Turn on thread page Beta

US Presidential Election 2016 official thread watch

  • View Poll Results: .
    .
    0
    0%
    .
    0
    0%

    • TSR Support Team
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Clearing and Applications Advisor


    US Presidential Election 2016


    It's one of the most important political events of the year as the United States of America votes in its 58th Presidential Election. With both Republican and Democrat Party candidates having fought in some tough presidential primaries in order to secure their party's nomination, this election season has been a year filled with scandals and ugly division. Whoever is elected as the next leader of the United States becomes the figurehead of the world's largest economy and the world's largest armed forces by expenditure. With starkly different visions for the US, who the country elects will be closely watched around the world.



    Election Night Live Tracker
    (this will update as results are announced)

    Hillary Clinton: 218
    Donald Trump: 289

    Donald Trump wins the Presidential Election

    How Election Day Works

    The US follows the electoral college system rather than directly electing their president. Each state and Washington DC are allocated electoral college votes (ECVs), the proportion of which roughly matches the proportion of the population living in that state. When the public casts their vote, they're actually nominating electors who should in theory vote in the electoral college for the candidate that wins the state's backing. Each state's number of electors is equal to the amount of lawmakers it has in the Senate and the House of Representatives, adding up to 538 electors in total.

    In almost all states, the candidate who wins the popular vote gets every elector in that state (e.g. whoever wins California get 55 ECVs). The exceptions are Nebraska and Maine, who allocate a vote to the winners of their congressional districts plus two votes for the candidate who wins the popular vote in the state. To win, a candidate must have at least a majority of electors, or 270 electors.

    Who Matters?

    Some states are safe-states - highly partisan and are seen as reliable cores for certain parties. For example, California's seats have gone to the Democrats for the last six elections, whilst Texas' seats have gone to the Republicans for the last nine.

    Hence, the traditional focus of campaigns and coverage during the election results has been on swing-states, the states where the two major parties have similar levels of support among voters. Most infamously it's often declared that whoever wins Ohio wins the presidency, with the state having proven to be a remarkably good predictor of the victor.

    POLITICO has identified 11 states as battleground states (with their ECVs in brackets):








    Colorado (9)
    Florida (29)
    Iowa (6)
    Michigan (16)
    Nevada (6)
    New Hampshire (4)
    North Carolina (15)
    Ohio (18)
    Pennsylvania (20)
    Virginia (13)
    Wisconsin (10)


    This election, the democrat candidate Hillary Clinton has bucked the trend and hasn't campaigned in every traditional swing-state. Instead, her strategy appears to be relying on the solid core of democrat safe-states and a group of six swing-states known as Clinton's firewall. These are Michigan, Wisconsin, Virginia, Colorado, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire.

    Mathematically, so long as these states and the traditional safe-states hold in favour of Clinton, she exceeds 270 ECVs even if every other state did not vote in her favour.

    These states have polled significantly in favour of Clinton for much of the election season, but the recent scandal regarding her use of a private email server has led to weakening leads in many of them. This is key, because should some of these states fall into the hands of Donald Trump, the republican candidate, her chances of winning the presidential election are weakened significantly.

    In contrast, Trump's bid for presidency hinges on winning states like Florida and Ohio else his chances are seen as slim.

    Who's likely to win?

    This is tricky to answer. Many forecasters have attached reasonably high probabilities on a Clinton victory. FiveThirtyEight's election forecast has Clinton's chance of winning at 71%. The Upshot, the election stats hub of the New York Times, gives an 84% chance of a Clinton win.







    Still, much has been made of the demographics of voters turning out to vote (the latino turnout and vote is seen as a key indicator of Trump's chance of success) and several states have leads within statistical error. Clinton's nationwide popularity lead has shrunk significantly since the FBI announced they were reviewing new emails relating to her use of a private server, so the case can be made that Trump has built significant momentum in the two weeks leading up to the 8th November. Though it was announced later that there was no evidence of incriminating material within those emails, it remains to be seen whether the whole case has damaged Clinton's lead going into election day.

