Clinton wins the popular vote by over a million votes

[fuji]

For those who were claiming it was a tie: her lead in the popular vote has grown to over a million and is going to continue growing as the remaining ballots are coming in primarily from blue states.

She is a lot more popular than Trump. This is going to take a lot of wind out of his sails.

http://time.com/4572295/hillary-clinton-popular-vote-lead/

 

[fuji]

So do you prefer french style elections where president is elected by popular vote , but that isn't representative of regions ?

The Senate already adequately represents the regions.

 

[Butler1000]

Actually it will give the GoP in the houses more incentive to work with him. The alternative is losses at the midterm and in 2020.

It will also give them both incentive to moderate the worst while still keeping the spirit.

As long as things move forward and the SC appointments go through initially, as well as a few easy bills things will start to flow.

And a few wins in the midterms will solidify things.

At least that's what I see objectively.

Subjectively the politicians will be looking at options and timing. Guys like McConnel and a few others just plain hate him, want the status quo back and while having to be careful about undermining him will do their level best to take care of their donors first, then the voters.

 

[Moviefan-2]

This is going to take a lot of wind out of his sails.

Dream on.

The challenge was to win the most electoral college votes. Trump won decisively and the Republicans also won the House and the Senate.

The popular vote count only matters to total flakes like Harry Reid.

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...ent-popular-vote-hillary-clinton-donald-trump

 

[Malibook]

Neither side wasted resources trying to win more votes in states where they had virtually no chance of winning and it is all or nothing.
One could argue that it is easier to pick up more votes in states that have more voters.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Neither side wasted resources trying to win more votes in states where they had virtually no chance of winning and it is all or nothing.
One could argue that it is easier to pick up more votes in states that have more voters.

Exactly.

 

[italianguy74]

Like I mentioned before the election, the rigging DNC would have to wait for a number to top on the GOP side then they will muster up the votes needed to beat it. They weren't able to do this with the electoral college votes because it was a race to 270. The popular vote isnt a race there is only a grand total to come up with. California allows up to 3 days for late ballots to come in, you can bet the majority of their votes were absentee ballots in reaction to Trumps victory.

How do you suppose with a significantly lower voter turnout Clinton is coming close to Obams number of votes in 2012? Perhapse they are getting a little help from the illegals..Or maybe David Blaine is counting the ballots.

 

[oldjones]

So do you prefer french style elections where president is elected by popular vote , but that isn't representative of regions ?

You'll have to explain how a single President can somehow represent different regions. The President of the United Staes of America represents the entire country, so does the President of France.

 

[Big Sleazy]

That's the problem with Democracy. 51% of the people telling 49% of the people how to run there lives. America needs to go back to there Constitution and Bill of Rights. Democracy sucks !

 

[oldjones]

Neither side wasted resources trying to win more votes in states where they had virtually no chance of winning and it is all or nothing.
One could argue that it is easier to pick up more votes in states that have more voters.

I'm sorry but that's how you win at marbles; it isn't how you ensure democratic leadership.

We all know the mechanism that gave Trump the win with fewer votes than Clinton. The point is whether that relic from three centuries ago is giving the country the President it wants when most people actually wanted someone else. And if you think so, why?

 

[Frankfooter]

I'm sorry but that's how you win at marbles; it isn't how you ensure democratic leadership.

We all know the mechanism that gave Trump the win with fewer votes than Clinton.

The mechanism was Russian interference.

 

[**Sophie**]

Who gives a shit?!!!! I don't know if you guys know this, but they have a President now, it's over. Time for you all to accept that.

 

[oldjones]

The mechanism was Russian interference.

No. The mechanism is the winner-take-all version of the Electoral College established to protect the elite and the status quo from the common people.

From tearing down signs, lying about the other candidates, disrupting their meetings and sending voters to the wrong place, dirty tricks have always been part of elections. When we can prove them we punish the corrupt and misdirected perpetrators. But democracy depends on people, not police.

 

[oldjones]

Who gives a shit?!!!! I don't know if you guys know this, but they have a President now, it's over. Time for you all to accept that.

If you can't follow what's being discussed, you'd be happier just ignoring it.

Of course the United States has a President now, his name is Obama, and there will not be a microsecond that they do not have one, as that office is assumed by Trump on January 20.

But the United States is not over, they'll be going through this whole thing again and again. If you don't care whether they democratically elect their Presidents, why are you wasting your time in threads like this?

 

[**Sophie**]

If you can't follow what's being discussed, you'd be happier just ignoring it.

Of course the United States has a President now, his name is Obama, and there will not be a microsecond that they do not have one, as that office is assumed by Trump on January 20.

But the United States is not over, they'll be going through this whole thing again and again. If you don't care whether they democratically elect their Presidents, why are you wasting your time in threads like this?

Excuse me? Who the heck are you to say i can't follow?? I guess because you think I'm dumb?!! This is why is doesn't matter who has the popular vote!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://www.northsuburbanrepublicanf...78236142373_5913112131176147206_n-257x300.jpg

 

[**Sophie**]

If you can't follow what's being discussed, you'd be happier just ignoring it.

Of course the United States has a President now, his name is Obama, and there will not be a microsecond that they do not have one, as that office is assumed by Trump on January 20.

But the United States is not over, they'll be going through this whole thing again and again. If you don't care whether they democratically elect their Presidents, why are you wasting your time in threads like this?

Yah no comment eh OldJones lol???! Didn't think so

 

[Malibook]

I'm sorry but that's how you win at marbles; it isn't how you ensure democratic leadership.

We all know the mechanism that gave Trump the win with fewer votes than Clinton. The point is whether that relic from three centuries ago is giving the country the President it wants when most people actually wanted someone else. And if you think so, why?

The point of this thread is that an idiot is blowing his load over popular vote when that is totally irrelevant at this time and was not the target of th campaigns.

 

[fuji]

The point of this thread is that an idiot is blowing his load over popular vote when that is totally irrelevant at this time and was not the target of th campaigns.

It's not irrelevant if you are interested in knowing what a majority of Americans want. Trump won the electoral college, question is will he listen to the people?

 

[oldjones]

Yah no comment eh OldJones lol???! Didn't think so

I assume, you want me to point out the misrepresentation on your map. Consider it done.

No matter where they live fewer people voted for Trump than Clinton. Winner Take All meant his votes were worth twice Clinton's. Nowhere has anyone said that American Presidents should be chosen by how spread out and isolated their voters are. Not even the propagandists who put out that map.

You can be first.

 

[oldjones]

The point of this thread is that an idiot is blowing his load over popular vote when that is totally irrelevant at this time and was not the target of th campaigns.

Sorry but even idiots get to express their opinions. However the thread is about the popular vote, not whatever was the target of the campaigns, and it's idiotic to argue popular vote has no relevance in a democracy.

In fact what is irrelevant is being hyper-defensive about Trump winning the votes in Electoral College, which is all but a done deal. You guys should get over it and onto stuff that'll affect elections to come: Like the rigging that Don's conveniently (now that he won) forgotten. Or the undemocratic Electoral College that might just as easily given Clinton the Oval office with only California, New York and a few other urbanized states.