9 datasets found
  1. Distribution of votes in the 2016 U.S. presidential election

    • statista.com
    Updated Aug 6, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). Distribution of votes in the 2016 U.S. presidential election [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1056695/distribution-votes-2016-us-presidential-election/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Aug 6, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Time period covered
    2016
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    The 2016 U.S. presidential election was contested by Donald J. Trump of the Republican Party, and Hillary Rodham Clinton of the Democratic Party. Clinton had been viewed by many as the most likely to succeed President Obama in the years leading up to the election, after losing the Democratic nomination to him in 2008, and entered the primaries as the firm favorite. Independent Senator Bernie Sanders soon emerged as Clinton's closest rival, and the popularity margins decreased going into the primaries. A few other candidates had put their name forward for the Democratic nomination, however all except Clinton and Sanders had dropped out by the New Hampshire primary. Following a hotly contested race, Clinton arrived at the Democratic National Convention with 54 percent of pledged delegates, while Sanders had 46 percent. Controversy emerged when it was revealed that Clinton received the support of 78 percent of Democratic superdelegates, while Sanders received just seven percent. With her victory, Hillary Clinton became the first female candidate nominated by a major party for the presidency. With seventeen potential presidential nominees, the Republican primary field was the largest in US history. Similarly to the Democratic race however, the number of candidates thinned out by the time of the New Hampshire primary, with Donald Trump and Ted Cruz as the frontrunners. As the primaries progressed, Trump pulled ahead while the remainder of the candidates withdrew from the race, and he was named as the Republican candidate in May 2016. Much of Trump's success has been attributed to the free media attention he received due to his outspoken and controversial behavior, with a 2018 study claiming that Trump received approximately two billion dollars worth of free coverage during the primaries alone. Campaign The 2016 presidential election was preceded by, arguably, the most internationally covered and scandal-driven campaign in U.S. history. Clinton campaigned on the improvement and expansion of President Obama's more popular policies, while Trump's campaign was based on his personality and charisma, and took a different direction than the traditional conservative, Republican approach. In the months before the election, Trump came to represent a change in how the U.S. government worked, using catchy slogans such as "drain the swamp" to show how he would fix what many viewed to be a broken establishment; painting Clinton as the embodiment of this establishment, due to her experience as First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State. The candidates also had fraught relationships with the press, although the Trump campaign was seen to have benefitted more from this publicity than Clinton's. Controversies Trump's off the cuff and controversial remarks gained him many followers throughout the campaign, however, just one month before the election, a 2005 video emerged of Trump making derogatory comments about grabbing women "by the pussy". The media and public's reaction caused many high-profile Republicans to condemn the comments (for which he apologized), with many calling for his withdrawal from the race. This controversy was soon overshadowed when it emerged that the FBI was investigating Hillary Clinton for using a private email server while handling classified information, furthering Trump's narrative that the Washington establishment was corrupt. Two days before the election, the FBI concluded that Clinton had not done anything wrong; however the investigation had already damaged the public's perception of Clinton's trustworthiness, and deflected many undecided voters towards Trump. Results Against the majority of predictions, Donald Trump won the 2016 election, and became the 45th President of the United States. Clinton won almost three million more votes than her opponent, however Trump's strong performance in swing states gave him a 57 percent share of the electoral votes, while Clinton took just 42 percent. The unpopularity of both candidates also contributed to much voter abstention, and almost six percent of the popular vote went to third party candidates (despite their poor approval ratings). An unprecedented number of faithless electors also refused to give their electoral votes to the two main candidates, instead giving them to five non-candidates. In December, it emerged that the Russian government may have interfered in this election, and the 2019 Mueller Report concluded that Russian interference in the U.S. election contributed to Clinton's defeat and the victory of Donald Trump. In total, 26 Russian citizens and three Russian organizations were indicted, and the investigation led to the indictment and conviction of many top-level officials in the Trump campaign; however Trump and the Russian government both strenuously deny these claims, and Trump's attempts to frame the Ukrainian government for Russia's invol...