    What times should I know ?

    The closing time for the polls in each state is illustrated by Bloomberg below (times in EST):



    No-one is certain of when the winning presidential candidate will be declared. The earliest the election is called in favour of a candidate is likely to be 11PM EST (4AM in the UK).
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Republican Senator Ted Cruz confirms US presidency bid.

    He's the first Republican to announce his presidency bid, so it will be interesting to see what follows from here.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Republican Senator Ted Cruz confirms US presidency bid.

    He's the first Republican to announce his presidency bid, so it will be interesting to see what follows from here.
    He's really far right if I'm not mistaken? I imagine he could do well in the primaries, forcing any moderates to the right, which tends to bugger them in the actual election
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aj12)
    He's really far right if I'm not mistaken? I imagine he could do well in the primaries, forcing any moderates to the right, which tends to bugger them in the actual election
    The BBC are calling him the 'darling of the Tea Party', so yeah, I suspect he's pretty right-wing. Hopefully he's nothing like Rick Santorum or any of the other relatively successful far right-wing Republicans we've seen in the past.

    Hilary Clinton will probably be the front runner for the Democrats, but it's less certain for the Republicans. Jeb Bush perhaps?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    The democrats will badly struggle to replace Obama in this one. The energy and enthusiasm he brought to both 2008 and 2012 campaigns wont be there with Clinton (who will be nearly 70), I can't see her motivating young people or minorities the way Obama could, turnout will therefore be lower for the democrats.

    If you remember in 08' Obama went to Germany and 250,000 people went to hear him speak, absolutely extraordinary for a guy to go to a foreign country and get that. Week after week in the US the guy was getting 100,000 people to hear him speak, 100,000 people in, Denver, Detroit everywhere in America, then he was the first person, beating LadyGaga and Bieber to 10 million twitter followers. In the cynical age of 21st century politics and how people view politicians normally, that's absolutely incredible.

    Hilary is no Obama, the democrats are effectively attempting to replace possibly the greatest politician of all time (in terms of speeches, charisma, presentation etc), we saw what happened to democrats in the mid terms when Obama's name was off the ticket.

    Many comments I'm reading in the NYT and Guardian suggest Obama will replace FDR as the greatest president of all time if gets the nuclear deal with Iran next week, the democrats are replacing a superstar effectively. The republicans will win this one as Obama is now off the ticket. The GOP wont increase their turnout, but the democrats will lose theirs in terms of young people and minorities.

    Also I think there will be an anti-dynasty vote, Americans wont like the idea of another Bush/Clinton again in the white house, so if the Republicans avoid picking Bush and let the democrats pick Clinton, that will help them, Scott Walker looks like their best bet.

    Both the Tories in the UK and Republicans are the natural part of government respectively in the US and the UK and are only put out of power when the left have a charismatic front man (e.g. JFK, Clinton, Obama, or Blair over here).
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Reluire)
    The BBC are calling him the 'darling of the Tea Party', so yeah, I suspect he's pretty right-wing. Hopefully he's nothing like Rick Santorum or any of the other relatively successful far right-wing Republicans we've seen in the past.

    Hilary Clinton will probably be the front runner for the Democrats, but it's less certain for the Republicans. Jeb Bush perhaps?
    Clinton has a lot hanging around her neck, a lot of scandals and she may have some health issues. I'd be interested to see if there could be an insurgent candidate among the democrats.

    My money is on Jeb Bush or Rubio right now. Chris Christie gets mentioned a lot but Romney tried to vet him for VP and a lot of dodgy things came out. I don't think the man could survive a presidential campaign once he gets put under scrutiny.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Ted Cruz....

    No abortions (including rape of course, I imagine like others of his he believes if a woman is truly raped she cannot get pregnant (Todd Akin)).

