Revisiting That Dirty Popular Vote Thing Again

[iceberg]

I really don't know why he would care

Because that’s how Trump’s ego works. He can never admit he’s didn’t win something.

He did win something. He won the presidency. How much more can you win than that?

I didn’t say he didn’t win anything. I said Trump can’t stand the fact that he didn’t win something, in this instance he can’t stand the fact that he didn’t win the popular vote.

Never seen Trump worry about this. Seems more like you are assigning this to Trump to fit your image of him that it is something he would do.

Only he didn't. You did.

 

[iceberg]

Changing our EC to PV would be mob rule. Only a few states would control the majority of states like what happened last election.

Mob rule? Is that a euphemism for having every vote count?

yet you are for states with less population to be held to standards in CA and TX simply because they carry the most people. the needs of one are not the needs of all and all needs should be represented when possible.

you act as if these "arguments" you and others have are new. that perhaps our forefathers missed something along the way. no. the very reason we have the EC is to prevent what you are wanting done.

you are not advocating a system for us all, you are advocating a system that makes you personally happy and pretending everyone else should be happy for the same reasons.

Our forefathers missed a lot of things. They knew it when they wrote the constitution. They did not foresee a party system let alone states forcing their electors to vote for the popular vote winner.

Don’t bring up the founding fathers without acknowledging that our current EC is not the one they envisioned.

don't ignore why they did what they did cause you don't like it. you are doing nothing to ensure states have equal votes in your commentary so it leads one to understand you want what is best for your views, not the country.

I’m not ignoring why they did what they did. They built the EC like they did to ensure populist demagogues like Trump wouldn’t be elected. They had no intention that electors would be ceremonial. Electors were intended to use their own judgement.

They didn't do it for that reason. They did it because it made the process as fair as it could be for us all.

Not one side over the other.

Besides if the dems orea h every vote counts and demand it, why do they keep shafting Bernie? Seems your vote doesn't matter unless they say it does.

That's fucked. Period.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Mob rule? Is that a euphemism for having every vote count?

yet you are for states with less population to be held to standards in CA and TX simply because they carry the most people. the needs of one are not the needs of all and all needs should be represented when possible.

you act as if these "arguments" you and others have are new. that perhaps our forefathers missed something along the way. no. the very reason we have the EC is to prevent what you are wanting done.

you are not advocating a system for us all, you are advocating a system that makes you personally happy and pretending everyone else should be happy for the same reasons.

Our forefathers missed a lot of things. They knew it when they wrote the constitution. They did not foresee a party system let alone states forcing their electors to vote for the popular vote winner.

Don’t bring up the founding fathers without acknowledging that our current EC is not the one they envisioned.

don't ignore why they did what they did cause you don't like it. you are doing nothing to ensure states have equal votes in your commentary so it leads one to understand you want what is best for your views, not the country.

I’m not ignoring why they did what they did. They built the EC like they did to ensure populist demagogues like Trump wouldn’t be elected. They had no intention that electors would be ceremonial. Electors were intended to use their own judgement.

They didn't do it for that reason. They did it because it made the process as fair as it could be for us all.

Not one side over the other.

Besides if the dems orea h every vote counts and demand it, why do they keep shafting Bernie? Seems your vote doesn't matter unless they say it does.

That's fucked. Period.

The founders did NOT care about the peoples vote for President. only 4 of the original 13 States even voted on the President the other 9 the legislatures of the State picked the electors and this continued until by 1832 only South Carolina still did it the rest all went to winner take all. South Carolina continued to use the legislature until 1860. After that it was winner take all until 1972 when Nebraska went to district.

 

[colfax_m]

I really don't know why he would care

Because that’s how Trump’s ego works. He can never admit he’s didn’t win something.

He did win something. He won the presidency. How much more can you win than that?

I didn’t say he didn’t win anything. I said Trump can’t stand the fact that he didn’t win something, in this instance he can’t stand the fact that he didn’t win the popular vote.

Yeah, I'm sure he tortures himself over not winning a made-up vote counting method that matters to nothing . . . while he's sitting at his desk in the Oval Office, in the few spare minutes he isn't running the country.

This is moderately delusional. His “few spare minutes” that he isn’t tweeting sick burns and golfing? He has the attention span of a third grader.

If it didn’t bother him, he wouldn’t have been lying about it so much. He wouldn’t have launched a voter fraud panel to try and prove he won the “made up” popular vote.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I really don't know why he would care

Because that’s how Trump’s ego works. He can never admit he’s didn’t win something.

He did win something. He won the presidency. How much more can you win than that?