  2. o

    US Inauguration 2021 Social Media Discourse

    • opendatabay.com
    .undefined
    Updated Jul 7, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Datasimple (2025). US Inauguration 2021 Social Media Discourse [Dataset]. https://www.opendatabay.com/data/ai-ml/b438b30b-da96-43ce-9433-d03a51ea4e78
    Explore at:
    .undefinedAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Jul 7, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Datasimple
    License

    CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Area covered
    Government & Civic Records, United States
    Description

    This dataset comprises tweets collected on 20th January 2021, the day Joe Biden was sworn in as the 46th President of the United States. The data was scraped using the Tweepy Library in conjunction with the Twitter Developer API. It aims to facilitate the study of general and global opinions towards the new administration, including what people are most anticipating and their primary concerns. The collection of tweets focused on specific hashtags such as Biden, Trump, KamalaHarris, JoeBiden, DonaldTrump, USinauguration, USElections, POTUS, FLOTUS, BidenHarrisInauguration, BidenHarris, USInaugurationDay, USpresidentWhiteHouse, and USinauguration2021.

    Columns

    • index: An identifier for each record.
    • created_at: The date and time when the tweet was sent.
    • text: The raw text content of the tweet.
    • user_location: The location specified by the user in their profile or detected by Twitter. There are 43,900 unique user locations, with 2% from the United States and 73% categorised as 'Other'.
    • user_name: The user's public display name on Twitter. There are 34,273 unique user names.
    • user_verified: A boolean indicator showing if the user is verified on Twitter. Approximately 1,537 users (3%) are verified, while 42,762 users (97%) are not verified.
    • user_description: The user's public profile description or bio. There are 35,294 unique descriptions.
    • user_created_at: The date when the user joined Twitter.

    Distribution

    The dataset consists of approximately 44,300 records, typically formatted as a CSV file. It was generated by scraping Twitter data via the Twitter API. A sample file will be made available separately on the platform.

    Usage

    This dataset is ideal for: * Studying general opinions and global perspectives on new administrations. * Conducting sentiment analysis regarding political events and figures. * Identifying key public expectations and major concerns related to political transitions. * Analysing social media discourse and trends during significant civic events.

    Coverage

    The dataset covers tweets posted specifically on 20th January 2021. Geographically, it is categorised as global, reflecting opinions from around the world, though a small percentage of user locations are specifically attributed to the United States.

    License

    CC0

    Who Can Use It

    This dataset is intended for: * Researchers interested in political science, social media analysis, and public opinion studies. * Data scientists and analysts performing natural language processing (NLP) tasks such as sentiment analysis or topic modelling. * Students and academics exploring civic engagement and discourse on major political events. * Anyone looking to understand the immediate public reaction to the 2021 US Presidential Inauguration.

    Dataset Name Suggestions

    • 2021 US Presidential Inauguration Tweets
    • Joe Biden Inauguration Day Twitter Data
    • US Inauguration 2021 Social Media Discourse
    • January 2021 US Political Tweets

    Attributes

    Original Data Source: 2021 US Presidential Inauguration Tweets

  3. US Executive Branch Finances

    • kaggle.com
    Updated Jun 25, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Jeegar Maru (2020). US Executive Branch Finances [Dataset]. https://www.kaggle.com/jeegarmaru/us-executive-branch-finances/discussion
    Explore at:
    CroissantCroissant is a format for machine-learning datasets. Learn more about this at mlcommons.org/croissant.
    Dataset updated
    Jun 25, 2020
    Dataset provided by
    Kagglehttp://kaggle.com/
    Authors
    Jeegar Maru
    License

    https://www.usa.gov/government-works/https://www.usa.gov/government-works/

    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    Context

    I found this dataset on the US Office of Government Ethics website, but all the financial reports were in the PDF format. I wanted to make it more easily accessible for data analysis & data science; hence, I converted all the PDF files to the Excel format that is much easier to use.

    Content

    It contains the Annual & on-termination financial reports for the entire Execution branch & it's administration from 2013 to 2020 including those of the President & vice-president. So, it covers the Obama Administration & the Trump Administration between those dates. It includes financial Assets, transactions, Retirement Accounts, Employments, Liabilities, Gifts & Travel Reimbursements, etc. with their values, income amounts, dates, name/description, etc.

    I have seen inaccuracies in the data when converting from the PDF to Excel for the President & Vice-president's (Obama, Biden, Trump, Pence) files. I have tried to fix the numerical errors as much as I can. Also, I am attaching the raw PDF files so you can compare it with the excel & fix your analysis. I haven't seen any inaccuracies between the PDF & Excel file for the rest of the administration files (which is easily the bulk of this dataset).

