The 2016 United States Presidential Election remains one of the most statistically analyzed events in modern political history. In the final official tally, Donald Trump won the Electoral College with 304 electoral votes to Hillary Clinton’s 227, despite Clinton winning the popular vote by a margin of approximately 2.87 million votes. This outcome marked the fifth time in American history that the winner of the popular vote did not secure the presidency, sparking decade-long discussions regarding the mechanics of the Electoral College and voter distribution across the "Rust Belt" states.
The Electoral College vs. The Popular Vote
The central narrative of the 2016 election numbers is the significant gap between the national popular vote and the state-based Electoral College. According to the Federal Election Commission (FEC), Hillary Clinton received 65,853,514 votes (48.18%), while Donald Trump received 62,984,828 votes (46.09%). This resulted in a popular vote margin of 2,868,686 in favor of Clinton.
However, the U.S. presidential election is decided by the Electoral College, which consists of 538 electors. To win, a candidate must secure a majority of 270. Donald Trump successfully flipped several key states that had previously voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, allowing him to bypass Clinton’s popular vote lead.
On Election Night, the pledged electoral count was 306 for Trump and 232 for Clinton. However, when the electors met in December 2016, a record number of "faithless electors" (seven in total) cast their ballots for candidates other than the ones to whom they were pledged. The final official count certified by Congress was 304 for Trump, 227 for Clinton, 3 for Colin Powell, 1 for Bernie Sanders, 1 for John Kasich, 1 for Ron Paul, and 1 for Faith Spotted Eagle.
The "Blue Wall" and State-Level Margins
The 2016 election was largely decided by three specific states in the Great Lakes region: Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. These states were part of what political analysts called the "Blue Wall"—states that had voted for Democratic candidates in every presidential election since 1992.
The margins in these three states were incredibly slim:
- Michigan: Trump won by 10,704 votes (0.23% margin).
- Pennsylvania: Trump won by 44,292 votes (0.72% margin).
- Wisconsin: Trump won by 22,748 votes (0.77% margin).
Combined, these three states represented 46 electoral votes. The total margin of victory for Donald Trump across these three deciding states was only 77,744 votes. If Clinton had won these three states, the Electoral College count would have shifted to 278 for Clinton and 260 for Trump, changing the outcome of the election entirely.
Significant State Shifts
Beyond the Rust Belt, other states showed varying degrees of shifts. Florida, a perennial swing state, went to Trump by a margin of 112,911 votes (1.2%). Meanwhile, traditional Republican strongholds like Texas saw a narrowing of the margin, though Trump still won the state by over 800,000 votes (9.0%).
The 2016 numbers also revealed a growing divide between urban and rural areas. Clinton won 487 counties nationwide, many of them high-density metropolitan areas, while Trump won 2,626 counties, dominating the rural landscape and smaller towns.
Voter Turnout and Demographic Data
According to the United States Elections Project, the 2016 voter turnout was approximately 60.1% of the Voting Eligible Population (VEP). This represented a slight increase from the 58.6% turnout in 2012 but remained lower than the 2008 high of 61.6%.
Breakdowns by Group
The 2016 numbers highlighted a profound "diploma divide." One of the most significant predictors of voting behavior was educational attainment, specifically among white voters.
- Education: Trump won white voters without a college degree by a massive 37-point margin. Conversely, Clinton won college-educated white voters, specifically women, by a significant margin compared to previous Democratic candidates.
- Gender: The gender gap remained wide. Clinton won women by approximately 13 points (54% to 41%), while Trump won men by 11 points (52% to 41%).
- Race and Ethnicity: Clinton won the majority of Black voters (89%), Hispanic voters (66%), and Asian voters (65%). However, her margins among these groups were slightly lower than those achieved by Barack Obama in 2012, particularly in key urban areas like Detroit and Milwaukee.
- Age: Younger voters (18-29) favored Clinton (55% to 36%), while older voters (65+) favored Trump (52% to 45%).
The Impact of Third-Party Candidates
Third-party and independent candidates played a more significant role in 2016 than in the preceding two election cycles. Collectively, third-party candidates received over 6% of the national popular vote, a sharp increase from the 2% they received in 2012.
- Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party): Received 4,489,235 votes (3.28%). This was the best performance for a Libertarian candidate in history at that time.
- Jill Stein (Green Party): Received 1,457,226 votes (1.07%). In Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, Stein’s total vote count exceeded the margin of victory between Trump and Clinton.
- Evan McMullin (Independent): Focused primarily on Utah, where he received 21.5% of the state's vote, though he did not win any electoral votes.
The presence of these candidates contributed to the fact that neither Trump nor Clinton reached 50% of the national popular vote.