I didn’t say he didn’t win anything. I said Trump can’t stand the fact that he didn’t win something, in this instance he can’t stand the fact that he didn’t win the popular vote.

Yeah, I'm sure he tortures himself over not winning a made-up vote counting method that matters to nothing . . . while he's sitting at his desk in the Oval Office, in the few spare minutes he isn't running the country.

This is moderately delusional. His “few spare minutes” that he isn’t tweeting sick burns and golfing? He has the attention span of a third grader.

If it didn’t bother him, he wouldn’t have been lying about it so much. He wouldn’t have launched a voter fraud panel to try and prove he won the “made up” popular vote.

If the left was SO sure there was no fraud why did they REFUSE to work with the panel?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Well, I have you, and you keep me laughing, so...

How do you have me

Um...
You say funny things, and I laugh at them - thus, when you ask what else I have -- I have you.
You people are cats to Trump's laser pointer. Keep up the good work.

This was my full reply to you, why not respond to the whole thing?

Your bigoted, hyper-partisan trolling? It speaks for itself.
But hey - thanks for another laugh!

He lost the popular vote and every indication is that he cares very much about it.

You SLAY me!!!!

 

[M14 Shooter]

Indications? Such as what?

Lying about millions of illegal votes and having his toady insist and lie for him about the size of his inauguration. It's embarrassing.

^^^^
Proof that Democrats are cats to Trumps laser pointer

 

[hadit]

IF this... IF that... Really.

How about this, IF you lose the election, you try to win next one, instead of trying to overturn current one.

We already have system that works, and what's not broke it doesn't need fixing.

Democrats have been trying to change the system to work in their favor, and stay in power, since Democrats. When they win, system works great, and when they lose, system have to be changed so they can win again.

we have a system that has worked but is not without flaw. Many feel that the electoral system ignores the votes of millions of people which it does, and a popular vote system would give a better gauge for how each American feels. Nothing wrong with that discussion. I think the argument is strong in favor of a popular vote. Why do you oppose it?

Changing our EC to PV would be mob rule. Only a few states would control the majority of states like what happened last election.

Mob rule? Is that a euphemism for having every vote count?

A nationwide popular vote would overwhelmingly represent the desires of urbanites living in a few very large cities while ignoring the desires of millions living outside said cities. The EC, like it or not, ensures that the desires of the minority are actually considered.

Nonsense. There are millions and millions of voters you’re referencing and every single one of their vote counts. There’s every reason to reach out for their vote. Why wouldn’t a candidate consider them?

Because there’s not enough of them concentrated in one place. Why bother with the expense and trouble of traveling thousands of miles to see maybe a few hundred people when you can go to one city and meet thousands?

 

[candycorn]

IF this... IF that... Really.

How about this, IF you lose the election, you try to win next one, instead of trying to overturn current one.

We already have system that works, and what's not broke it doesn't need fixing.

Democrats have been trying to change the system to work in their favor, and stay in power, since Democrats. When they win, system works great, and when they lose, system have to be changed so they can win again.

we have a system that has worked but is not without flaw. Many feel that the electoral system ignores the votes of millions of people which it does, and a popular vote system would give a better gauge for how each American feels. Nothing wrong with that discussion. I think the argument is strong in favor of a popular vote. Why do you oppose it?

Changing our EC to PV would be mob rule. Only a few states would control the majority of states like what happened last election.

Mob rule? Is that a euphemism for having every vote count?

Nobody would campaign outside of large population centers if we had straight PV determination of the President Elect. Also consider if in 20 years or so we get a popular citizen who decides to run and gets 25% of the vote—Dwayne Johnson, George Clooney or Rush Limbo are capable of doing so.

So the eventual victor will likely be someone who got 40%. We could have that now of course but it is more likely under the PV.

Without the EC, people would actually start campaigning in far more places than they do now. Right now, a small number of swing states control the outcome of the election. The vast majority of campaigning takes place there.

A Republican has no reason to campaign in California where currently any Republican vote is effectively thrown in the trash. No Democrat has a reason to campaign in Texas where the same thing happens. Without the EC, a Republican would actually have a reason to fight for votes in blue states and vice verse.

So it’s a trade. What is the win if Candidate X shows up in Dallas instead of Des Moines?

 

[candycorn]

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

Which doesn't exist, and that's why she did NOT win the election.

Hillary won the popular vote. By millions of votes

 

[candycorn]

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

A sure sign that your life is empty and pathetic: you cling to fantasies of winning things that don't exist.

I hope you’re still vaping.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

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

Which doesn't exist, and that's why she did NOT win the election.

