Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google Communications Network Software The Internet Politics Technology

Google Will Display Election Results As Soon As Polls Close (techcrunch.com) 174

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Google has been highly involved with connecting U.S. voters to timely information throughout this election cycle, by offering everything from voter registration assistance to polling place information in its search result pages. Today, the company announced plans to display the results of the U.S. election directly in search, in over 30 languages, as soon as the polls close. Web searchers who query for "election results" will be able to view detailed information on the Presidential, Senatorial, Congressional, Gubernatorial races as well as state-level referenda and ballot propositions, says Google. The results will be updated continuously -- every 30 seconds, as indicated by a screenshot shared by the company on its official blog post detailing the new features. Tabs across the top will let you switch to between the various races, like President, House, and Senate, for example. The results will also include information like how many more electoral votes a presidential candidate needs to win, how many seats are up for grabs in the House and Senate, and how many Gubernatorial races are underway, among other things. This data is presented in an easy-to-read format, with Democrats in blue, Republicans in red, and simple graphs, alongside the key numbers.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Will Display Election Results As Soon As Polls Close

Comments Filter:
  • I'd prefer Google to stop meddling with the elections altogether.
    • by ASDFnz ( 472824 )

      What is it they are doing? (Not living in the US I don't seem to have been targeted by "Google election meddling")

      • Re:Honestly (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 07, 2016 @06:44PM (#53233231)

        From Censorship by Google

        "During the 2016 Presidential Election, Google was accused by SourceFed for manipulating its results in favor of Hillary Clinton. They alleged that the recommended searches for the candidate are different than the recommended searchers to both Yahoo and Bing and yet the searches for both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are identical to both Yahoo and Bing. Furthermore, SourceFed placed the recommended searches for Clinton on Google Trends and observed that these terms were searched less than the recommended searchers for both Yahoo and Bing.[42][43] Later, on July 27, Google again faced controversy when Trump and Gary Johnson were left out of the Google search for "Presidential Candidates."[44] Google has responded with a statement that these omissions were as a result of a "technical bug" and has subsequently brought back the candidates.[45]"

        [42] Hern, Alex (June 10, 2016). "Google Manipulating Search In Favor Of Hillary Clinton?". Techaeris. Retrieved June 10, 2016.
        [43] http://www.washingtontimes.com, The Washington Times (June 9, 2016). "Google accused of burying negative Hillary Clinton stories". The Washingtion Times. Retrieved June 10, 2016.
        [44] Fingas, Jon (July 27, 2016). "Google searches omitted key US presidential candidates". Engadget. Retrieved July 27, 2016.
        [45] Brandom, Russell (July 27, 2016). "Google tweaks system after Trump left off search results for 'presidential candidates'". The Verge. Retrieved July 28, 2016.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        What is it they are doing?

        They are reporting the truth. Most ideologues consider that "meddling".

        • If they are reporting results when the polls close then that's not the truth. They're engaging in statistical prediction which is not the same thing as presenting the truth.

    • Re:Honestly (Score:4, Funny)

      by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Monday November 07, 2016 @06:41PM (#53233207) Journal

      I'd prefer Google to stop meddling with the elections altogether.

      How do you feel about Russia meddling with the elections?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        How do you feel about Russia meddling with the elections?

        You mean when the Russians gave the American people accurate information that America's own leaders were trying to hide? Is that the "meddling" you are referring to?

        • Re:Honestly (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Jeremi ( 14640 ) on Monday November 07, 2016 @08:49PM (#53233979) Homepage

          You mean when the Russians gave the American people accurate information that America's own leaders were trying to hide? Is that the "meddling" you are referring to?

          Digging up all the dirt you can find on a candidate and then dumping it to the public (at the time you think it will do the most damage to their reputation) is not a new practice; when a political campaign does it, it is called "opposition research".

          So now we have Russia doing opposition research on behalf of the Republican Party. I'd call that meddling, wouldn't you?

          You don't really believe that Putin has the best interests of the American voters in mind, do you?

          • by chihowa ( 366380 )

            You don't really believe that Putin has the best interests of the American voters in mind, do you?

            Frankly, I don't think that either of the major party candidates (or most of the party leadership) have the best interests of the American voters in mind. From my perspective, any additional accurate information is helpful, even if it comes from distasteful sources.

