2016: Conservatism WON the presidential popular vote

[TheGreatGatsby]

Okay, but say it had came down to a runoff between two candidates; the data shows that it wouldn't have been in the bag for Hillary. My overarching point is that the Hillary winning the popular vote by 2.5 percent is superficial if not just outright phony.

3 million more votes is not superficial, and not phony. The country didn't want Trump as president

It is. People knew going into this that the popular vote was not the deciding factor and voted accordingly. I know plenty of people who made statement votes or non votes who likely otherwise vote differently under a popular vote system. But as it is, people did vote at larger numbers for conservative principles.

Voted accordingly? What is that supposed to mean? Are you trying to say Trump supporters voted for someone else, or that people that didn't support him voted for him anyway? Explain what you mean by voted accordingly, and how could that make 3000 more votes mean anything but 3000 more people wanted her.

It was pretty clear the first time, honestly. People vote differently based on different parameters. I'll let you do some actual critical thinking if you give a fuck. No spoonfeeding you twice.

Just tell me what voted accordingly is supposed to mean, and how it makes 3 million more votes mean something other than 3 million more people wanted her.

No spoonfeeding. Do some critical thinking. Reread the text. I was clear.

 

[BluesLegend]

Ms. Clinton got more votes than anyone else.

Right, now subtract illegals who voted illegally, legal aliens who voted illegally, and the anchor baby votes.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

If. if. If. if. Your clown lucked out, and you want to act like he legitimately won. He' will be president, but you will never be able to say the majority of the country wanted that.

Trump did legitimately win. The outcome is not in disrepute. And my point would be that it could be argued that ultimately more people wanted Trump than Hillary. If we're counting only legal citizens, then the picture becomes clearer still yet.

Still whining about imaginary illegal citizens voting. Come up with proof of more than a tiny fraction of a percent, and you might have a point.

It's not PROOF -- but it is entirely suspicious that there were about 1.5MILLION "provisional" ballots cast in Cali. When I last checked about 8 days after the election, Cali had just cleared less than 200,000 of these. So we KNOW that an extraordinary amount of questionable ballots were cast. And that's on the Cali system. Where people have the expectation of just walking into a polling place (or a dozen polling places) and be allowed to vote regardless of the fact that they don't APPEAR on the voting rolls.

That's a lousy way to run an election system.

So some keyboard warrior can sit on his couch, probably several states away, and find widespread laws being broken, but the professionals that were actually there, and had the authority to view every step of the procedure didn't find a thing. You are truly a legend in your own mind.

Nobody will ever KNOW how many of those 1.5Million provisionals were illegal or folks attempting to vote more than once. Because a good MILLION were never cleared before the deadline for certification. They'll go into boxes in basements and never be studied. Or prosecuted. And we'll also never know about the 1/4 or 1/3 of those and by what STANDARDS those provisionals were approved. It's a slipshod crappy system BEGGING for fraud.

It goes beyond that. In California, an illegal alien can very comfortably register to vote. There is no rigors process in place to discourage it or counter it or prosecute against it. Heck, the state has illegals in elected positions.

 

[BULLDOG]

If. if. If. if. Your clown lucked out, and you want to act like he legitimately won. He' will be president, but you will never be able to say the majority of the country wanted that.

Trump did legitimately win. The outcome is not in disrepute. And my point would be that it could be argued that ultimately more people wanted Trump than Hillary. If we're counting only legal citizens, then the picture becomes clearer still yet.

Still whining about imaginary illegal citizens voting. Come up with proof of more than a tiny fraction of a percent, and you might have a point.

It's not PROOF -- but it is entirely suspicious that there were about 1.5MILLION "provisional" ballots cast in Cali. When I last checked about 8 days after the election, Cali had just cleared less than 200,000 of these. So we KNOW that an extraordinary amount of questionable ballots were cast. And that's on the Cali system. Where people have the expectation of just walking into a polling place (or a dozen polling places) and be allowed to vote regardless of the fact that they don't APPEAR on the voting rolls.

That's a lousy way to run an election system.

So some keyboard warrior can sit on his couch, probably several states away, and find widespread laws being broken, but the professionals that were actually there, and had the authority to view every step of the procedure didn't find a thing. You are truly a legend in your own mind.

