The Final Results of the 2016 Presidential Election Are In

The results are in: Donald Trump has officially been elected as the 45^th President of the United States.

On Election Day, according to state laws governing the awarding of electoral votes based on the results of the popular vote, Trump won 306 votes, and Hillary Clinton won 232. The margin was virtually unchanged yesterday; Trump took 304, and Clinton, 227. Two pledged Trump electors from Texas went rogue, one voting for John Kasich and the other for Ron Paul. (So the Libertarian Party will still end up with an electoral vote, despite Gary Johnson's failure to make a splash.) Meanwhile, five Clinton electors across the country voted for several other people, including Bernie Sanders, Colin Powell, and Faith Spotted Eagle (an American Indian activist involved in the Dakota Access pipeline fight).

Amusingly, for all the talk of Republican electors voting for someone other than Trump, Clinton actually lost more votes to faithless electors. And it could have been even worse for her—another three pledged Clinton electors in Minnesota, Maine, and Colorado attempted to vote for someone else (Sanders in Maine and Minnesota, and Kasich in Colorado) but had their votes invalidated due to state laws binding electors to the results of the statewide popular vote.

Some unexpected names also received electoral votes for Vice President: Carly Fiorina, Susan Collins, Maria Cantwell, and Winona LaDuke (the Green Party’s 2000 VP nominee).

Seven rogue electors may be well short of the thirty-seven that would have been needed to actually change the results of the election, but it’s still hard to count the ways in which this was historic:

·         Most number of faithless electors in a single election, beating the previous record of six, set in 1808.

·         Most people to receive at least one electoral vote for president in a single election.

·         First time the Green Party has received an electoral vote for President or Vice President (Winona LaDuke).

·         First time faithless electors voted for a candidate from the other major party (the three Democrats in Washington State who voted for Colin Powell).

·         And Faith Spotted Eagle now has a place in history, going from completely unknown activist to one of only two women (along with Hillary Clinton) to have won Electoral College votes for President.

Odd footnotes to a crazy year.

And presumably, now that Trump has officially been elected President, liberals will forget their brief infatuation with the power of the Electoral College and “Hamilton electors” and go back to decrying it as a relic of slavery.

The Importance of Jill Stein

On Monday, when I listed some of the steps Gary Johnson would need to take if he hoped to be truly competitive, I neglected to mention one important additional factor. Not so much something that Johnson himself could control, but an outside factor that could nevertheless influence the election and therefore his, or Clinton’s or Trump’s, chances of winning—the candidacy of Jill Stein.

Stein, the Green Party nominee, is polling somewhere between two and six percent in national surveys, and as things now stand has no chance of making it onto the debate stage, let alone winning the Presidency. If the chances of Johnson winning are equivalent to me being struck by lightning at the same time a comet crashes into the Earth, Stein’s chances are roughly equivalent to me being struck by lightning while being eaten by a shark—at the same time the Earth is hit by a comet being ridden by little green men.

Nevertheless, Stein’s current 3.1% RealClearPolitics polling average is respectable for a third-party (fourth-party?) candidate, and is marginally better than the 2.7% Ralph Nader ender up pulling nationally in 2000. The lessons of that election show how meaningful minor-party candidacies can be in elections, even when they come nowhere close to actually winning.

Just as the Johnson-Weld ticket serves as an attractive rallying point for disaffected Republicans and conservative independents who reject both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Stein and the Green Party serve as an attractive, principled place to go for disaffected Democrats and liberal independents who reject Trump out of hand, but see Clinton as not sufficiently liberal, and just as dishonest and unfit for the Presidency as Trump. Even though Johnson is actively reaching out to these same voters, many will feel more ideologically at home with the liberal activists of the Green Party. The challenge for Stein becomes the need to spread the word about her candidacy and increase name recognition among these voters, particularly if Johnson makes the debate stage and she does not.

Still, with Johnson’s Republican credentials and past conservative record as governor, it’s hard to predict just how many Sanders voters will end up voting Libertarian and how many will support Stein. And if she manages to take a significant number of votes away from Clinton, the overall margin necessary to win both individual states and the national popular vote is decreased even further. A candidate winning only 30% of the vote could conceivably win several states and come close to winning the popular vote outright, adding even more unpredictability to an already crazy year.

How Gary Johnson Could Win

I should preface this by saying that I think it unlikely, to say the least, that the Johnson-Weld ticket will actually win. Despite Johnson’s current polling strength, he still has a long way to go before he’s even close to being a serious contender for the Presidency. The two major parties, though weakened, still retain a near monopoly over the electoral process, and there’s a reason why no independent or third-party candidate has come anywhere close to winning the White House since 1992, or indeed even won a state since 1968.