          • by zifn4b ( 1040588 )

            You don't really believe that Putin has the best interests of the American voters in mind, do you?

            I challenge you to show me any politician or political leader that doesn't have a bias towards some special interest or another. In that context, your question is irrelevant. Your question should be re-phrased as: Who has the best interests of the American voters most in mind? Everyone of a reasonable amount of intelligence is meta gaming. Show me someone in this space that isn't. You know why you can't? Because those that don't play the game well get kicked from the game. You can have all the disdai

        • by zifn4b ( 1040588 )

          How do you feel about Russia meddling with the elections?

          You mean when the Russians gave the American people accurate information that America's own leaders were trying to hide? Is that the "meddling" you are referring to?

          Does it really make any difference? The term "honest politician" is an oxymoron is it not? For the idealists, isn't the politician you're searching for as rare as a unicorn? Finding discrepancies in what politicians say is like shooting fish in a barrel.

        • How do you feel about Russia meddling with the elections?

          You mean when the Russians gave the American people accurate information that America's own leaders were trying to hide? Is that the "meddling" you are referring to?

          True, but how do we know that Russia will be fair and balanced?

  • by HBI ( 604924 ) on Monday November 07, 2016 @06:06PM (#53232963) Journal

    When the polls close, typically, in a US state, precincts start tabulating and releasing the data to a Secretary of State or similar state official. Then, the results are released via a web site. This process is not fast, though it is much faster than it once was. The bottom line is that it takes hours for most states to get all the precincts accounted for to the 99% mark. 100% is not going to happen election night, as absentee ballots are not counted at that point. The early vote mostly will be accounted for, but may not be separately broken out, depending on the state.

    Google is going to have to wait the same as everyone else.

    • by Gen-GNU ( 36980 )

      Although the practice has been stopped after the 2000 election, it used to be common place for network television to call results of elections before the polls even closed. This was done based entirely on exit polls and previous polling data. After the debacle in the 2000 election where Florida was called for Bush (before the polls closed), then back to undecided (I think after the polls closed), then to Bush again, then (if I remember correctly) Gore, the Easter Bunny, Elmer Fudd, and finally, "we have n

      • In more contested districts, it is more common to have longer lines at the polls, which can mean that people technically vote after the poll close times, if they arrived before that time. People waiting in line and giving up based on speculated information, like what Google will be providing, is exactly what happened before.

        If this is true - and they'll call the result when there's still enough people in line to change the result - then shame on Google. They've gone from organizing the world's information to predicting (and influencing) the future.

        • by creimer ( 824291 )

          If this is true - and they'll call the result when there's still enough people in line to change the result - then shame on ABC/CBS/NBC. They've gone from organizing the world's information to predicting (and influencing) the future.

          FTFY - For the old timers who remember the Three Networks in the pre-24/7 news cycle, pre-Internet era.

          • by k6mfw ( 1182893 )

            FTFY - For the old timers who remember the Three Networks in the pre-24/7 news cycle, pre-Internet era.

            back in 1980 on television when Carter conceded election to Reagan before the polls closed in California.

        • by Anonymous Coward

          If this is true - and they'll call the result when there's still enough people in line to change the result - then shame on Google. They've gone from organizing the world's information to predicting (and influencing) the future.

          Great. Now people aren't even reading the fucking title:

          Google Will Display Election Results As Soon As Polls Close

          • If this is true - and they'll call the result when there's still enough people in line to change the result - then shame on Google. They've gone from organizing the world's information to predicting (and influencing) the future.

            Great. Now people aren't even reading the fucking title:

            Google Will Display Election Results As Soon As Polls Close

            Great. Now people aren't even reading the fucking parent comment

            In more contested districts, it is more common to have longer lines at the polls, which can mean that people technically vote after the poll close time

      • by HBI ( 604924 )

        Google should only show tabulated votes, not anything else. The exit polls are temp college kids who are walking around with clipboards taking instant feedback from people at the polls. There is so much skew in this data - year after year - that it's fundamentally useless except for one thing - watching how many people go in and out of the precinct. Republicans don't like to be polled and i'm sure that's not the only demo that feels that way.

      • by HBI ( 604924 )

        Also, remember, they called the election before the Panhandle closed its polls - most of the state is ET, but the Panhandle is CT. The number of voters deterred is debatable, but almost assuredly there was more than one.