    Acknowledgements

    This dataset, ofcourse, would not be possible without the US Office of Government Ethics collecting this & making it available for downloads. So, thanks to them! You can find the original PDF files on their website at : https://www.oge.gov/web/oge.nsf

    The data also comes with Terms of Use that I have uploaded as the LICENSE.txt file. I am pasting it here too for easy access. By using this dataset, you are acknowledging & accepting these terms.

    Public Financial Disclosure Reports Title 1 of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, as amended, 5 U.S.C. app. § 105(c), states that: It shall be unlawful for any person to obtain or use a report: (A) for any unlawful purpose; (B) for any commercial purpose, other than by news and communications media for dissemination to the general public; (C) for determining or establishing the credit rating of any individual; or (D) for use, directly or indirectly, in the solicitation of money for any political, charitable, or other purpose. The Attorney General may bring a civil action against any person who obtains or uses a report for any purpose prohibited in paragraph (1) of this subsection. The court in which such action is brought may assess against such person a penalty in any amount not to exceed $11,000. Such remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available under statutory or common law.

    Inspiration

    I don't know exactly what questions to ask, but feel free to use your imagination or follow your inspiration. Some interesting things might be how people's finances have evolved over time, does anyone seemingly have any conflict of interest based on their investments & their role

  4. d

    Replication Data for: Affinity or Effectiveness? Donor’s Preferences for...

    • search.dataone.org
    Updated Mar 6, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Interactions, International (2024). Replication Data for: Affinity or Effectiveness? Donor’s Preferences for Bypass Aid [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/DMQXTT
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Mar 6, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    Harvard Dataverse
    Authors
    Interactions, International
    Description

    Western donors have progressively increased the amount of foreign aid allocated through bypass channels, particularly for recipients with weak domestic institutions. Rather than giving money directly to recipient governments, aid is given to non-governmental organizations working on the ground in those countries. Explanations for this shift range from increased donor attention to effectiveness, a desire to deliver assistance directly to those in need, and enhanced legitimacy by working with local civil society partners. Donors, however, face a trade-off when deciding whether or not to allocate aid through bypass channels. Because bypass aid is not given directly to the recipient government, the donor has less leverage to prop up friendly regimes or buy policy concessions. We argue that as donors balance competing motivations, geostrategic incentives can, at times, trump concerns regarding best practices of poverty alleviation. Using data on bypass aid from 2004-2019, we find that donor’s commitment to good governance is ameliorated in strategically important recipient states. Strategic partners who improve their domestic governance are rewarded with less bypass aid (more government-to-government aid) at higher rates than less strategic recipients. These results highlight potential limitations of the good governance movement in foreign aid.

  5. Number of executive orders signed by U.S. presidents 1789-2025

    • statista.com
    Updated Jan 20, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2025). Number of executive orders signed by U.S. presidents 1789-2025 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1125024/us-presidents-executive-orders/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jan 20, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    An executive order is one of the most commonly used form of administrative action taken by the President of the United States. It is where an order or directive regarding the management of the U.S. government is signed into law by the president. Executive orders are generally used by presidents to influence U.S. laws and the administration of the country, without the need for a vote in Congress or the Supreme Court; although these orders are subject to judicial review, and can be challenged by the courts or another branch of government. If deemed unlawful or unconstitutional, the order will be revoked or cancelled, and a president may also revoke, cancel or amend any executive order that they, or any other presidents, have made. The U.S.' first 25 presidents signed a combined total of 1,262 executive orders in roughly 112 years, averaging at around 12 per year, however there was a large increase in the number of orders issued in the first half of the twentieth century. Theodore Roosevelt, the 26th U.S. president, was the first to issue more than one thousand executive orders alone; while Woodrow Wilson, who was in office during the First World War, signed more than 1,800. Franklin D. Roosevelt The president who signed the most executive orders was Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR), who, during his twelve years in office, signed more than a quarter of all executive orders ever published. While FDR did serve over four years more than any other president, he still issued the highest number of average annual executive orders, with over three hundred per year. FDR was in office throughout most of the Second World War, although the majority of these orders came in his earlier years in office (more than a thousand orders were signed in 1933 and 1934), as he used his New Deal policies to lead the U.S. through its economic recovery from the Great Depression. Roosevelt's most controversial order, however, did relate to the Second World War; this was Order 9066, which saw approximately 120,000 people of Japanese descent, and almost 15,000 ethnic Germans and Italians, interned in concentration camps for almost three years.

