General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumssomething doesn't up, 138 mill vs 134 mill
138 million, that's the 2020 popular vote total
134 million, that's 2016 popular vote total.
does that seem right? record early votes and a brisk turnout on election day and we are virtually where we were in 2016. I have seen some estimates that they were expecting more than 150 million votes???
BeerBarrelPolka
(1,202 posts)States like NY and CA have not been completely tallied yet.
Eid Ma Clack Shaw
(490 posts)and sent to incinerators.
EarlG
(21,947 posts)They're just in states that were called quickly and don't make any difference to the current electoral college battle. I know California takes a long time to complete its counts for example.
rzemanfl
(29,557 posts)unblock
(52,219 posts)Jersey Devil
(9,874 posts)It may take a few weeks for the totals from large states like CA to come in. What we have now are only partial returns
BKDem
(1,733 posts)Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)HiltonHeadDem
(34 posts)bigtree
(85,996 posts)...remember back when California dribbled a million or so votes out late in 2016.
Statistical
(19,264 posts)The vote count in 2016 wasn't 134 million the morning after election day it was millions and millions less.
At a minimum there are about 1.2 million ballots left to count in NY, 1 million in NJ, 2.2 million in CA, and 0.4 million in Oregon. So even if there was no other ballot in any other states that would put us over 140 million.
DrToast
(6,414 posts)Not a proper comparison. There are many votes still left to be added to the tally in CA.
katusha
(809 posts)did not seem right, but now makes more sense
Rice4VP
(1,235 posts)LisaL
(44,973 posts)but the turnout out ended up not really being much higher overall.