      • by hawk ( 1151 )

        > After the debacle in the 2000 election where Florida was called for Bush (before the polls closed)

        You remember incorrectly.

        Florida was called prematurely for Gore while the polls were still open in the panhandle.

        This probably cost Bush a staggering number of votes in the panhandle by the effect of the losing party not going to the polls, while the winning party jumps in and still triumphantly votes (which in turn would have prevented the debacle). The panhandle is as rich in Republican votes as Palm B

    • It does lead to a question... are they going to project/call individual states for Kodos or Kang before we get to that 99% mark, like most cable TV networks do?

      • by HBI ( 604924 )

        If they do, I don't really object. The votes are in. They are subject to being wrong, but if they use the right kind of trained people, the errors will be uncommon.

      • by Gen-GNU ( 36980 )

        Yes, they will, but that's not really a bad thing. You can give accurate results well before the 99% mark in almost every election. Certain districts have a very repeatable voting pattern (meaning a district will vote nearly all republican or democrat in every election), and you can get voter turn out numbers well before results are counted. In addition, polling data, exit polls, and statistics can give you a prediction, and if the first 15% of the results are following the pattern, you can say with a re

    • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Monday November 07, 2016 @07:16PM (#53233493)

      Google is going to have to wait the same as everyone else.

      Only if the election is really close. That is unlikely.

      Here is a quick cheat sheet:
      If Donald wins in Pennsylvania, Hillary is in trouble.
      If Hillary wins Florida, she will likely win the election.
      If Hillary carries North Carolina, she almost certainly will win the election.
      If Hillary wins in Ohio, she will likely win by an Electoral College landslide.

      No other states matter.

      • by AuMatar ( 183847 )

        Actually Trump needs to pretty much win every swing state to win. He needs Florida and Ohio and North Carolina and Arizona. There's only 1 or 2 small ones he can fail to win... or he has to win in a state that hasn't voted republican for president in decades. Demographics just don't favor the republican party and are getting worse. Its actually harder now as Virginia is fairly solidly blue (where 12 years ago it was red) and North Carolina is red leaning purple (where it was red). The growth of urban ce

        • by HBI ( 604924 )

          Thinking AZ is a swing state is a tell tale that you are trusting polls with bad demo mixes. Out of the four you mention, precisely zero are going to Clinton. The election day mix in Florida is +16 Trump. The same in Ohio is +8 Trump. You should check out the CNN article about the North Carolina vote and how Trump is significantly ahead of Romney 2012 - who won the state, while Clinton is significantly behind.

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Just don't think it can't happen. Don't make the mistake a lot of British people did with Brexit, making a protest vote or not bothering at all on the assumption it wouldn't matter. It did matter.

      • Most everything you've said is wrong:

        Polls say Hillary can win even without PA.
        Hillary doesn't need Florida to win, either.
        Hillary doesn't even need North Carolina to win, though one of those 3 is necessary. PA is heavily in her favor, and she's ahead in the other two as well.

        Trump needs to win all THREE above listed swing states (which are polling against him) to even stay alive, and that's assuming he wins every other close state, too.

        See:
        http://projects.fivethirtyeigh... [fivethirtyeight.com]

        • by HBI ( 604924 )

          The only polls worth anything at this point are the latest ones - the last few days. Everything older than a week is useless.

        • Polls say Hillary can win even without PA.

          If Hillary loses Pennsylvania, then the polls are WRONG. Brexit level wrong. So many other states will likely break the "wrong" way too. She will be in trouble.

          Hillary doesn't need Florida to win, either.

          She doesn't need it, but Trump does. So if she takes it, she will likely win.

          Hillary doesn't even need North Carolina to win

          If she takes NC, then her vote is even better than her support in polls, and she will likely cruise to a strong victory.

          • If Hillary loses Pennsylvania, then the polls are WRONG. Brexit level wrong. So many other states will likely break the "wrong" way too. She will be in trouble.

            No, the polling in PA can prove to be wrong without any other state being affected by whatever issue there is in PA.

            if she takes it, she will likely win.

            She will likely win without it, so you're stating absolutely nothing, here. Sky is blue, water is wet, etc.

