Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Every person elected in his nation from sheriff, mayor, governor, state legislators, senators, congressman, dog catcher, etc, running, the popular vote, is how they win...Which is exactly what you snowflakes do; go nuts anytime anyone reminds you that HRC got more votes than your blob. See this thread for proof.If it’s meaningless...why are you so bothered by the fact that she got millions more votes than your blob?
Me thinks that your bothered because it somehow—in your mind—delegitimizes the blob’s Presidency. Grow up
You're right, it's meaningless that she got couple of million votes more. We simply don't care, since she's not president, but it obviously means a lot to you that "she won" something.
By the way, she had more votes than Barry in 2008 Dem primaries, and I don't see you complaining how "she won" back then. Hypocrite.
Democratic Party Primary rules are dumb.
Hillary getting more votes than your blob just triggers you snowflakes so it’s fun to point it out on these threads you consider meaningless.
You people on the left need to learn the definition of "triggered." Discussing your stance on something is not being triggered. It's freaking out over something.
We have nothing to be freaked out over. We won. The system can never change without a constitutional amendment. It's going to be this way until you die, your children die, and your grandchildren die. It's never going to change.
I don't see anybody going nuts, just trying to point out the obvious which is for one, it doesn't matter. Two, popular vote only counts in a contest of people trying to get the popular vote, and if somebody does by mistake, it was unintentional. Three, what your claim is that you had a great rummy hand, but we were playing pinochle. You had a good rummy hand only because you had terrible pinochle cards.
You're clearly just trolling now, but I do wonder if you understand I what pointed out. We can't assume that the votes cast in an electoral election tell us who would have won if the election had been based on the popular vote.If it’s meaningless...why are you so bothered by the fact that she got millions more votes than your blob?
First of all, he's not my blob. I despise Trump. Second, it doesn't bother me. I'm just pointing out that your claim doesn't mean what you think it means.
Yet here you are arguing about something you claim is meaningless 3 plus years after the fact.
LOL - I'm not arguing about. I'm just pointing out that your supposed "fact" isn't all that.
That HRC got more votes than the blob? Yup—it’s a fact
Look I linked to your claim, we have NEVER had a time when more states elected by district then winner take all NEVER, in fact when Hamilton was complaining about it MOST states did not even elected electors the State legislature picked them. Ignore me all you want you are simply wrong. There were more then 2 Founders.Every person elected in his nation from sheriff, mayor, governor, state legislators, senators, congressman, dog catcher, etc, running, the popular vote, is how they win...Which is exactly what you snowflakes do; go nuts anytime anyone reminds you that HRC got more votes than your blob. See this thread for proof.You're right, it's meaningless that she got couple of million votes more. We simply don't care, since she's not president, but it obviously means a lot to you that "she won" something.
By the way, she had more votes than Barry in 2008 Dem primaries, and I don't see you complaining how "she won" back then. Hypocrite.
Democratic Party Primary rules are dumb.
Hillary getting more votes than your blob just triggers you snowflakes so it’s fun to point it out on these threads you consider meaningless.
You people on the left need to learn the definition of "triggered." Discussing your stance on something is not being triggered. It's freaking out over something.
We have nothing to be freaked out over. We won. The system can never change without a constitutional amendment. It's going to be this way until you die, your children die, and your grandchildren die. It's never going to change.
I don't see anybody going nuts, just trying to point out the obvious which is for one, it doesn't matter. Two, popular vote only counts in a contest of people trying to get the popular vote, and if somebody does by mistake, it was unintentional. Three, what your claim is that you had a great rummy hand, but we were playing pinochle. You had a good rummy hand only because you had terrible pinochle cards.
So, it's understandable that citizens consider the vote of we the people, as important....
The electoral college process and founder's intent is misunderstood, or not taught in school....
It means something to a lot of Democrats. They think it proves that Hillary should have won, that she would have won if not for the EC. They are wrong.First of all, he's not my blob. I despise Trump. Second, it doesn't bother me. I'm just pointing out that your claim doesn't mean what you think it means.
Yet here you are arguing about something you claim is meaningless 3 plus years after the fact.
LOL - I'm not arguing about. I'm just pointing out that your supposed "fact" isn't all that.
