SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
And the winner of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, as reported by the major mainstream media outlets is Donald Trump. It has also been reported that Hillary Clinton called President-elect Donald Trump to concede.
Electoral vote count (so far): 279 for Donald Trump, 218 for Hillary Clinton. 270 electoral votes are needed to win.
Popular vote: 57,227,164 votes (48.0%) for Donald Trump, 56,279,305 votes (47.2%) for Hillary Clinton. Update: Now it is closer to 59,085,795 votes (47.5%) for Donald Trump and 59,236,903 votes (47.6%) for Hillary Clinton.
Yell, scream, gnash teeth... but please keep it civil.
Results at CNN, NYT, FiveThirtyEight, Wikipedia.
takyon: Republicans have retained control of the House and Senate.
Here's some market news:
Dow futures plunge nearly 750 points as investors warily eye electoral map
Asian markets plummet on likelihood of Trump victory
Bitcoin price soars as Trump pulls ahead
Opinion: How to profit from a Donald Trump victory
Ballot measure results will be covered in an upcoming story. Some initial results can be found at Ballotpedia and CNN.
[TMB Note: Stop breaking stuff, cmn32480]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday November 09 2016, @03:33PM
Many newspapers that traditionally endorse the Republican endorsed Hillary, Gary Johnson, or nobody instead.
Many mainstream Republicans refused to endorse Trump, endorsed Hillary, or kept their mouth shut. Jeb Bush is a notable example.
Trump battled publicly with the Republican Speaker of the House and infuriated the Republican National Committee Chairman. These people are expected to be on the same page.
Several of his positions have been widely rejected by his party's politicians. Notable examples are the TPP, and his stance on Muslims entering the U.S. He also doesn't appear to share many of the traditional Republican social positions, aside from opposition to abortion.
Trump's own running mate, an establishment pick, openly repudiated Trump's comments or positions in some cases.
There is a lot of bad blood between Trump and other Republicans. It won't simply vanish, and I doubt we have seen the last policy clash.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Informative) by NotSanguine on Wednesday November 09 2016, @06:31PM
While it may seem to some (or even many) that the election of Donald Trump is some sort of bellwether for some sort of real change, you're about to be disappointed, IMHO.
The Presidential Election:
The played out pretty much along the lines of 2012, with Trump replicating the Ritt Momney coalition. But Clinton did not hold together the coalition that Obama had then.
The polls were, for the most part, pretty good, with results that were almost all within the margins of error.
The "swing" states were very close in terms of actual votes [politico.com]. For example, in Wisconsin, out of 2,944,126 votes cast, Trump beat Clinton by 27,390 votes, or 0.9%. In Pennsylvania, out of 5,969,446 votes cast, Trump beat Clinton by 67,951 votes, or 1.1%.
What this shows me is that this was a a typical R vs. D election. Trump turned out the R base, and Clinton did not turn out the D base.
The Congressional Elections
To my mind, these are even more evidence that the "drain the swamp" or "throw the crooks out" or "Washington is hopelessly broken/corrupt" rhetoric was nothing but hyperbole.
With the exceptions of Russell Kirk (IL) and possibly Kelly Ayotte (NH), every incumbent senator up for re-election won.
In the House, with a very few exceptions, incumbents won re-election, most quite easily.
So. The folks who inhabit "the swamp" and make up the "corrupt Washington elites" will go back to work for their corporate/special interest masters.
tl;dr: All-in-all, Nothing of consequence has changed. We're a tightly divided electorate and It's back to business as usual in DC. Perhaps one day, the hacks we send to Washington will stop jockeying for filthy lucre and work for the good of those they're supposed to be representing. I won't hold my breath.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr