by a significant amount. The further away from 50 you are, the less "winning the popular vote" means, and this election more than any other recent election saw a larger dispersal of votes to multiple 3rd party candidates as opposed to just one main one. If Clinton had won 50% of the vote, she probably would've won the Electoral College. That makes 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2016 -four of the past 7 elections - where the person that received the most votes did not achieve a majority.

A Democrat has only gotten a majority of the vote twice in the past 10 elections.

this is truly a meaningless post. Clinton won easily both times he was elected. The fact that he didn't get 50% of the vote really isn't relevant. Bush didn't get 50% either and neither did Trump. Have Republicans EVER gotten 50% of the vote in the past 25 years?

I'm sorry that mathematics offends you.

I don't give much credit to winning the vote when we start splitting the vote more than 2 ways. If we were basing who won the election on popular vote, you would change the vote of a lot of Johnson, Stein, and McMullin voters for starters which is 6 million votes right there.

2004 by the way.

[StateBoiler]

yea. I forgot about 2004.  point still stands. Most 3rd party voters  are either non-voters or end up going both directions. Clinton was well ahead in 1992 while Perot wasn't in the race. His running may have diminished Clinton's victory, frankly.

Also, it's pretty rich of someone to focus solely on the EC when the states don't even require 50% either to give all of their votes to a candidate.

If I was made election dictator in this country I'd fully embrace the Louisiana system nationwide.

I'm working on a paper for the Electoral College based on different systems. One is what I call "Convention-style Rules" where if no candidate gets 50% you do a proportional split for all above a certain threshold. Playing with a 5% threshold for example:

2000-Gore 272, Bush 265, Nader 1 (Convention-style rules are the only one of the various methods I've looked at that Gore gets 270)
1996-Clinton 359, Dole 158, Perot 21
1992-Clinton 239, Bush 195, Perot 104 (not looked at Electoral Districts yet, but the current Electoral College is the only way this election does not go to the House of every method I've looked at, which is 12)
1980-Reagan 385, Carter 134, Anderson 19

As far back as I've gotten. I'd like to go back to 1868. Not done this year yet because results aren't final.

[StateBoiler]

Clinton 64,160,361 47.90%
Trump 62,217,622 46.45%
Johnson 4,402,142 3.29%
Stein 1,384,348 1.03%
McMullin 572,310 0.43%
Castle 193,825 0.14%
La Riva 65,124 0.05%
De La Fuente 32,971 0.02%
Sanders 24,693 0.02%
Duncan 23,552 0.02%
Other 89,262 0.07%

Write-ins not broken down yet 734,239 0.55%
Scattered (write-ins post broken-down) 8,474 0.01%
None of These Candidates 28,863 0.02%

Total 133,937,674