Nobody will ever KNOW how many of those 1.5Million provisionals were illegal or folks attempting to vote more than once. Because a good MILLION were never cleared before the deadline for certification. They'll go into boxes in basements and never be studied. Or prosecuted. And we'll also never know about the 1/4 or 1/3 of those and by what STANDARDS those provisionals were approved. It's a slipshod crappy system BEGGING for fraud.

So they weren't counted. How does that effect the 3 million more counted votes who voted for Hillary?

 

[flacaltenn]

Okay, but say it had came down to a runoff between two candidates; the data shows that it wouldn't have been in the bag for Hillary. My overarching point is that the Hillary winning the popular vote by 2.5 percent is superficial if not just outright phony.

3 million more votes is not superficial, and not phony. The country didn't want Trump as president

It is. People knew going into this that the popular vote was not the deciding factor and voted accordingly. I know plenty of people who made statement votes or non votes who likely otherwise vote differently under a popular vote system. But as it is, people did vote at larger numbers for conservative principles.

Voted accordingly? What is that supposed to mean? Are you trying to say Trump supporters voted for someone else, or that people that didn't support him voted for him anyway? Explain what you mean by voted accordingly, and how could that make 3000 more votes mean anything but 3000 more people wanted her.

It was pretty clear the first time, honestly. People vote differently based on different parameters. I'll let you do some actual critical thinking if you give a fuck. No spoonfeeding you twice.

Just tell me what voted accordingly is supposed to mean, and how it makes 3 million more votes mean something other than 3 million more people wanted her.

If you do that -- and disenfranchise the OTHER 4.6% that voted AGAINST Clinton, her 2.2Million margin against Trump gets swamped. The only thing we DO KNOW about the popular vote is that more folks chose to vote AGAINST her than for her. That's the ENTIRE popular vote. Not a ficticious 2-way competition that never occurred. You don't KNOW what the pop vote result would have been in a 2 way popularity contest between damaged maniacs.

 

[BULLDOG]

Okay, but say it had came down to a runoff between two candidates; the data shows that it wouldn't have been in the bag for Hillary. My overarching point is that the Hillary winning the popular vote by 2.5 percent is superficial if not just outright phony.

3 million more votes is not superficial, and not phony. The country didn't want Trump as president

30 of 50 states disagree with you.

At a minimum. Info Wars contests that Hillary stole five states, though I've never heard which ones they believe this is true of.

Nevada, Virginia, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Colorado, New Mexico, Maine would be the prime targets.

Not Colorado, the front rang where all the colleges and the large population centers are is solidly liberal. Sprinkle in the ski/tourist areas are Colorao has turned blue.

BTW, we have a Democrat governor and Democrat controlled state houses.

Maybe, you're right. Though I found it suspicious how fast Colorado went from red to blue in the last decade. And I know that the politicians in Colorado are as corrupt there as anywhere. I suspect mass cheating in that state in the last three presidential elections.

You're a RWNJ. Trump and right wing radio told you to be suspicious. You did exactly as the crazies intended.

 

[BULLDOG]

3 million more votes is not superficial, and not phony. The country didn't want Trump as president

It is. People knew going into this that the popular vote was not the deciding factor and voted accordingly. I know plenty of people who made statement votes or non votes who likely otherwise vote differently under a popular vote system. But as it is, people did vote at larger numbers for conservative principles.

Voted accordingly? What is that supposed to mean? Are you trying to say Trump supporters voted for someone else, or that people that didn't support him voted for him anyway? Explain what you mean by voted accordingly, and how could that make 3000 more votes mean anything but 3000 more people wanted her.

It was pretty clear the first time, honestly. People vote differently based on different parameters. I'll let you do some actual critical thinking if you give a fuck. No spoonfeeding you twice.

Just tell me what voted accordingly is supposed to mean, and how it makes 3 million more votes mean something other than 3 million more people wanted her.

No spoonfeeding. Do some critical thinking. Reread the text. I was clear.

You were clearly trying to spread crap.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

3 million more votes is not superficial, and not phony. The country didn't want Trump as president

It is. People knew going into this that the popular vote was not the deciding factor and voted accordingly. I know plenty of people who made statement votes or non votes who likely otherwise vote differently under a popular vote system. But as it is, people did vote at larger numbers for conservative principles.