Final Certified Results Table
The following table reflects the official data certified by the Federal Election Commission and the National Archives regarding the top-performing candidates.
| Candidate | Political Party | Popular Vote | Percentage | Pledged Electoral Votes | Actual Electoral Votes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Donald Trump | Republican | 62,984,828 | 46.09% | 306 | 304 |
| Hillary Clinton | Democratic | 65,853,514 | 48.18% | 232 | 227 |
| Gary Johnson | Libertarian | 4,489,235 | 3.28% | 0 | 0 |
| Jill Stein | Green | 1,457,226 | 1.07% | 0 | 0 |
| Evan McMullin | Independent | 732,273 | 0.54% | 0 | 0 |
| Others | Various | 1,152,387 | 0.84% | 0 | 7 |
Note: The "Actual Electoral Votes" column reflects the votes cast by electors in December 2016, including faithless electors.
Regional Analysis: The Shift in the Midwest
To understand the 2016 election numbers, one must examine the regional shift in the Midwest and the Rust Belt. For decades, the Democratic strategy relied on the "Blue Wall," a set of 18 states plus the District of Columbia that had voted Democratic in every election from 1992 through 2012. In 2016, Trump breached this wall by winning Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
Economic and Cultural Factors in the Data
The numbers suggest that the swing in these states was driven by white working-class voters in non-metropolitan counties. For example, in Pennsylvania, Clinton’s massive lead in Philadelphia (where she won by over 475,000 votes) was offset by Trump’s dominance in the rest of the state. In many rural Pennsylvania counties, Trump increased the Republican margin by double digits compared to Mitt Romney’s 2012 performance.
In Ohio, a state that had long been considered the premier national bellwether, the shift was even more dramatic. Trump won Ohio by 8.1 percentage points, a significant jump from the narrow margins seen in 2004, 2008, and 2012. This shift signaled Ohio’s transition from a "swing state" to a more reliably "red" state in the years following 2016.
Voter Turnout Challenges and Factors
While 136.7 million people voted in 2016, the data indicates significant variations in participation. In some key areas, Democratic turnout lagged behind 2012 levels. For instance, in Wayne County, Michigan (home to Detroit), Clinton received approximately 76,000 fewer votes than Obama did in 2012. Given that she lost the state by only 10,704 votes, the decline in turnout in urban strongholds was a critical factor in the final numbers.
Conversely, Republican turnout in rural areas reached historic highs. Trump was able to mobilize "infrequent voters"—individuals who were registered but rarely participated in elections—by focusing on trade, manufacturing, and immigration. This mobilization is reflected in the 2016 numbers through the high raw vote totals in traditionally low-turnout rural districts.
The Role of the FEC and Official Documentation
The Federal Election Commission is the primary source for verified 2016 election numbers. Their official report, "Federal Elections 2016," provides a comprehensive breakdown of every vote cast for President, the U.S. Senate, and the U.S. House of Representatives.
The verification process for these numbers takes months. While media outlets project winners on election night, the official numbers are not finalized until every state certifies its results and the Electoral College meeting is officially recorded by the Office of the Federal Register. In 2016, this process was particularly scrutinized due to the narrow margins in several states and the unusual number of faithless electors.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the popular vote in the 2016 election?
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by a margin of 2,868,686 votes. She received 65,853,514 total votes compared to Donald Trump's 62,984,828. This resulted in Clinton holding 48.18% of the vote share against Trump's 46.09%.
How many electoral votes did Donald Trump receive?
Donald Trump officially received 304 electoral votes. While he won enough states on Election Night to earn 306 pledged electors, two Republican electors (one from Texas and one from Maine's 2nd district was blocked but others occurred) ultimately cast ballots for other individuals during the official Electoral College meeting.
What states were the closest in the 2016 election?
The closest states were Michigan (0.23% margin), New Hampshire (0.37% margin, won by Clinton), Pennsylvania (0.72% margin), and Wisconsin (0.77% margin). These narrow margins in the Great Lakes region were the primary reason the Electoral College outcome differed from the popular vote.
How many people voted in the 2016 election?
A total of approximately 136.7 million Americans cast a ballot for President in 2016. This represented 60.1% of the voting-eligible population. In addition to the two main party candidates, over 8 million people voted for third-party candidates or wrote-in names.
What are faithless electors and how many were there in 2016?
Faithless electors are members of the Electoral College who do not vote for the candidate to whom they are pledged. In 2016, there were seven successful faithless electors: five who were pledged to Hillary Clinton and two who were pledged to Donald Trump. This was the highest number of faithless electors in a single presidential election in U.S. history.
Did third-party votes affect the outcome in 2016?
Statistically, the votes cast for third-party candidates like Jill Stein and Gary Johnson exceeded the margin of victory between Trump and Clinton in several key swing states, including Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. While it cannot be definitively proven how those voters would have acted if only two candidates were on the ballot, their presence significantly influenced the final percentages in those states.
Practical Recommendation for Data Research
When researching 2016 election numbers for academic or legal purposes, always prioritize the Official Federal Election Commission (FEC) reports over news graphics or exit polls. Exit polls are surveys of voters and contain a margin of error; they are not the same as the certified vote counts. For the most accurate state-by-state data, visit the Secretary of State website for each individual state, as they provide the final precinct-level results that are eventually aggregated into the national FEC reports.
