Talk:2016 United States elections

Untitled

Just out of curiosity--how can there be an "unknown incumbent" for the upcoming Senate elections, as the image in this article lists? They're presumably not hiding in the woods somewhere, right? This is information we, as Internet denizens in the 21st century, can find out? American government is not my area of expertise, so "unknown" may refer to something actually useful and pertinent, so please disregard if that is the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.252.48.8 (talk) 21:09, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Delayed response, but "unknown incumbent" is used when there is either a vacancy or a preceding election that will determine the incumbent for this election. E.g. in 2013 we didn't know who the 2016 New Hampshire incumbent would be, since there was a 2014 New Hampshire gubernatorial election. Orser67 (talk) 21:15, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Maps

Time to update the maps? Unfortunately I know not how to do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.3.2.32 (talk) 11:07, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Updating the table

I won't be able to update the table of election results until the weekend after election day. I welcome it if anyone else wants to update the table, but if not, this message should preempt any complaints about the table being out-of-date. Orser67 (talk) 23:58, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I'd update the gubernatorial elections map, but I don't know how :( GoodDay (talk) 18:48, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

VOTE COUNTS

Popular vote counts MAY NOT be accurate as not all states have certified their vote tabulations AND not all states actually count MAIL-IN BALLOTS when the states have already clearly declared a winner WITHOUT final tally of the non-voting-day write-in and provisional ballots. NOTE: most write in ballots tend to lean republican. The POPULAR vote could be significantly different if/when all votes are counted. 2601:41:C101:AB84:55F1:94C8:8322:FF88 (talk) 00:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Russian involvement?

Should we be having this included in the article? GoodDay (talk) 20:52, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Undue weight. See my comments on Template talk:US 2016 presidential elections series#Addition. — JFG ^talk 09:06, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes. Found to require greater weight in the article on the Presidential election, here.Casprings (talk) 02:30, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Unless there is demonstrable evidence of how they interfered and how it is significant it should not be there. There were other countries that tried to influence in favor of Hillary, but that is not mentioned. 24.215.169.241 (talk) 23:35, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

The consensus seems to be no, so why is it included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:399E:2570:89DA:E9E5:5E99:4E21 (talk) 02:37, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

There is no evidence only claims please reduce this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.59.187.55 (talk) 05:19, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes. It only seems undue weight because the article's text is otherwise so small. It is certainly a notable report/claim that should be mentioned/linked--albeit perhaps more succinctly unless/until the rest of the article is expanded. 108.202.195.48 (talk) 17:37, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete results for U.S. territories

The outcome of the territorial legislature elections of Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and Puerto Rico have not been added. They should be added. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:39, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Turnout

Would anyone be willing to add some information on voter turnout in this article? Turnout is mentioned in the presidential article, but not here. It seems just as relevant if not more relevant to describe the general turnout in the general election article. 108.202.195.48 (talk) 18:05, 12 December 2017 (UTC)