    No gay marriage of course, though not making it illegal yet surprisingly.

    Contraception will mostly be out, condoms still in but basically any pills he brands as "causing abortions of babies" regardless of their mechanism.

    Scrap Obama's health stuff (albeit it's not popular with all anyway), seems to dislikes cheap healthcare options despite his own healthcare only coming from his wife's job.

    Scrap the IRS....not quite sure what he intends to do in its place...

    Voted against legislation for more funding and government bodies to investigate violent crimes against women, maybe a partners right to keep his wife like an animal, sounds teaparty.

    Wants to "secure our borders"...despite being the son of a Cuban immigrant and...being born in Canada (had to give up citizenship to run)

    So basically...the first of your usual handful of Republican crazies/Christian nutters steps forward. More he says sooner he'll go, I'd imagine if he does gain ground someone will film undercover comments about wanting to kill homosexuals or something.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joey11223)
    Ted Cruz....

    No abortions (including rape of course, I imagine like others of his he believes if a woman is truly raped she cannot get pregnant (Todd Akin)).

    No gay marriage of course, though not making it illegal yet surprisingly.

    Contraception will mostly be out, condoms still in but basically any pills he brands as "causing abortions of babies" regardless of their mechanism.

    Scrap Obama's health stuff (albeit it's not popular with all anyway), seems to dislikes cheap healthcare options despite his own healthcare only coming from his wife's job.

    Scrap the IRS....not quite sure what he intends to do in its place...

    Voted against legislation for more funding and government bodies to investigate violent crimes against women, maybe a partners right to keep his wife like an animal, sounds teaparty.

    Wants to "secure our borders"...despite being the son of a Cuban immigrant and...being born in Canada (had to give up citizenship to run)

    So basically...the first of your usual handful of Republican crazies/Christian nutters steps forward. More he says sooner he'll go, I'd imagine if he does gain ground someone will film undercover comments about wanting to kill homosexuals or something.
    Yeah, I reckon Cruz is far too right for him to land the presidency.

    he's also joke, take a look: http://tedcruz.com
    how he's managed to announce his presidential campaign when he hasn't even bothered to sort himself out first is beyond me.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Rand Paul announces 2016 White House bid.

    Another Republican entry. Haven't heard much from the Democrats yet.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    #StandWithRand
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gnobe)
    Many comments I'm reading in the NYT and Guardian suggest Obama will replace FDR as the greatest president of all time if gets the nuclear deal with Iran next week,
    Oh my god. Are you serious?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Rand Paul announces 2016 White House bid.

    Another Republican entry. Haven't heard much from the Democrats yet.
    Bet their all waiting to see if Hilary jumps in or not. Wonder how different Rand will be from his father. Can't see him ever winning, or even getting close.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gnobe)
    The democrats will badly struggle to replace Obama in this one. The energy and enthusiasm he brought to both 2008 and 2012 campaigns wont be there with Clinton (who will be nearly 70), I can't see her motivating young people or minorities the way Obama could, turnout will therefore be lower for the democrats.
    Um, no. Sure, Obama had LOTS of enthusiasm in 2008, but 2012 was a whole another story. The recurring theme in 2012 was that of lackluster enthusiasm for both parties-with voters dissatisfied by both Romney and Obama. Among voters, it was a choice of which one was less worse than the other. Any enthusiasm that Obama had in 08 has long been gone.

    It's unfair to compare 08 Obama who was running to 15 Hillary who isn't even in political office. But the being said, Hillary's book Hard Choices and it's tour was popular, and Hillary has always been good in gathering enthusiasm from women voters-who are a key bloc for the Democratic Party.

    Hilary is no Obama, the democrats are effectively attempting to replace possibly the greatest politician of all time (in terms of speeches, charisma, presentation etc), we saw what happened to democrats in the mid terms when Obama's name was off the ticket.