    Notable orders Arguably, the most famous and well known executive order was Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation** in 1862, which changed the legal status of all enslaved people in the Confederate states during the Civil War, and declared them free in the eyes of the Union. A number of other orders also marked notable milestones in African-American civil rights; including the desegregation of the U.S. military by President Truman in 1948, and the desegregation of public schools by President Eisenhower in 1957. While the number of orders issued by presidents has decreased since the Eisenhower administration, recent presidents have generally issued between 100 and 200 orders during each term. Examples of more controversial orders from recent years include George W. Bush's Order 13233, which tightened restrictions on the accessibility of former U.S. presidents' records, and Donald Trump's Order 13769, which placed travel bans on citizens from a number of Muslim-majority countries; Bush's Order was eventually revoked by Barack Obama the day after his inauguration, while Trump's travel ban was one of several executive orders repealed by Joe Biden on his first day in office.

  6. f

    Data from: The global impacts of US climate policy: a model simulation using...

    • tandf.figshare.com
    tiff
    Updated Feb 26, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Han Chen; Lining Wang; Wenying Chen; Yong Luo; Yu Wang; Sheng Zhou (2024). The global impacts of US climate policy: a model simulation using GCAM-TU and MAGICC [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.6727271.v1
    Explore at:
    tiffAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Feb 26, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    Taylor & Francis
    Authors
    Han Chen; Lining Wang; Wenying Chen; Yong Luo; Yu Wang; Sheng Zhou
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    To assess the potential impacts of the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, this study applied GCAM-TU (an updated version of the Global Change Assessment Model) to simulate global and regional emission pathways of energy-related CO2, which show that US emissions in 2100 would reduce to −2.4 Gt, −0.7 Gt and −0.2 Gt under scenarios of RCP2.6, RCP3.7 and RCP4.5, respectively. Two unfavourable policy scenarios were designed, assuming a temporary delay and a complete stop for US mitigation actions after 2015. Simulations by the Model for the Assessment of Greenhouse-gas Induced Climate Change (MAGICC) indicate that the temperature increase by 2100 would rise by 0.081°C–0.161°C compared to the three original RCPs (Representative Concentration Pathways) if US emissions were kept at their 2015 levels until 2100. The probability of staying below 2°C would decrease by 6–9% even if the US resumes mitigation efforts for achieving its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) target after 2025. It is estimated by GCAM-TU that, without US participation, increased reduction efforts are required for the rest of the world, including developing countries, in order to achieve the 2°C goal, resulting in 18% higher global cumulative mitigation costs from 2015 to 2100. Key policy insightsPresident Trump’s climate policies, including planned withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, cast a shadow on international climate actions, and would lower the likelihood of achieving the 2°C target.To meet the 2°C target without the US means increased reduction efforts and mitigation costs for the rest of the world, and considerable economic burdens for major developing areas.Active state-, city- and enterprise-level powers should be supported to keep the emission reduction gap from further widening even with reduced mitigation efforts from the US federal government. President Trump’s climate policies, including planned withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, cast a shadow on international climate actions, and would lower the likelihood of achieving the 2°C target. To meet the 2°C target without the US means increased reduction efforts and mitigation costs for the rest of the world, and considerable economic burdens for major developing areas. Active state-, city- and enterprise-level powers should be supported to keep the emission reduction gap from further widening even with reduced mitigation efforts from the US federal government.

  7. Twice Broken: How U.S. Legal Infrastructure Lost the Rule of Law—and the...

    • zenodo.org
    bin, xls
    Updated Jun 22, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Scott Brown; Daniel Hall; Scott Brown; Daniel Hall (2025). Twice Broken: How U.S. Legal Infrastructure Lost the Rule of Law—and the Trust of Markets [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15716747
    Explore at:
    xls, binAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Jun 22, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    Zenodohttp://zenodo.org/
    Authors
    Scott Brown; Daniel Hall; Scott Brown; Daniel Hall
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    Structural Democratic Regression: From Watergate to Trump – Figure 1 Replication Archive

    This repository contains the data, code, and instructions needed to replicate Figure 1 from our study on democratic erosion in the United States. The figure visualizes structural breaks in regime characteristics using Polity5 and V-Dem indicators, spanning the period from the Watergate scandal (1972–74) through the Trump presidency (2016–21).

    Our analysis reveals two major inflection points in American democratic structure. The first, catalyzed by Watergate, led to a wave of institutional reforms (e.g., FOIA, FEC, Ethics in Government Act). The second, during the Trump era, saw the collapse of many of these oversight mechanisms. Together, these episodes chart a trajectory of constitutional rot and declining institutional resilience, with measurable impacts on legal infrastructure, investor trust, and democratic governance.