            If she takes NC, then her vote is even better than her support in polls, and she will likel

            • No, the polling in PA can prove to be wrong without any other state being affected by whatever issue there is in PA.

              Possible, but extremely unlikely. The big question is black turnout in Philadelphia. It that is lower than expected, the same factors will likely depress black turnout in places like Miami, Richmond, Raleigh, etc.

              Right now, it is 68F and sunny in Philadelphia. That should help Hillary. In fact, the weather is nice across most of the East Coast and Midwest, and Democrats do better when turnout is higher. She should have a good day.

              • Right now, it is 68F and sunny in Philadelphia. That should help Hillary. In fact, the weather is nice across most of the East Coast and Midwest, and Democrats do better when turnout is higher. She should have a good day.

                It would seem the weather wasn't good enough...

  • There are some states, (i.e. Florida panhandle) that span two time zones. In at least one recent election (Bush/Gore?) the TV pundits called the race before all the poles in the state (both time zones) had closed. It was claimed that this illegally discouraged voters. They risk running afoul of U.S. election laws if something like this happens.

    • TV pundits called the race before all the poles in the state (both time zones) had closed.

      What have Polish people got to do with it?

      • What have Polish people got to do with it?

        I'm sure you've heard the old joke about the science fiction writers who conducted an examination of Polish survey methods? Called "Poul and Pohl's Pole poll poll."

    • Google uses published nothing more. I don't think they can fall afoul of those laws.

  • Most states publish results as they are tabulated and recorded, providing these to media outlets. A long time practice.

    And then the media will decide how to describe these results. That's the objectionable part.

    Rumor is that exit polling data will be distributed before all polls close nationwide, which is somewhat of a departure form tradition, but predictable, since it's fairly obvious the media has tried to influence the vote, and why stop now?

    • by mi ( 197448 )

      Most states publish results as they are tabulated and recorded, providing these to media outlets.

      Whatever most States do, it is enough for one (or two) of them to be sufficiently close to warrant a recount [factcheck.org] or a legal action [trust.org], and the national results may be delayed by days and weeks.

      Unless, of course, the fix is so in, even any of the above eventualities will not matter. Given Google's being deeply and solidly in tank with one of the candidates [lifezette.com], this may be more probable than is healthy for the democratic p

  • by CanEHdian ( 1098955 ) on Monday November 07, 2016 @06:14PM (#53233043)
    Yes, from the Podesta emails we've seen how "highly involved" they are with the Clinton campaign.
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      So what's the end game here? Say Clinton wins, some infographics and tweets appear proving it was rigged, Trump refuses to concede. What is going to happen, what are you going to do?

  • Washington State, Oregon, and most of California votes by mail or in early voting.

    All the votes in WA are legal if postmarked Tuesday or dropped at a free drop box location by 8 pm PST. Most of those won't be counted until Saturday at the earliest (Friday is Veteran's Day).

    Luckily for you, over half of WA has already voted, 40 percent of Oregon has already voted, and similar results in California, but technically, you can't call it until November 20th at the earliest.

    • Was thinking the same thing (Oregon resident here).

      Then again, at least in Oregon, they only need count votes from the counties of Multnomah (Portland), Marion (Salem) and Deschutes (Bend). Not like the rest of us in Oregon have any real influence or notice (except in the travel brochures, but you know...)

    • There is zero chance that Washington state tips the election one way or the other. It's a pretty safe bet.

    • by Sowelu ( 713889 )

      Interestingly, at least one WA county warned that due to high mail volume, they might not be able to postmark everything that was mailed close to the election in time. If you haven't got it in by now, make sure you put it in a ballot drop box instead.

  • by dohzer ( 867770 )

    Missing word: Live

  • If Hillary wins Florida, the election is over.
    • Nate Silver is predicting that Trump will win Florida.

      He also says Hillary is one state away from losing the election [foxnews.com] (ie - if even one D state flips to an R, she loses).

      It's a close race - I'm looking forward to seeing the results.

      • by creimer ( 824291 )

        Nate Silver is predicting that Trump will win Florida.

        If Trump wins Florida, he will need to win Ohio (went to Obama in 2008 and 2013) and Pennsylvania (went Republican in 1988). If he fails to win all three states, his chances of becoming POTUS is slim to none.