That HRC got more votes than the blob? Yup—it’s a fact
And it doesn't mean anything, just fact.
I am sick of hearing that Hillary won the "popular vote" when that doesn't even count for anything! What counts is the popular vote AT THE STATE LEVEL, after that, it becomes 50 STATE elections. You don't win a country,
YOU WIN STATES.
You'd think democrats and Hillary would KNOW that considering that she was both First Lady, New York Senator and Secretary of STATE.
So I went back and wanted to look at the data a bit different way.
I'm also sick of hearing how pathetic the red states are. So I wanted to know, just what WAS each candidate really up against in 2016 and what did they really win?
In 2016, Hillary won TWENTY states, Trump won THIRTY. To win a state, you have to go up against all voters in a given state; the more people, the more likely voters so, the harder it is to win. And by winning a state, you also win and carry the voice of that state and the people that go in it. So what exactly did the 2016 candidates win?
I looked up the latest tallies of state population, and in the 20 states that Hillary won, her states total population (THE BLUE STATES) was: 2016 BLUE STATE POPULATION = 140,743,676.
And the thirty states that Trump won? 2016 RED STATE POPULATION = 163,435,276.
Yes. Trump's states have 22,691,600 more people in them. A not so small fact I've never seen mentioned before. What is the significance of this?
Trump won 30 states with nearly 23 million more people in them compared to Hillary's 20 states. Not only does that mean you had to carry sway with more people in more states (and by implication, means Trump represented a far greater diversity of the nation!), it means that there are many millions of people who either didn't vote last time or voted against Trump in states he won before who could decide to come out and vote this time or switch their vote to Trump after the recent fiasco of years of Democrats making false claims and accusations all proven wrong and spending tens of millions of dollars of hard earned taxpayer money on silly Russia investigations and a baseless, desperate, petulant, childish impeachment that was nothing more than an abuse of House power resulting in a near Constitutional crisis.
Democrats have stirred up an angry hornets nest, meantime, with the likes of who they have to represent them this time, Democrats may find many of themselves demoralized bowing to the futility.
The 50 US States Ranked By Population
In case anyone wants to check my math.
Trump has 30 states and a potential of up to TWENTY MILLION additional voters this time around, his supporters are pissed, and that is if he doesn't even win any additional states!
Democrats CAN'T feel good about that.
Hillary won the popular vote
So what? Trump won more states.
And if popular vote counts, why Barry was presidential candidate, and not her, since she had more votes than him in Dem Primaries?
Hillary won the popular vote
No, she didn't. There was no popular vote election in 2016. If there had been, the vote totals would have been different. The entire election would have been different.
Ok, she got millions and millions more votes than your blob
Hillary did in fact win the popular vote over the blob. That it triggers you guys is just a bonusHillary won the popular vote
So what? Trump won more states.
And if popular vote counts, why Barry was presidential candidate, and not her, since she had more votes than him in Dem Primaries?
Hillary won the popular vote
Keep saying that, it just may become the truth.
Nope. She had more votes than Trump, but she didn't have more than 50% of popular vote, she didn't win anything.
You're missing the point. Or maybe you just don't understand it. The votes cast in 2016 were cast in an electoral college election. People knew that going into the voting booth. Candidates knew that when they campaigned. If someone lived in a state that overwhelmingly supported a candidate they opposed, there was very little point in them even voting. Many likely stayed home. In a popular election, they might have actually voted. Likewise, if the election had been based on the popular vote, rather than the electoral college, candidates would have campaigned differently. And a different system would have effected the primaries as well. It's possible, even likely, that both parties would have nominated different candidates, candidates more likely to win the popular vote.
I am sick of hearing that Hillary won the "popular vote" when that doesn't even count for anything! What counts is the popular vote AT THE STATE LEVEL, after that, it becomes 50 STATE elections. You don't win a country,
YOU WIN STATES.
You'd think democrats and Hillary would KNOW that considering that she was both First Lady, New York Senator and Secretary of STATE.
So I went back and wanted to look at the data a bit different way.
I'm also sick of hearing how pathetic the red states are. So I wanted to know, just what WAS each candidate really up against in 2016 and what did they really win?