Voted accordingly? What is that supposed to mean? Are you trying to say Trump supporters voted for someone else, or that people that didn't support him voted for him anyway? Explain what you mean by voted accordingly, and how could that make 3000 more votes mean anything but 3000 more people wanted her.

It was pretty clear the first time, honestly. People vote differently based on different parameters. I'll let you do some actual critical thinking if you give a fuck. No spoonfeeding you twice.

Just tell me what voted accordingly is supposed to mean, and how it makes 3 million more votes mean something other than 3 million more people wanted her.

If you do that -- and disenfranchise the OTHER 4.6% that voted AGAINST Clinton, her 2.2Million margin against Trump gets swamped. The only thing we DO KNOW about the popular vote is that more folks chose to vote AGAINST her than for her. That's the ENTIRE popular vote. Not a ficticious 2-way competition that never occurred. You don't KNOW what the pop vote result would have been in a 2 way popularity contest between damaged maniacs.

He has no argument for that. And frankly, this doesn't even factor in ballot box stuffing. It's clear that the voting process has been corrupted.

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump did legitimately win. The outcome is not in disrepute. And my point would be that it could be argued that ultimately more people wanted Trump than Hillary. If we're counting only legal citizens, then the picture becomes clearer still yet.

Still whining about imaginary illegal citizens voting. Come up with proof of more than a tiny fraction of a percent, and you might have a point.

It's not PROOF -- but it is entirely suspicious that there were about 1.5MILLION "provisional" ballots cast in Cali. When I last checked about 8 days after the election, Cali had just cleared less than 200,000 of these. So we KNOW that an extraordinary amount of questionable ballots were cast. And that's on the Cali system. Where people have the expectation of just walking into a polling place (or a dozen polling places) and be allowed to vote regardless of the fact that they don't APPEAR on the voting rolls.

That's a lousy way to run an election system.

So some keyboard warrior can sit on his couch, probably several states away, and find widespread laws being broken, but the professionals that were actually there, and had the authority to view every step of the procedure didn't find a thing. You are truly a legend in your own mind.

Nobody will ever KNOW how many of those 1.5Million provisionals were illegal or folks attempting to vote more than once. Because a good MILLION were never cleared before the deadline for certification. They'll go into boxes in basements and never be studied. Or prosecuted. And we'll also never know about the 1/4 or 1/3 of those and by what STANDARDS those provisionals were approved. It's a slipshod crappy system BEGGING for fraud.

It goes beyond that. In California, an illegal alien can very comfortably register to vote. There is no rigors process in place to discourage it or counter it or prosecute against it. Heck, the state has illegals in elected positions.

No. You have nothing to prove that either. Just what other RWNJs told you. Come back if you ever have proof of anything.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

You were clearly trying to spread crap.

You clearly have no interest in critical thinking.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

No. You have nothing to prove that either. Just what other RWNJs told you. Come back if you ever have proof of anything.

I don't play the prove game with political hacks.

 

[BULLDOG]

3 million more votes is not superficial, and not phony. The country didn't want Trump as president

It is. People knew going into this that the popular vote was not the deciding factor and voted accordingly. I know plenty of people who made statement votes or non votes who likely otherwise vote differently under a popular vote system. But as it is, people did vote at larger numbers for conservative principles.

Voted accordingly? What is that supposed to mean? Are you trying to say Trump supporters voted for someone else, or that people that didn't support him voted for him anyway? Explain what you mean by voted accordingly, and how could that make 3000 more votes mean anything but 3000 more people wanted her.

It was pretty clear the first time, honestly. People vote differently based on different parameters. I'll let you do some actual critical thinking if you give a fuck. No spoonfeeding you twice.

Just tell me what voted accordingly is supposed to mean, and how it makes 3 million more votes mean something other than 3 million more people wanted her.

If you do that -- and disenfranchise the OTHER 4.6% that voted AGAINST Clinton, her 2.2Million margin against Trump gets swamped. The only thing we DO KNOW about the popular vote is that more folks chose to vote AGAINST her than for her. That's the ENTIRE popular vote. Not a ficticious 2-way competition that never occurred. You don't KNOW what the pop vote result would have been in a 2 way popularity contest between damaged maniacs.

