4 ms·

I believe you are incorrect. I believe in 2008 it was about 132M and in 2016 it was 139M. http://www.electproject.org/2008g http://www.electproject.org/2008g h

by fiter 10y ago

I believe you are incorrect. I believe in 2008 it was about 132M and in 2016 it was 139M. http://www.electproject.org/2008g http://www.electproject.org/2008g http://www.electproject.org/2016g http://www.electproject.org/2016g I will also note that the poster you're replying to references gerrymandering as one of the causes of the election results not matching the votes; neither of your statements directly refute that. http://www.npr.org/2016/06/15/482150951/understanding-congressional-gerrymandering-its-moneyball-applied-to-politics http://www.npr.org/2016/06/15/482150951/understanding-congre...

Arizhel 10y ago
For some reason I really thought I saw figures that 5M fewer people voted than in '08. Maybe I'm comparing to '12? I'm too lazy to research this at the moment. However, your own page shows that the voter turnout was 2-3% lower between '08-'16. As for gerrymandering, that only affects the House races, nothing else. The President isn't affected by that, only by the archaic and undemocratic Electoral College and the way state borders are drawn. The Senate is similar. The GOP swept all three.
- fiter 10y ago
  I remember hearing the 5M number on the day of the election and maybe the day after, but not all the votes were counted at that point. It looks like the voter turnout was pretty average. Going back to 1972, the turnout numbers are similar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_St... Thank you for the reminder about the limitations of gerrymandering! Senate is 52-48 which doesn't seem like a sweep. This includes two independents which caucus with the Democrats. I think the Democrats actually picked up two seats, which doesn't seem like a sweep either. Also, in your previous comment, you said the GOP won some seats. Which seats were these? Donald Trump had a victory margin in the bottom 10 of historical elections: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_Electoral_College_margin#Table_of_election_results https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presiden...

by fiter 10y ago

Arizhel 10y ago

For some reason I really thought I saw figures that 5M fewer people voted than in '08. Maybe I'm comparing to '12? I'm too lazy to research this at the moment. However, your own page shows that the voter turnout was 2-3% lower between '08-'16. As for gerrymandering, that only affects the House races, nothing else. The President isn't affected by that, only by the archaic and undemocratic Electoral College and the way state borders are drawn. The Senate is similar. The GOP swept all three.

fiter 10y ago
I remember hearing the 5M number on the day of the election and maybe the day after, but not all the votes were counted at that point. It looks like the voter turnout was pretty average. Going back to 1972, the turnout numbers are similar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_St... Thank you for the reminder about the limitations of gerrymandering! Senate is 52-48 which doesn't seem like a sweep. This includes two independents which caucus with the Democrats. I think the Democrats actually picked up two seats, which doesn't seem like a sweep either. Also, in your previous comment, you said the GOP won some seats. Which seats were these? Donald Trump had a victory margin in the bottom 10 of historical elections: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_Electoral_College_margin#Table_of_election_results https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presiden...