In 2016, Hillary won TWENTY states, Trump won THIRTY. To win a state, you have to go up against all voters in a given state; the more people, the more likely voters so, the harder it is to win. And by winning a state, you also win and carry the voice of that state and the people that go in it. So what exactly did the 2016 candidates win?
I looked up the latest tallies of state population, and in the 20 states that Hillary won, her states total population (THE BLUE STATES) was: 2016 BLUE STATE POPULATION = 140,743,676.
And the thirty states that Trump won? 2016 RED STATE POPULATION = 163,435,276.
Yes. Trump's states have 22,691,600 more people in them. A not so small fact I've never seen mentioned before. What is the significance of this?
Trump won 30 states with nearly 23 million more people in them compared to Hillary's 20 states. Not only does that mean you had to carry sway with more people in more states (and by implication, means Trump represented a far greater diversity of the nation!), it means that there are many millions of people who either didn't vote last time or voted against Trump in states he won before who could decide to come out and vote this time or switch their vote to Trump after the recent fiasco of years of Democrats making false claims and accusations all proven wrong and spending tens of millions of dollars of hard earned taxpayer money on silly Russia investigations and a baseless, desperate, petulant, childish impeachment that was nothing more than an abuse of House power resulting in a near Constitutional crisis.
Democrats have stirred up an angry hornets nest, meantime, with the likes of who they have to represent them this time, Democrats may find many of themselves demoralized bowing to the futility.
The 50 US States Ranked By Population
In case anyone wants to check my math.
Trump has 30 states and a potential of up to TWENTY MILLION additional voters this time around, his supporters are pissed, and that is if he doesn't even win any additional states!
Democrats CAN'T feel good about that.
All that math and for what? Clinton still received more votes. Nobody is confused about how the electoral college works or doesn't work. It still doesn't change the fact that as a sitting president more people voted against him than any other in history and just so happened also lost the popular vote by a higher margin than any of the other fluke presidencies that managed to lose the popular vote.
STILL? Still what? So what? I've heard you idiots told 90,000 times now THE NUMBER OF VOTES MEANS NOTHING, yet you morons wear it on your sleeve like a badge of honor! Hillary got move votes than Barack, yet you don't bitch about that because you still got a democrat in office!
And without voter ID, no one knows how many votes were legit! So you can take your 2.8 million unqualified votes, that and a $1.50 will buy you a cup of coffee. And if you actually READ these threads, yes, a great many people are apparently VERY confused about why we have the EC, why we need the EC, why it was put in place, and how it works, and that the popular vote is a meaningless statistic not used in this country for anything.
Somebody is triggered.
Do I believe that political ads on facebook and elsewhere are effective? Yes. Why? Because political campaigns spend millions doing just that. Bloomberg is evidence that campaign ads can and do work.
So what are you going to bet that Bloomberg doesn't get the nomination? Hillary spent three times as much as Trump, so why is she not President today?
Here we go again the link that proves we have never voted by districts in a majority of States.As I suspected at first electors were chosen by State Government not by popular vote. When that changed in the early to mud 1800's it went to winner take all. There was NEVER a time when a majority of States did by district so Maine and Nebraska are actually odd men out.United States Electoral College - Wikipedia
from the articleIn 1789, at-large popular vote, the winner-take-all method, began with Pennsylvania and Maryland; Virginia and Delaware used a district plan by popular vote, and in the five other states participating in the election (Connecticut, Georgia, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and South Carolina),[42] state legislatures chose. By 1800, Virginia and Rhode Island voted at-large, Kentucky, Maryland, and North Carolina voted popularly by district, and eleven states voted by state legislature. Beginning in 1804 there was a definite trend towards the winner-take-all system for statewide popular vote.[43]
By 1832, only South Carolina chose their electors this way, and it abandoned the method after 1860.[43] States using popular vote by district have included ten states from all regions of the country. By 1832, there was only Maryland, and from 1836 district plans fell out of use until the 20th century, though Michigan used a district plan for 1892 only.[44]
Since 1836, statewide winner-take-all popular voting for electors has been the almost universal practice. As of 2016, Maine (from 1972) and Nebraska (from 1996) use the district plan, with two at-large electors assigned to support the winner of the statewide popular vote.[45]
Every person elected in his nation from sheriff, mayor, governor, state legislators, senators, congressman, dog catcher, etc, running, the popular vote, is how they win...Which is exactly what you snowflakes do; go nuts anytime anyone reminds you that HRC got more votes than your blob. See this thread for proof.You're right, it's meaningless that she got couple of million votes more. We simply don't care, since she's not president, but it obviously means a lot to you that "she won" something.