    🔧 Included Files

    • vdem_polity5_data.xlsx – Cleaned data combining V-Dem and Polity5 indicators for the U.S. and comparator countries

    • generate_figure1_code.docx – Python code for use in Google Colab to generate Figure 1

    • README.md – Step-by-step instructions for browser-based execution with no installation required

    📊 Methodology

    • Sources: V-Dem 2024 dataset; Polity5 democracy indicators (through 2023)

    • Tools: Python (ruptures, pandas, matplotlib) in Google Colab

    • Framework: Structural break detection, constitutional crisis theory, and rule-of-law decline

    📈 Reproducibility

    This project is designed for open, replicable science. Anyone can run the code using Google Colab in a standard web browser:

    1. Upload vdem_polity5_data.xlsx to your Colab environment

    2. Copy and paste the code from generate_figure1_code.docx

    3. Click “Run” to generate the figure automatically

    📚 Citation and Use

    Please cite the related research paper if you use or adapt these materials. Full citation details will be provided upon publication. Proper attribution to the authors is appreciated.

    For questions or collaboration inquiries, contact the corresponding author or visit the University of Puerto Rico School of Business for related research outputs.

  8. Size of Federal Reserve's balance sheet 2007-2025

    • statista.com
    Updated Jul 2, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2025). Size of Federal Reserve's balance sheet 2007-2025 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1121448/fed-balance-sheet-timeline/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 2, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Time period covered
    Aug 1, 2007 - Jun 25, 2025
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    The Federal Reserve's balance sheet has undergone significant changes since 2007, reflecting its response to major economic crises. From a modest *** trillion U.S. dollars at the end of 2007, it ballooned to approximately **** trillion U.S. dollars by June 2025. This dramatic expansion, particularly during the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic - both of which resulted in negative annual GDP growth in the U.S. - showcases the Fed's crucial role in stabilizing the economy through expansionary monetary policies. Impact on inflation and interest rates The Fed's expansionary measures, while aimed at stimulating economic growth, have had notable effects on inflation and interest rates. Following the quantitative easing in 2020, inflation in the United States reached ***** percent in 2022, the highest since 1991. However, by *************, inflation had declined to *** percent. Concurrently, the Federal Reserve implemented a series of interest rate hikes, with the rate peaking at **** percent in ***********, before the first rate cut since ************** occurred in **************. Financial implications for the Federal Reserve The expansion of the Fed's balance sheet and subsequent interest rate hikes have had significant financial implications. In 2023, the Fed reported a negative net income of ***** billion U.S. dollars, a stark contrast to the ***** billion U.S. dollars profit in 2022. This unprecedented shift was primarily due to rapidly rising interest rates, which caused the Fed's interest expenses to soar to over *** billion U.S. dollars in 2023. Despite this, the Fed's net interest income on securities acquired through open market operations reached a record high of ****** billion U.S. dollars in the same year.

  9. U.S. real GDP growth by quarter Q2 2013- Q2 2024

    • statista.com
    • ai-chatbox.pro
    Updated Nov 4, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). U.S. real GDP growth by quarter Q2 2013- Q2 2024 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/188185/percent-change-from-preceding-period-in-real-gdp-in-the-us/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Nov 4, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    As of the third quarter of 2024, the GDP of the U.S. grew by 2.8 percent from the second quarter of 2024. GDP, or gross domestic product, is effectively a count of the total goods and services produced in a country over a certain period of time. It is calculated by first adding together a country’s total consumer spending, government spending, investments and exports; and then deducting the country’s imports. The values in this statistic are the change in ‘constant price’ or ‘real’ GDP, which means this basic calculation is also adjusted to factor in the regular price changes measured by the U.S. inflation rate. Because of this adjustment, U.S. real annual GDP will differ from the U.S. 'nominal' annual GDP for all years except the baseline from which inflation is calculated. What is annualized GDP? The important thing to note about the growth rates in this statistic is that the values are annualized, meaning the U.S. economy has not actually contracted or grown by the percentage shown. For example, the fall of 29.9 percent in the second quarter of 2020 did not mean GDP is suddenly one third less than a year before. In fact, it means that if the decline seen during that quarter continued at the same rate for a full year, then GDP would decline by this amount. Annualized values can therefore exaggerate the effect of short-term economic shocks, as they only look at economic output during a limited period. This effect can be seen by comparing annualized quarterly growth rates with the annual GDP growth rates for each calendar year.