        He also says Hillary is one state away from losing the election (ie - if even one D state flips to an R, she loses).

        Hillary starts off at 268 electoral votes and has multiple paths to win. Trump starts off with 205 electoral votes and has to run the table to win Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

        It's a close race - I'm looking forward to seeing the results.

        That may be true for some states. Hillary will probably win in a landslide overall.

        • by cfalcon ( 779563 )

          > Hillary starts off at 268 electoral votes

          Press F5 to refresh map.

          • by creimer ( 824291 )

            Press F5 to refresh map.

            Trump pulled a miracle by running the tables (Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania) and breaking the Democratic firewall (Wisconsin).

      • by Sowelu ( 713889 )

        If one state in her firewall flips, AND no toss-ups go to her, sure.

      • As of this moment Florida is 54% blue [fivethirtyeight.com] and I expect that to go up. It was around 77% blue before the Weiner emails and it's headed back there now that she's cleared.
  • by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Monday November 07, 2016 @06:45PM (#53233247) Journal

    The gamblers have already called the election:

    https://electionbettingodds.co... [electionbettingodds.com]

    • John Stossel is a gambler?

      He is a democrat reporter.

      • John Stossel is a gambler?

        He is a democrat reporter.

        John Stossel is not a Democrat. He's been a far-Right libertarian-type Republican for as long as I can remember. Not only was he a reporter for Fox, but he still has a blog over at Townhall.com, one of the largest Republican websites.

    • Curiously (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Okian Warrior ( 537106 ) on Monday November 07, 2016 @07:00PM (#53233361) Homepage Journal

      Curiously, the total money bet favors Clinton, while the total number of bets favors Trump.

      In a situation where everyone has exactly one vote, it's not clear which measure has predictive power.

      • by creimer ( 824291 )

        Curiously, the total money bet favors Clinton, while the total number of bets favors Trump.

        When the FBI director made his announcement 10 days ago, the number of bets that Trump will win went up dramatically. Like most of the Clinton scandals, the announcement failed to turn up a smoking gun.

      • Re:Curiously (Score:5, Informative)

        by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Monday November 07, 2016 @07:16PM (#53233489) Journal

        Curiously, the total money bet favors Clinton, while the total number of bets favors Trump.

        As something of a gambler myself, I think I can explain.

        The payout on the Trump bet is greater because he's going off at long odds due to his underdog status. People who bet long-shots tend to do so with smaller amounts, whereas people making big bets are more likely to play the chalk. Hedges are always smaller than the primary wager.

        In a situation where everyone has exactly one vote, it's not clear which measure has predictive power.

        Given the small number of people who bet on elections, I would caution against reading anything into the total number of wagers on either candidate. It would be like picking a winner based on the number of people at their rallies.

  • WE MUST (Score:3, Funny)

    by l0n3s0m3phr34k ( 2613107 ) on Monday November 07, 2016 @06:49PM (#53233289)
    Build a wall around The Google, to make the cyber GREAT AGAIN! We will make the Internets pay for it! Google is part of rigging, the Second Amendters must do something! FOR GREAT JUSTICE!
  • Wish I could remember the old Max Headroom bit about the top two candidates negotiating a plausible election result for network 66.
  • I'm voting early in the morning. When I get home from work, I'm not going to be sitting on the edge of my seat, biting my nails hoping candidate A, beats candidate B. Personally, I think the entire system is so screwed up, it won't matter who wins. Career politicians just care about their own cushy little deal they have. I'm going to attempt to go about my life, and try to survive whatever happens.
  • to rig the election. Then again we're already seeing lower early voter turn out among blacks in N.C. which was pretty much predicted by the (then GOP) folks running the state, so I'm not hopeful. :(
  • I love how they can announce the winners 30 seconds after the polls close, but it takes them weeks to actually finish counting, especially for ballot measures and such and especially for absentee voters . It's all based on exit polls of course. But here is the problem, a lot of people might be embarrassed about certain choices this year, and it's already well known people lie to survey takers. So how can you really know what the results are when everyone expects the answers within hours. Also keep in min
  • Dixville Notch results have been out for well over 30 minutes, yet Google doesn't display it.

FORTRAN is not a flower but a weed -- it is hardy, occasionally blooms, and grows in every computer. -- A.J. Perlis

Working...