By the way, she had more votes than Barry in 2008 Dem primaries, and I don't see you complaining how "she won" back then. Hypocrite.
Democratic Party Primary rules are dumb.
Hillary getting more votes than your blob just triggers you snowflakes so it’s fun to point it out on these threads you consider meaningless.
You people on the left need to learn the definition of "triggered." Discussing your stance on something is not being triggered. It's freaking out over something.
We have nothing to be freaked out over. We won. The system can never change without a constitutional amendment. It's going to be this way until you die, your children die, and your grandchildren die. It's never going to change.
I don't see anybody going nuts, just trying to point out the obvious which is for one, it doesn't matter. Two, popular vote only counts in a contest of people trying to get the popular vote, and if somebody does by mistake, it was unintentional. Three, what your claim is that you had a great rummy hand, but we were playing pinochle. You had a good rummy hand only because you had terrible pinochle cards.
So, it's understandable that citizens consider the vote of we the people, as important....
The electoral college process and founder's intent is misunderstood, or not taught in school....
Do I believe that political ads on facebook and elsewhere are effective? Yes. Why? Because political campaigns spend millions doing just that. Bloomberg is evidence that campaign ads can and do work.
So what are you going to bet that Bloomberg doesn't get the nomination? Hillary spent three times as much as Trump, so why is she not President today?
Bloomberg went from nowhere to third place by doing nothing but ads. Clinton, might I remind you actually won the vote and she also had to deal with some really bad news thanks to Comey right before the election.
What we do know is that Russians heavily targeted states like Michigan and Pennsylvania and look what happened.
The SCOTUS can't change the electoral college. That requires changing the constitution and that's not the SCOTUS's job.I am sick of hearing that Hillary won the "popular vote" when that doesn't even count for anything! What counts is the popular vote AT THE STATE LEVEL, after that, it becomes 50 STATE elections. You don't win a country,
YOU WIN STATES.
You'd think democrats and Hillary would KNOW that considering that she was both First Lady, New York Senator and Secretary of STATE.
So I went back and wanted to look at the data a bit different way.
I'm also sick of hearing how pathetic the red states are. So I wanted to know, just what WAS each candidate really up against in 2016 and what did they really win?
In 2016, Hillary won TWENTY states, Trump won THIRTY. To win a state, you have to go up against all voters in a given state; the more people, the more likely voters so, the harder it is to win. And by winning a state, you also win and carry the voice of that state and the people that go in it. So what exactly did the 2016 candidates win?
I looked up the latest tallies of state population, and in the 20 states that Hillary won, her states total population (THE BLUE STATES) was: 2016 BLUE STATE POPULATION = 140,743,676.
And the thirty states that Trump won? 2016 RED STATE POPULATION = 163,435,276.
Yes. Trump's states have 22,691,600 more people in them. A not so small fact I've never seen mentioned before. What is the significance of this?
Trump won 30 states with nearly 23 million more people in them compared to Hillary's 20 states. Not only does that mean you had to carry sway with more people in more states (and by implication, means Trump represented a far greater diversity of the nation!), it means that there are many millions of people who either didn't vote last time or voted against Trump in states he won before who could decide to come out and vote this time or switch their vote to Trump after the recent fiasco of years of Democrats making false claims and accusations all proven wrong and spending tens of millions of dollars of hard earned taxpayer money on silly Russia investigations and a baseless, desperate, petulant, childish impeachment that was nothing more than an abuse of House power resulting in a near Constitutional crisis.
Democrats have stirred up an angry hornets nest, meantime, with the likes of who they have to represent them this time, Democrats may find many of themselves demoralized bowing to the futility.
The 50 US States Ranked By Population
In case anyone wants to check my math.
Trump has 30 states and a potential of up to TWENTY MILLION additional voters this time around, his supporters are pissed, and that is if he doesn't even win any additional states!
Democrats CAN'T feel good about that.