That being said, Johnson does have a chance of winning, however remote. Here’s his most likely path to victory:

1.      Manage to get up to 15% in national polls. According to the Commission on Presidential Debates, candidates who wish to participate in the debates must satisfy Constitutional requirements for holding office; obtain ballot access in enough states to “have a mathematical chance of winning a majority vote in the Electoral College”, and average 15% in national polls, using the most recent results from five different national polling groups. Any candidate who satisfies those three criteria before each of the three debates will be allowed to participate, and the running mate of each candidate who qualifies for the first debate (in late September) will automatically be allowed to participate in the single VP debate.

Johnson meets all age and residency requirements in the Constitution, and the Libertarian Party has already obtained ballot access in thirty-six states, more than fulfilling the second debate requirement. All that remains is achieving a polling average of 15% before late September. He has already hit 13% in some isolated polls, and currently hovers around 8% in the RealClearPolitics average. With both Trump and Clinton intensely disliked, and their numbers unlikely to improve dramatically anytime soon, it’s easy to imagine Johnson reaching 15% in the polling averages within the next six weeks.

2.      Perform well in the debates. Just showing up won’t be enough. Johnson would need to stand out and draw a clear contrast with both Trump and Clinton, while not fading into the background. (The same would go for Bill Weld in the VP debate.) He’s not the best debater or public speaker, so if he does make it into the debates he’ll need extensive debate prep. If he handles the debate effectively, however, tens of millions of voters will hear from him for the first time, and the majority who despise both Trump and Clinton will learn more about their third option.

3.      Capitalize on debate success. It won’t be enough to just have a successful debate or two and coast to November. Assuming he does have a good debate, Johnson would need to get out right away and start holding larger rallies, airing TV and radio ads, and in general take advantage of the record-setting fundraising the Libertarian Party is already reporting. He would also be much more in demand for interviews and other valuable opportunities of free air time that he should seize wherever possible.

4.      Target disaffected conservatives, moderates, independents, and Sanders supporters. Broadly, those groups represent Johnson’s best path to victory. And he’s already been reaching out to them to varying extents. What he needs to focus on right now are the conservative Republicans who are firmly #NeverTrump but aren’t currently supporting the Libertarian nominee, as well as Republicans who opposed Trump in the primary, are supporting him now only because he’s the nominee and is, they believe, better than Hillary—but could be persuaded to support a more principled choice, especially with aid from Trump himself.

Competing for Cruz and Sanders supporters simultaneously may seem counterintuitive, but there are ways Johnson can reach out to both camps without contradicting himself. Cruz voters will find Johnson’s stances in favor of limited government and free markets appealing, while Bernie bros will like his support of same-sex marriage, a dovish foreign policy, and attacks against a political system rigged in favor of the two major parties.

5.      Target specific states where Libertarians have the best chance of success. This will pose the most difficult problem for Johnson, as unlike a standard Republican or Democratic nominee he would essentially need to compete across the country, taking no state for granted. On the other hand, if the Libertarian ticket does become a serious threat, both Trump and Clinton would need to do likewise, as Johnson could put many reliable red and blue states in play, either by winning them outright or by serving as a spoiler and enabling one of the other major candidates to compete strongly.

The closest thing to a geographic base for Johnson would likely be the Mountain West, an area in which both Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders thrived during the primaries. Utah in particular is turning out to be highly competitive, and with a large number of undecided voters it could be especially receptive to a third-party message. States like Colorado, Montana, and the Dakotas also have strong libertarian bents. And in other parts of the country, Maine, Vermont, and Minnesota have shown a willingness to support independent and third-party candidacies for state office in the recent past. All could be fertile ground for Johnson to make the case for a Libertarian President.

I want to stress once again that I don’t think Johnson will actually win the Presidency. (For some perspective, no Libertarian nominee has ever won more than 1% of the vote.) This is just what he would need to do if he’s to have any realistic hope of winning.

But a year ago, no one would have expected Trump to be the Republican nominee, or Hillary to struggle to the very end of the primary season against Bernie Sanders. This is the year anything can happen, and there would be no better way to highlight that fact than to see a no-name third-party candidate win the White House.

Top Nicknames for Trump Supporters

To celebrate the end of the nominating conventions, and the continuation of the (mostly) apolitical Olympics, here’s something more light-hearted—my list of the best nicknames for Trump supporters. As you’ll notice, each entry has a definition subtly different from the others. Are you a Trumplican, a Trumpeteer, or something else? Find out below!

