Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
Breaking News

And the winner is.....

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday November 09 2016, @12:10PM   Printer-friendly
from the not-the-people dept.

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]

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
And the winner is..... | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 448 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by JNCF on Wednesday November 09 2016, @08:06PM

    by JNCF (4317) on Wednesday November 09 2016, @08:06PM (#424819) Journal

    Needlessly ignoring slinches' perfectly valid (and much simpler) solution, we could agree on an algorithm for dividing a polygon into n roughly equal districts, and then have the computer spit out an answer that anybody could verify as having been made by the agreed upon algorithm. As long as we aren't changing the algorithm whenever a different faction takes over or the population shifts slightly, this should work just fine. If legislators do fiddle with the algorithm, they can't hide behind the excuse of neccessary redistricting. I'm just proposing that this one problem is solvable, not that American democracy is generally fixable.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   4  

  • (Score: 2) by EvilSS on Wednesday November 09 2016, @09:20PM

    by EvilSS (1456) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday November 09 2016, @09:20PM (#424861)

    agreed upon algorithm

    Stop right there. You might as well have it picked by unicorns if agreeing on anything is a requirement.

    • (Score: 2) by JNCF on Wednesday November 09 2016, @10:21PM

      by JNCF (4317) on Wednesday November 09 2016, @10:21PM (#424881) Journal

      Despite your retroactive advice, I contiued:

      I'm just proposing that this one problem is solvable, not that American democracy is generally fixable.