I didn't take the time of counting votes, but anyway Clinton and Gore both won the majority vote.
Actually, even that isn't really quite true. In Florida, they wrongly called the vote early for Gore despite the fact that the panhandle was in a different time zone and had another hour before their polls closed, and hearing that Gore had already won, people stopped voting early, no doubt costing GW many votes he should have gotten.
Yet Gore won the popular vote. You can dish it up anyway you want, but its written in history that Gore and Clinton won the popular vote.
Good point. Another reason we should keep the EC. I think it should be both the EC and PV but if the choice was one OR the other, I would take the EC every timeThe SCOTUS can't change the electoral college. That requires changing the constitution and that's not the SCOTUS's job.I am sick of hearing that Hillary won the "popular vote" when that doesn't even count for anything! What counts is the popular vote AT THE STATE LEVEL, after that, it becomes 50 STATE elections. You don't win a country,
YOU WIN STATES.
You'd think democrats and Hillary would KNOW that considering that she was both First Lady, New York Senator and Secretary of STATE.
So I went back and wanted to look at the data a bit different way.
I'm also sick of hearing how pathetic the red states are. So I wanted to know, just what WAS each candidate really up against in 2016 and what did they really win?
In 2016, Hillary won TWENTY states, Trump won THIRTY. To win a state, you have to go up against all voters in a given state; the more people, the more likely voters so, the harder it is to win. And by winning a state, you also win and carry the voice of that state and the people that go in it. So what exactly did the 2016 candidates win?
I looked up the latest tallies of state population, and in the 20 states that Hillary won, her states total population (THE BLUE STATES) was: 2016 BLUE STATE POPULATION = 140,743,676.
And the thirty states that Trump won? 2016 RED STATE POPULATION = 163,435,276.
Yes. Trump's states have 22,691,600 more people in them. A not so small fact I've never seen mentioned before. What is the significance of this?
Trump won 30 states with nearly 23 million more people in them compared to Hillary's 20 states. Not only does that mean you had to carry sway with more people in more states (and by implication, means Trump represented a far greater diversity of the nation!), it means that there are many millions of people who either didn't vote last time or voted against Trump in states he won before who could decide to come out and vote this time or switch their vote to Trump after the recent fiasco of years of Democrats making false claims and accusations all proven wrong and spending tens of millions of dollars of hard earned taxpayer money on silly Russia investigations and a baseless, desperate, petulant, childish impeachment that was nothing more than an abuse of House power resulting in a near Constitutional crisis.
Democrats have stirred up an angry hornets nest, meantime, with the likes of who they have to represent them this time, Democrats may find many of themselves demoralized bowing to the futility.
The 50 US States Ranked By Population
In case anyone wants to check my math.
Trump has 30 states and a potential of up to TWENTY MILLION additional voters this time around, his supporters are pissed, and that is if he doesn't even win any additional states!
Democrats CAN'T feel good about that.
I didn't take the time of counting votes, but anyway Clinton and Gore both won the majority vote.
Actually, even that isn't really quite true. In Florida, they wrongly called the vote early for Gore despite the fact that the panhandle was in a different time zone and had another hour before their polls closed, and hearing that Gore had already won, people stopped voting early, no doubt costing GW many votes he should have gotten.
Yet Gore won the popular vote. You can dish it up anyway you want, but its written in history that Gore and Clinton won the popular vote.
And its a GREAT thing that the popular vote does not count for winning an election. If it did, massive voting corruption in any one place could throw the election one way or another. The fact that the election is decided by winning individual states/ electoral votes, means that any corruption in one place is minimized and diluted to some extent.
Good point. Another reason we should keep the EC. I think it should be both the EC and PV but if the choice was one OR the other, I would take the EC every timeThe SCOTUS can't change the electoral college. That requires changing the constitution and that's not the SCOTUS's job.I am sick of hearing that Hillary won the "popular vote" when that doesn't even count for anything! What counts is the popular vote AT THE STATE LEVEL, after that, it becomes 50 STATE elections. You don't win a country,
YOU WIN STATES.
You'd think democrats and Hillary would KNOW that considering that she was both First Lady, New York Senator and Secretary of STATE.
So I went back and wanted to look at the data a bit different way.