(Some of these names I made up myself, while others originated with a variety of other writers, commentators, and interested citizens and have essentially entered the public domain at this point. In most cases it’s nearly impossible to tell who came up with what name first, but thank you to everyone who came up with a word that managed to bring some laughter into this wild year. All of the definitions are my own.)

• Trumpkin— (noun) One of Trump’s most dedicated fans; one who has been with the candidate since the beginning of the primary. Most willing to ignore any gaffe or any inconsistency as an Establishment scheme to ruin the good Mr. Trump.

• Trumpeteer— (noun) Intermediate in the ranks of Trump supporters; one who supported Trump during at least part of the primary, but who is not one of the original true believers. Nevertheless, they serve as effective enforcers for the Trump campaign, with the fervor of the converted, and seek to convert others to their cause—and silence those who dissent. Prominent Trumpeteers include Mike Huckabee and Chris Christie.

• Trumplican— (noun) Republicans who were resistant to Trump during the primary, but now compel allegiance to Trump for the sake of party unity. Their support may be only grudging, but they see the Trump campaign as the only vehicle remaining capable of stopping Hillary Clinton—and as such, all dissenters must now board the Trump Train. Prominent Trumplicans include Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell.

• Trump-bro— (noun) Similar to the Bernie Bros of the Democratic Party, a younger male who is especially fervent in support of Donald Trump. Members of this group are often also Trumpkins, though some are Trumpeteers, and are usually drawn to Trump by his racial and/or sexual views, rather than his business history or broader political views.

• Trumpanzee— (noun) Another subset of the larger Trumpkin group, someone most likely to set aside all intelligent thought and rational discourse in wildly militant devotion to Trump. Most likely to throw insults, personal attacks on family members, and their own feces at Trump opponents than engage in reasoned, intelligent debate.

• Trumpocrat— (noun) Whereas Trumplicans support Donald Trump for the sake of party unity, Trumpocrats defy their own party in supporting him, for a variety of reasons. This group may include enemies of free trade, aging hippies and Russia-lovers who see Hillary Clinton as more militaristic and antagonistic of Putin than Trump, angry Bernie Bros, and even a few who refuse to vote for any Democratic presidential nominee other than Martin O’Malley.

• Trumper-tantrum— (verb) The reaction of a Trump supporter to a non-Trump voter criticizing their beloved candidate; most commonly characterized by a demand for unity in order to beat Hillary. Oddly, those throwing Trumper-tantrums are strangely silent when their candidate attacks Paul Ryan or John Kasich.

• Trumpster diving— (verb) The act of looking for a compelling candidate, whether in the primary or general elections, and finding Donald Trump.

Democrats, Too, Will Be Made to Unite

In the aftermath of the United States v. Windsor Supreme Court decision, as well as the more general normalization of same-sex relationships, Erick Erickson coined the phrase “you will be made to care,” to describe the push by many radical Leftists to criminalize all dissent from those who believe in the traditional definition of marriage.

Bakers and florists will be sued for refusing to serve at gay weddings. Vocal support for traditional marriage will be labeled “hate speech”. Even those who try to stay out of the controversies will be forced to choose a side, and if that side opposes progress, its supporters will be punished.

Members of the Republican Party will now be made to unite. Dissent will not be tolerated. It will no longer be enough to simply remain silent on the presidential nominee, or to criticize both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, or to encourage people to vote their conscience and make their own decisions. Unite, or be punished.

For Democrats, too, the time has come for them to unite or be punished.

Just as Cruz supporters were silenced by the RNC and the Trump campaign, so too will Sanders supporters be silenced by the DNC and the Clinton campaign, should they attempt to express concerns over the party rules (especially on superdelegates), or in any way disrupt the coronation ceremony. Sanders delegates were already given the removal of Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC chair, but that will not put the latest email scandal to rest, nor should it.

Democratic Party leadership will now see Schultz’s ouster, together with the platform changes, as such a large concession that they will no longer tolerate any concerns of Sanders delegates over superdelegates, the nomination of Tim Kaine for Vice President, or anything else. Sanders supporters have already extracted far more from the Clinton campaign than Cruz supporters did from the Trump campaign, but now the door has slammed shut for both. No longer will either primary victor tolerate dissent or even open discussion.

Sanders delegates—you will be told that a vote for anyone other than Hillary Clinton is a vote for Donald Trump. Your attempts to air your concerns and hold a simple roll call vote will be ignored. And if you dare to go against the collective and stand for your principles, or ask that your nominee work to win you over, rather than merely taking your vote for granted, you will be labeled a traitor.

Welcome to the party.