News flash!!!!!!It wasn't a two way contest. You can say what if all you want, but you can't say 3 million more votes for Hillary means the country wanted Trump

 

[BULLDOG]

No. You have nothing to prove that either. Just what other RWNJs told you. Come back if you ever have proof of anything.

I don't play the prove game with political hacks.

Of course you don't. You can't.

 

[kiwiman127]

Fact: Trump got 46.1% of the vote. That means 53.9% didn't vote for Trump.
Info Wars=Fake News
Let's see real facts to back up your argument not hyper-partisan conjecture.

 

[Derelict_Drvr]

This whole discussion really doesn't mean anything because popular never has, nor will it ever, decide who the President will be. The popular vote per state is to decide who the state EC Electors will vote for. It is the tally of those votes that elects the President.

You know this, so getting into a heated discussion of who wins/won the popular vote is pointless. You know states decide, therefore Trump won that popular vote 60% to 40% of the states with a 77 vote difference.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

No. You have nothing to prove that either. Just what other RWNJs told you. Come back if you ever have proof of anything.

I don't play the prove game with political hacks.

Of course you don't. You can't.

You tell yourself that.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

It is. People knew going into this that the popular vote was not the deciding factor and voted accordingly. I know plenty of people who made statement votes or non votes who likely otherwise vote differently under a popular vote system. But as it is, people did vote at larger numbers for conservative principles.

Voted accordingly? What is that supposed to mean? Are you trying to say Trump supporters voted for someone else, or that people that didn't support him voted for him anyway? Explain what you mean by voted accordingly, and how could that make 3000 more votes mean anything but 3000 more people wanted her.

It was pretty clear the first time, honestly. People vote differently based on different parameters. I'll let you do some actual critical thinking if you give a fuck. No spoonfeeding you twice.

Just tell me what voted accordingly is supposed to mean, and how it makes 3 million more votes mean something other than 3 million more people wanted her.

If you do that -- and disenfranchise the OTHER 4.6% that voted AGAINST Clinton, her 2.2Million margin against Trump gets swamped. The only thing we DO KNOW about the popular vote is that more folks chose to vote AGAINST her than for her. That's the ENTIRE popular vote. Not a ficticious 2-way competition that never occurred. You don't KNOW what the pop vote result would have been in a 2 way popularity contest between damaged maniacs.

News flash!!!!!!It wasn't a two way contest. You can say what if all you want, but you can't say 3 million more votes for Hillary means the country wanted Trump

The country elected Trump. But hey, the fact that you had a felon almost win shows how far Dems have came in their pursuit of corruption.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

3 million more votes is not superficial, and not phony. The country didn't want Trump as president

30 of 50 states disagree with you.

At a minimum. Info Wars contests that Hillary stole five states, though I've never heard which ones they believe this is true of.

Nevada, Virginia, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Colorado, New Mexico, Maine would be the prime targets.

Not Colorado, the front rang where all the colleges and the large population centers are is solidly liberal. Sprinkle in the ski/tourist areas are Colorao has turned blue.

BTW, we have a Democrat governor and Democrat controlled state houses.

Maybe, you're right. Though I found it suspicious how fast Colorado went from red to blue in the last decade. And I know that the politicians in Colorado are as corrupt there as anywhere. I suspect mass cheating in that state in the last three presidential elections.

You're a RWNJ. Trump and right wing radio told you to be suspicious. You did exactly as the crazies intended.

Label, label, label.

 

[BULLDOG]

This whole discussion really doesn't mean anything because popular never has, nor will it ever, decide who President will be. The popular per state is to decide who the state EC Electors will vote for. It is the tally of those votes elects the President.

You know this, so getting into a heated discussion of who wins/won the popular vote is pointless. You know states decide, therefore Trump won that popular vote 60% to 40% with a 77 vote difference.

There is a very specific point in discussing the popular vote. The country wanted Hillary as president, but Trump won instead because of an odd result from the electoral college. Three Million more votes for Hillary proves that. Yes, he will be president. No, it wasn't because of the will of the people. You can brag about him winning all you want, but you will never be able to truthfully say it was the will of the voters.

 

[BULLDOG]

No. You have nothing to prove that either. Just what other RWNJs told you. Come back if you ever have proof of anything.

I don't play the prove game with political hacks.

Of course you don't. You can't.

You tell yourself that.

You haven't been able to so far.