This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
[[Presidency of Barack Obama#Policies|President Obama's policies]] The anchor (#Policies) has been
deleted by other users before.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors
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)reply
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)reply
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)reply
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)reply
I'd update the gubernatorial elections map, but I don't know how :(
GoodDay (
talk) 18:48, 22 November 2016 (UTC)reply
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)reply
Russian involvement?
Should we be having this included in the article?
GoodDay (
talk) 20:52, 10 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Yes. Found to require greater weight in the article on the Presidential election,
here.
Casprings (
talk) 02:30, 7 March 2017 (UTC)reply
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)reply
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)reply
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)reply
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)reply