Talk:2020 United States presidential election: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:44, 30 June 2019

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2020 United States presidential election article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30: 15 days

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
Changes challenged by reversion may not be reinstated without affirmative consensus on the talk page

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as obvious vandalism.
In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.
Whenever you are relying on one of these exemptions, you should refer to it in your edit summary and, if applicable, link to the discussion where consensus was clearly established.

The contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topics sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Donald Trump Unassessed High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Donald Trump, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Donald Trump 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.Donald TrumpWikipedia:WikiProject Donald TrumpTemplate:WikiProject Donald TrumpDonald Trump articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Elections and Referendums Unassessed

	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 has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Politics: American Unassessed High‑importance

	Politics portal 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 has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Top-importance).

United States: Presidential elections / Government Unassessed Mid‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as High-importance).

2020 United States presidential election was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 2, 2006	Articles for deletion	Deleted
October 30, 2015	Articles for deletion	Kept
November 1, 2015	Good article nominee	Not listed
March 1, 2017	Articles for deletion	Kept
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 22, 2015. The text of the entry was: Did you know that potential candidates in the United States presidential election of 2020* include Tom Cotton, Hillary Clinton, and Kanye West?*
Current status: Former good article nominee

Consensuses reached for the 2012 and 2016 elections apply for the 2020 election as well, unless these consensuses are reversed. Regarding the infobox: A consensus has been reached to make it so that the political parties that earned at least one electoral vote in the previous election are to, by default, be included in the infobox of the article about the next election This means that, as of right now, only the Republican and Democratic parties are to be included in the infobox. In order for a third party to be included, they need to have ballot acces in the 2020 election to at least 270 electoral votes, per this consensus.

Consensus on the order of candidates in the infobox:

Parties that got at least one electoral vote in the 2016 election will be the first to appear in the infobox and will be ordered by how many electoral votes they got in 2016. Since the Republicans Party got 306 electoral votes and the Democratic Party got 232, the Republican Party will be the first to appear in the infobox and the Democratic Party will be the second.
Some political parties that are qualified to appear in the infobox did not get any electoral votes in 2016. They will be ordered by the total amount of electoral votes in the states that have ballot access. Write-in access counts too.
- If two or more parties have access to the same amount of electoral votes, they will be sorted by how many popular votes they got in 2016. If one of the parties did not participate in the 2016 election, they will be be ordered after the parties (with the access to the same amount of electoral votes) that did. If two or more parties both have access to the same amount of electoral votes and did not participate in the 2016 election, they will be sorted alphabetically by the candidates' names.

Consensus on the criteria for a potential candidate to be included in the article:

The "Publicly expressed interest" section requires only one source from the last six months where the individual is quoted as being interested in running in 2020. Social media posts do not count as public expressions of interest.
The "Potential candidates" section requires at least two sources speculating that an individual may run or where an individual talks about the 2020 election from any point after the 2016 election (since November 9, 2016). The sources must not be a list of several potential candidates nor a persuasive article about why a candidate should run.
The "Declined candidates" section requires at least two sources from any point after the 2016 election (since November 9, 2016). One source must be speculative in the same vein as the "Potential candidates" section, while the second must be a quoted denial from the individual in question.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2020 United States presidential election article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30: 15 days

Socialist Action's Jeff Mackler running

I follow the smaller U.S. socialist parties, and Socialist Action made an announcement earlier this week that Jeff Mackler, their nominee in 2016, will be the nominee this time around as well, as per this article from their website. Now, one could argue that he shouldn't have a Wikipedia page in the first place, but as he does, thus meets that notability requirement, would it be appropriate to add him into this article? - GhostHeart1993 (talk) 18:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

yes.Arglebargle79 (talk) 01:11, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Prohibition party nomination

