The map above shows what the 2016 US Presidential Election results would have been if votes not cast for Hillary, Trump or one of the third party candidates had gone to fictional candidate “Did Not Vote.”
Only 6 states + Washington DC, had high enough voter turnouts where one of the actual candidates won more votes than people who did not to vote. Iowa and Wisconsin for Trump and Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire and DC for Clinton.
A few other 2016 election facts for you:
As a percentage of eligible voters, Clinton received 26.27% (60,839,922) of all votes compared to Trump’s 26.02% (60,265,858) and Did Not Vote’s 43.1% (110,450,842).
Total voter turnout was estimated to be 56.9%.
It is the 5th election since 1820 when the winner of the popular vote lost the presidency (the others being 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000)
Donald Trump received 667,646 fewer votes than Romney did in 2012, but Hilary Clinton received 5,075,873 fewer votes than Obama did in 2012.
Neither Candidate even won a majority of votes cast, Clinton got 47.8% vs Trump’s 47.3%.
As a percentage of the entire US population (including those too young or other ineligible to vote) Clinton got votes from 18.73% of the population and Trump got votes from 18.56% of people.
Washington DC is the only area in the country where a majority of all eligible voters (whether they voted or not) voted for Clinton (90% of voters, voted for Clinton on a 55.7% turnout). In the other 6 states listed above, victories were simple pluralities.
A Princeton PhD, was a US diplomat for over 20 years, mostly in Eastern Europe, and was promoted to the Senior Foreign Service in 1997. For the Open World Leadership Center, he speaks with
its delegates from Europe/Eurasia on the topic, "E Pluribus Unum? What Keeps the United States United." Affiliated with Georgetown University for over ten years, he shares ideas with students about public diplomacy.
The papers of his deceased father -- poet and diplomat John L. Brown -- are stored at Georgetown University Special Collections at the Lauinger Library. They are manuscript materials valuable to scholars interested in post-WWII U.S.-European cultural relations.
This blog is dedicated to him, Dr. John L. Brown, a remarkable linguist/humanist who wrote in the Foreign Service Journal (1964) -- years before "soft power" was ever coined -- that "The CAO [Cultural Affairs Officer] soon comes to realize that his job is really a form of love-making and that making love is never really successful unless both partners are participating."