Hillary won the popular vote. By millions of votes

ONLY in California before California was counted Trump was up over a million votes. One State does NOT elect our President.

 

[iceberg]

yet you are for states with less population to be held to standards in CA and TX simply because they carry the most people. the needs of one are not the needs of all and all needs should be represented when possible.

you act as if these "arguments" you and others have are new. that perhaps our forefathers missed something along the way. no. the very reason we have the EC is to prevent what you are wanting done.

you are not advocating a system for us all, you are advocating a system that makes you personally happy and pretending everyone else should be happy for the same reasons.

Our forefathers missed a lot of things. They knew it when they wrote the constitution. They did not foresee a party system let alone states forcing their electors to vote for the popular vote winner.

Don’t bring up the founding fathers without acknowledging that our current EC is not the one they envisioned.

don't ignore why they did what they did cause you don't like it. you are doing nothing to ensure states have equal votes in your commentary so it leads one to understand you want what is best for your views, not the country.

I’m not ignoring why they did what they did. They built the EC like they did to ensure populist demagogues like Trump wouldn’t be elected. They had no intention that electors would be ceremonial. Electors were intended to use their own judgement.

They didn't do it for that reason. They did it because it made the process as fair as it could be for us all.

Not one side over the other.

Besides if the dems orea h every vote counts and demand it, why do they keep shafting Bernie? Seems your vote doesn't matter unless they say it does.

That's fucked. Period.

The founders did NOT care about the peoples vote for President. only 4 of the original 13 States even voted on the President the other 9 the legislatures of the State picked the electors and this continued until by 1832 only South Carolina still did it the rest all went to winner take all. South Carolina continued to use the legislature until 1860. After that it was winner take all until 1972 when Nebraska went to district.

understood. speaking more in a general sense. the EC was because they felt the avg person likely wasn't smart enough to vote.

given what we see in here, you can't blame them for that mindset.

 

[Lesh]

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

Which doesn't exist, and that's why she did NOT win the election.

Hillary won the popular vote. By millions of votes

ONLY in California before California was counted Trump was up over a million votes. One State does NOT elect our President.

You wanna exclude California? Take out Texas as well. What's it look like then?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I really don't know why he would care

Because that’s how Trump’s ego works. He can never admit he’s didn’t win something.

He did win something. He won the presidency. How much more can you win than that?

I didn’t say he didn’t win anything. I said Trump can’t stand the fact that he didn’t win something, in this instance he can’t stand the fact that he didn’t win the popular vote.

Yeah, I'm sure he tortures himself over not winning a made-up vote counting method that matters to nothing . . . while he's sitting at his desk in the Oval Office, in the few spare minutes he isn't running the country.

This is moderately delusional. His “few spare minutes” that he isn’t tweeting sick burns and golfing? He has the attention span of a third grader.

If it didn’t bother him, he wouldn’t have been lying about it so much. He wouldn’t have launched a voter fraud panel to try and prove he won the “made up” popular vote.

Hey, if you're okay with believing that a "third grader" is kicking the left's ass all over the political landscape, I certainly have no problem with what that says about your intellectual abilities.

And I certainly have no problem with you clinging to whatever pathetic vestige of a victory lessens your utter despair. Enjoy.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

Which doesn't exist, and that's why she did NOT win the election.

Hillary won the popular vote. By millions of votes

The popular vote still doesn't exist, so it still doesn't matter. It will not matter no matter how many times you repeat it to yourself.

 

[iceberg]

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

Which doesn't exist, and that's why she did NOT win the election.

Hillary won the popular vote. By millions of votes

ONLY in California before California was counted Trump was up over a million votes. One State does NOT elect our President.

You wanna exclude California? Take out Texas as well. What's it look like then?

Speaking of not smart enough to vote...

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

A sure sign that your life is empty and pathetic: you cling to fantasies of winning things that don't exist.

I hope you’re still vaping.

Maybe you should try it. Works wonders for the endless depression and anxiety you must be feeling every day.

 

[candycorn]

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

Which doesn't exist, and that's why she did NOT win the election.

Hillary won the popular vote. By millions of votes

The popular vote still doesn't exist, so it still doesn't matter. It will not matter no matter how many times you repeat it to yourself.

Yup,?it does. And Hillary got 3M more votes than your blob puffy

 

[Cellblock2429]

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.

/——/ Sore loser hildabeast knows how it works. She’s lashing out like a 5 year old who blames her loss on something that doesn’t matter. “My shoe was untied, the sun was in my eye, I had a rock in my shoe...”