Drew Angerer/Getty Images 
 
 Update, Wednesday, Nov. 9, 2 p.m. ET: It's now all but certain that Hillary Clinton will win the popular vote. Click here for more. 
 
 Original post, Tuesday, Nov. 8, 11:45 p.m. ET: As of 11:45 p.m. EST on Tuesday, the New York Times’ live forecast projected a Trump victory with greater than 95 percent confidence. At the same time, it projected roughly a 1 percentage point victory for Clinton in the popular vote, even as Trump led in the early returns. 
 
 At the moment, we believe there's a 66% chance of a Democratic win in the popular vote and a Trump win in the Electoral College — Nate Cohn (@Nate_Cohn) November 9, 2016 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 
 
 This should sound awfully familiar to Democrats. The last candidate to win the popular vote but lose the election was Al Gore in 2000. It happened just three times prior to that, all in the 1800s. 
 
 Will Oremus Will Oremus is Slate’s senior technology writer. Email him at will.oremus@slate.com or follow him on Twitter. 
 
 It would be scant consolation to Clinton or her supporters, but a popular vote win would still be a historic landmark: It would make her the first woman to win the most votes in a U.S. presidential election. 
 
 If Clinton does become the next winner who also lost, the simplest way to explain it will be to look at the three most populous states in the nation: California, Texas, and New York. Clinton will win both California and New York by wide margins, racking up millions of votes that have no effect on the number of electoral votes she receives. The Times is projecting margins of greater than 20 percent for Clinton in both states. In contrast, Trump’s projected margin in Texas—the largest red state by far—is a more modest 10 percent. 
 
 If few had discussed this possibility ahead of the election, it was probably because most models projected Clinton to win both the popular vote and the Electoral College. That said, FiveThirtyEight had noted for some time that Clinton was more vulnerable in the Electoral College than in the popular vote, and Nate Silver elaborated on that Tuesday night: 
 
 According to our polls-only model, Clinton was projected to win the Electoral College in only 59 percent of cases where she won the popular vote by 1 to 2 percentage points, as she may eventually do tonight once all votes are counted. And she was projected to win it only a quarter of the time when she won the popular vote by less than 1 point. 

 Here’s a look at how Trump reshaped the election map. As of Thursday morning, Michigan and New Hampshire are still too close to call. This page will be updated when a winner is called in those states. 

 Hillary Clinton. Mike Segar/Reuters Despite losing in the Electoral College to Donald Trump, and therefore losing the presidency, Hillary Clinton looks on track to win the popular vote in Tuesday's presidential election. 
 
 Clinton led by more than 200,000 votes as of 4:30 p.m. EST on Wednesday, with votes still to be counted in California and Washington, two Democratic strongholds, as well as Oregon and Colorado, two states Clinton was projected to win. 
 
 The New York Times projects that once those votes are counted Clinton will have won the popular vote by more than 1 percentage point. That margin of victory in the popular vote would be higher than Al Gore's in 2000. 
 
 In the Electoral College, Trump looked as if he might hit 300 votes, easily outpacing Clinton. 
 
 The presidency has been won only four times by a candidate who lost the popular vote: George W. Bush in 2000, Benjamin Harrison in 1888, Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876, and John Quincy Adams in 1824.
– It may be deja vu all over again for Democrats, with the very real possibility emerging that Hillary Clinton will be the second candidate in 16 years to win the popular vote but lose the Electoral College. As of 8am ET, Clinton had pulled ahead of President-elect Donald Trump by roughly 130,000 votes by the New York Times' count. Politico notes it could be weeks before it's declared either way, as absentee ballots will be counted for the foreseeable future. If Clinton does come out on top, Politico sees it as "likely provid[ing] little comfort besides adding a footnote to her historic run." In terms of footnotes, Business Insider reports this would be the fifth time such a thing ever happened, with George W. Bush losing the popular vote in 2000, preceded by Benjamin Harrison in 1888, Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876, and John Quincy Adams in 1824. At Slate, Will Oremus writes, "It would be scant consolation to Clinton or her supporters, but a popular vote win would still be a historic landmark: It would make her the first woman to win the most votes in a US presidential election."