Someone reverted an edit of mine because there was no "consensus." The edit was that the teensy and moribund Prohibition party's nomination race is over and a ticket nominated. What I did was that I changed the table to add the VP candidate and call the "Declared candidate" for the nomination the nominee. When EACH of the various parties, both major and minor do this, there should be no need for consensus, we just have to make sure the facts are correct. I know that when something happens for the first time, someone always reverts it, and that's annoying, but the two guys were nominated. They were really nominated. That's all that's needed.Arglebargle79 (talk) 01:11, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think the "no consensus" statement was actually meant to relate to your unilateral decision to remove the "expressed interest" section, an issue that has been litigated numerous times on here. If you have a new argument as to why this section is unneeded, feel free to make it. I don't have an issue with the Prohibition Party thing though, and, as you said, I don't know why anybody would.--ACbreezy (talk) 05:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change

In the event that no candidate receives the minimum 270 electoral votes needed to win the election, the United States House of Representatives will select the president, and the United States Senate will select the vice president

to

In the event that no candidate receives the minimum 270 electoral votes needed to win the election, the United States House of Representatives will select the president from three candidates that received the most electoral votes, and the United States Senate will select the vice president from the candidates that received the two highest totals

because the current wording implies that the House and Senate can select whomever they want, which is incorrect because their choice is limited by the 12th Amendment.47.139.42.28 (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2019 (UTC) 47.139.42.28 (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Great suggestion. Thanks. --A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 02:13, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Carter

The article says "Former president Jimmy Carter, having served a single term as president, is not constitutionally prohibited from being elected to another term in the 2020 election. "

This is technically a true statement, but it implies that Carter could be elected to another term in the 2020 election. Considering that he will be 96 on the day of the election, and the term to which he would be elected won't end until he is 100, it is not a realistic possibility and I don't see what is notable about the fact that the Constitution doesn't prohibit it. The only reason I can see to mention Carter (out of the millions of eligible citizens) is that he is the only living eligible person who has previously been President, but it shouldn't be mentioned in a way that makes it sound more plausible than it is. 47.139.42.28 (talk) 01:42, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Kimberly Ruff, candidate.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:06, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trump calls for no interference from RUSSIANS -- "Don't Meddle"

In June 2019, while attending a meeting between President Trump and Vladimir Putin at the G-20 summit in OSAKA, Japan, President Trump was asked by a news reporter if he would tell Russia not to meddle in American elections. Trump responded, “Yes, of course I will.” Mr. Trump then turned to Mr. Putin and said, "Don’t meddle in the election, President." Mr. Trump then pointed at another Russian official and repeated, “Don’t meddle in the election.” https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/28/us/politics/trump-putin-election.html 174.150.200.144 174.150.200.144 (talk) 00:46, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was a joke. What he told George Stephanopoulos was what he believes. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:03, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

simply your opinion, not the truth, of what Trump actually does.. Read, Listen, Observe the truth...174.150.200.144 (talk) 02:39, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 82: / Line 82: @@
 In June 2019, while attending a meeting between President Trump and [[Vladimir Putin]] at the G-20 summit in OSAKA, Japan, President Trump was asked by a news reporter if he would tell Russia not to meddle in American elections.  Trump responded, “Yes, of course I will.” Mr. Trump then turned to Mr. Putin and said, "Don’t meddle in the election, President." Mr. Trump then pointed at another Russian official and repeated, “Don’t meddle in the election.” https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/28/us/politics/trump-putin-election.html[[Special:Contributions/174.150.200.144|174.150.200.144]] [[Special:Contributions/174.150.200.144|174.150.200.144]] ([[User talk:174.150.200.144|talk]]) 00:46, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 :This was a joke. What he told George Stephanopoulos was what he believes. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]]&nbsp;([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 01:03, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
-::simply your opinion, not the actual truth, of what Trump actually does.. [[Special:Contributions/174.150.200.144|174.150.200.144]] ([[User talk:174.150.200.144|talk]]) 02:39, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
+::simply your opinion, not the truth, of what Trump actually does.. Read, Listen, Observe the truth...[[Special:Contributions/174.150.200.144|174.150.200.144]] ([[User talk:174.150.200.144|talk]]) 02:39, 30 June 2019 (UTC)