I'm also sick of hearing how pathetic the red states are. So I wanted to know, just what WAS each candidate really up against in 2016 and what did they really win?
In 2016, Hillary won TWENTY states, Trump won THIRTY. To win a state, you have to go up against all voters in a given state; the more people, the more likely voters so, the harder it is to win. And by winning a state, you also win and carry the voice of that state and the people that go in it. So what exactly did the 2016 candidates win?
I looked up the latest tallies of state population, and in the 20 states that Hillary won, her states total population (THE BLUE STATES) was: 2016 BLUE STATE POPULATION = 140,743,676.
And the thirty states that Trump won? 2016 RED STATE POPULATION = 163,435,276.
Yes. Trump's states have 22,691,600 more people in them. A not so small fact I've never seen mentioned before. What is the significance of this?
Trump won 30 states with nearly 23 million more people in them compared to Hillary's 20 states. Not only does that mean you had to carry sway with more people in more states (and by implication, means Trump represented a far greater diversity of the nation!), it means that there are many millions of people who either didn't vote last time or voted against Trump in states he won before who could decide to come out and vote this time or switch their vote to Trump after the recent fiasco of years of Democrats making false claims and accusations all proven wrong and spending tens of millions of dollars of hard earned taxpayer money on silly Russia investigations and a baseless, desperate, petulant, childish impeachment that was nothing more than an abuse of House power resulting in a near Constitutional crisis.
Democrats have stirred up an angry hornets nest, meantime, with the likes of who they have to represent them this time, Democrats may find many of themselves demoralized bowing to the futility.
The 50 US States Ranked By Population
In case anyone wants to check my math.
Trump has 30 states and a potential of up to TWENTY MILLION additional voters this time around, his supporters are pissed, and that is if he doesn't even win any additional states!
Democrats CAN'T feel good about that.
I didn't take the time of counting votes, but anyway Clinton and Gore both won the majority vote.
Actually, even that isn't really quite true. In Florida, they wrongly called the vote early for Gore despite the fact that the panhandle was in a different time zone and had another hour before their polls closed, and hearing that Gore had already won, people stopped voting early, no doubt costing GW many votes he should have gotten.
Yet Gore won the popular vote. You can dish it up anyway you want, but its written in history that Gore and Clinton won the popular vote.
And its a GREAT thing that the popular vote does not count for winning an election. If it did, massive voting corruption in any one place could throw the election one way or another. The fact that the election is decided by winning individual states/ electoral votes, means that any corruption in one place is minimized and diluted to some extent.
"Lush"?Relax dude. A paltry 80,000 votes spread across three states accounted for that electoral “ thumping “Trump squeaked out an electoral win.
Winning ten more states and 306 EC votes to Hillary's 240 is a bit more than a "squeak."
More like a THUMP.
so what was the point of this thread anyway?
Standard Trumper whining and braggadocio?
SURE it did, Lush, SURE it did.
Your very post confirms you are sweating blood. Trump has a hundred different ways to skin a cat and with Biden, Sanders or Bloomberg your likely opponent this time, the job just got a whole lot easier!
View attachment 310002
Do I believe that political ads on facebook and elsewhere are effective? Yes. Why? Because political campaigns spend millions doing just that. Bloomberg is evidence that campaign ads can and do work.
So what are you going to bet that Bloomberg doesn't get the nomination? Hillary spent three times as much as Trump, so why is she not President today?
Bloomberg went from nowhere to third place by doing nothing but ads. Clinton, might I remind you actually won the vote and she also had to deal with some really bad news thanks to Comey right before the election.
What we do know is that Russians heavily targeted states like Michigan and Pennsylvania and look what happened.
No, we don't know that at all. Nobody from Russia had any impact on our elections. It isn't possible. I have expert testimony to backup my claim too.
I'm sure that's -exactly- what he was thinking as he took the oath of office, while Hillary watched Bill check out Melania.Trump cares.And no one cares, except for trolls who think someone cares.All that math and for what? Clinton still received more votes.
I'm sure that's -exactly- what he was thinking as he took the oath of office, while Hillary watched Bill check out Melania.Trump cares.And no one cares, except for trolls who think someone cares.All that math and for what? Clinton still received more votes.