    Many comments I'm reading in the NYT and Guardian suggest Obama will replace FDR as the greatest president of all time if gets the nuclear deal with Iran next week, the democrats are replacing a superstar effectively. The republicans will win this one as Obama is now off the ticket. The GOP wont increase their turnout, but the democrats will lose theirs in terms of young people and minorities.
    Once again, no. President Obama, as much as I love him, is not perceived by the American people to be the greatest POTUS of all time. Obama has been roundly criticized for overusing his executive authority to sidestep Congress, for a non-coherent Middle East policy, for sitting idly and watching ISIS gain power in the Middle East, negotiating the Iran deal without Congressional input, and alienating Israel. That doesn't even include criticisms of his domestic policy. FYI, comments from random people in the NYTimes (a bastion of liberalism) and the Guardian (which isn't even an American paper) are not indicative of the overall opinion of the American people.

    BTW, do you even keep up with American politics? The latest polls put Hillary in a double digit lead to win over Jeb Bush, the highest rated Republican potential POTUS candidate. Hillary isn't going to decrease enthusiasm-she's been carefully planning this for ages.

    Also I think there will be an anti-dynasty vote, Americans wont like the idea of another Bush/Clinton again in the white house, so if the Republicans avoid picking Bush and let the democrats pick Clinton, that will help them, Scott Walker looks like their best bet.
    I highly doubt that their will be an anti-dynasty vote. Like I mentioned, the latest polls put Hillary to win the bid for the White House. On the GOP side, there has been a clear divide between the establishment branch (which Jeb embodies) and the ideological branch (which Ted Cruz and etc. are more affiliated with). FYI, the establishment branch tends to win because it has a better group of donors and is much more palatable for the primaries. On the other hand, the Republicans tend to go through a "anything but establishment candidate" phase, but I think the winner of that will be Rand Paul, the winner of the CPAC 2015 Straw Poll.

    Both the Tories in the UK and Republicans are the natural part of government respectively in the US and the UK and are only put out of power when the left have a charismatic front man (e.g. JFK, Clinton, Obama, or Blair over here).
    That is incorrect on SO many levels. The Republicans have NOT been the dominant party throughout American history. Maybe you should learn American history before you spout such erroneous ideas.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well,usually Rebublicans before elections move more to "left" just to attract new voters.Democrats equally move more to the "right" to attract new voters.Hillary is the only candidate who has already stabilized at the centre.This shows at my personal opinion that she believes she can win the elections.She realizes her numbers.And she was smart enough to quit the run for presidency against Obama.So,she has not much of political frictions.On the other hand, Republicans are already the upper hand in both in the House and the Senate something which shows the political wave Republicans currently have and will most likely will continue to have in a year.Except if one year is enough for Americans to show their anger and dissatisfaction.Last but not least,Americans is a nation who traditionally vote for the most trusted and promising people.So in that case maybe a woman with a lot of political experience(if you include her husband's service) can improve America's position by improving both foreign policy (for start have a stronger word in Europe) and domestic (for instance do actually something about those sperms of racism).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    paul>clinton
    I'd be saying that x2 if by "paul" I meant "ron"
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zippity.doodah)
    paul>clinton
    I'd be saying that x2 if by "paul" I meant "ron"
    not really sure he'll overcome Cruz though
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hellen21)
    not really sure he'll overcome Cruz though
    oh yeah, I forgot US conservatives were still mostly crazy :/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zippity.doodah)
    oh yeah, I forgot US conservatives were still mostly crazy :/

    Well Republicans still love Texas hahaha
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Republican Senator Ted Cruz confirms US presidency bid.

    He's the first Republican to announce his presidency bid, so it will be interesting to see what follows from here.
    Cruz? That's the best from R? US is not great enough? I can feel despair now.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Rand Paul announces 2016 White House bid.

    Another Republican entry. Haven't heard much from the Democrats yet.
    Better choice from R? But I don't think homosexuals and feminists like him. They couldn't vote for him.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

1,085

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.