  10. Not seeing a result you expected?
    Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.

Share
FacebookFacebook
TwitterTwitter
Email
Click to copy link
Link copied
Close
Cite
Statista (2024). Distribution of votes in the 2016 U.S. presidential election [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1056695/distribution-votes-2016-us-presidential-election/
Organization logo

Distribution of votes in the 2016 U.S. presidential election

Explore at:
Dataset updated
Aug 6, 2024
Dataset authored and provided by
Statistahttp://statista.com/
Time period covered
2016
Area covered
United States
Description

The 2016 U.S. presidential election was contested by Donald J. Trump of the Republican Party, and Hillary Rodham Clinton of the Democratic Party. Clinton had been viewed by many as the most likely to succeed President Obama in the years leading up to the election, after losing the Democratic nomination to him in 2008, and entered the primaries as the firm favorite. Independent Senator Bernie Sanders soon emerged as Clinton's closest rival, and the popularity margins decreased going into the primaries. A few other candidates had put their name forward for the Democratic nomination, however all except Clinton and Sanders had dropped out by the New Hampshire primary. Following a hotly contested race, Clinton arrived at the Democratic National Convention with 54 percent of pledged delegates, while Sanders had 46 percent. Controversy emerged when it was revealed that Clinton received the support of 78 percent of Democratic superdelegates, while Sanders received just seven percent. With her victory, Hillary Clinton became the first female candidate nominated by a major party for the presidency. With seventeen potential presidential nominees, the Republican primary field was the largest in US history. Similarly to the Democratic race however, the number of candidates thinned out by the time of the New Hampshire primary, with Donald Trump and Ted Cruz as the frontrunners. As the primaries progressed, Trump pulled ahead while the remainder of the candidates withdrew from the race, and he was named as the Republican candidate in May 2016. Much of Trump's success has been attributed to the free media attention he received due to his outspoken and controversial behavior, with a 2018 study claiming that Trump received approximately two billion dollars worth of free coverage during the primaries alone. Campaign The 2016 presidential election was preceded by, arguably, the most internationally covered and scandal-driven campaign in U.S. history. Clinton campaigned on the improvement and expansion of President Obama's more popular policies, while Trump's campaign was based on his personality and charisma, and took a different direction than the traditional conservative, Republican approach. In the months before the election, Trump came to represent a change in how the U.S. government worked, using catchy slogans such as "drain the swamp" to show how he would fix what many viewed to be a broken establishment; painting Clinton as the embodiment of this establishment, due to her experience as First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State. The candidates also had fraught relationships with the press, although the Trump campaign was seen to have benefitted more from this publicity than Clinton's. Controversies Trump's off the cuff and controversial remarks gained him many followers throughout the campaign, however, just one month before the election, a 2005 video emerged of Trump making derogatory comments about grabbing women "by the pussy". The media and public's reaction caused many high-profile Republicans to condemn the comments (for which he apologized), with many calling for his withdrawal from the race. This controversy was soon overshadowed when it emerged that the FBI was investigating Hillary Clinton for using a private email server while handling classified information, furthering Trump's narrative that the Washington establishment was corrupt. Two days before the election, the FBI concluded that Clinton had not done anything wrong; however the investigation had already damaged the public's perception of Clinton's trustworthiness, and deflected many undecided voters towards Trump. Results Against the majority of predictions, Donald Trump won the 2016 election, and became the 45th President of the United States. Clinton won almost three million more votes than her opponent, however Trump's strong performance in swing states gave him a 57 percent share of the electoral votes, while Clinton took just 42 percent. The unpopularity of both candidates also contributed to much voter abstention, and almost six percent of the popular vote went to third party candidates (despite their poor approval ratings). An unprecedented number of faithless electors also refused to give their electoral votes to the two main candidates, instead giving them to five non-candidates. In December, it emerged that the Russian government may have interfered in this election, and the 2019 Mueller Report concluded that Russian interference in the U.S. election contributed to Clinton's defeat and the victory of Donald Trump. In total, 26 Russian citizens and three Russian organizations were indicted, and the investigation led to the indictment and conviction of many top-level officials in the Trump campaign; however Trump and the Russian government both strenuously deny these claims, and Trump's attempts to frame the Ukrainian government for Russia's invol...

Search
Clear search
Close search
Google apps
Main menu