Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh, so dirt represents the will of the people now?
Make up your mind. Does the will of the people reflect the actual people or does the will of the people reflect the dirt quantity?
We are a republic, not a democracy. The will of the people in each state matters, as it is 50 separate votes, not one combined vote. It's that simple.
And as others have pointed out, if the rules were such that it was one national vote, the campaigning and results would have been quite different. Trump was able to move the results in major cities in the midwest by several points by way of campaigning there and speaking to those people. If he had done the same thing in the top 3 cities of NY, LA, and Chicago, the same percentages would have been persuaded to vote for him there, resulting in a huge swing in the total because there are so many people in those cities.
To me, the will of the people means the popular opinion, aka the majority. He should have said the will of the states if that is all that counts.
Well then, neither Trump (46%) nor Clinton (48.1%) got the majority of the popular vote. So I guess the popular opinion, aka the majority of people, didn't want either of them! I think you are confusing majority with plurality.
Plurality: the number of votes cast for a candidate who receives more than any other but does not receive an absolute majority.
I did not say Clinton won the EC. I said she won the populous vote. Unless you have proof that this is not the case...
My argument stands. The will of the people, meaning the popular vote, clearly gave Clinton this one. But the way the system works, Trump won. I admit that.
EC vote or popular vote trump would have won either way. Clinton and her arrogant staff ran a delusional campaign and simply didn't understand how election tactics and strategies work. Egotistical creeps all and got what they deserved. You should seriously think about who you trust and adore.
Oh sheet, I need to change my underwear! I laughed soooo hard watching that twatwaffle's newest( but hopefully not last) emotional breakdown that if came out of both ends!!!! Oh, sorry, TMI. But you get the picture.
I really think that one day he will provide us with an on camera stroke. Now, THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT!👏👏👏
I guess I'll hear it from the snowflakes now. Que sera sera.
My argument stands. The will of the people, meaning the popular vote, clearly gave Clinton this one. But the way the system works, Trump won. I admit that.
That is understood but if the rules change so does everything else including the results. If it was for the popular vote the campaign and the voter turnout would of been different. For example how many people in California and NY that would have voted for Trump didn't even bother going to the polls? That works for Clinton too but that's beside the point.
There is no way to definitively say who would of won an election based on the popular vote.
For months we heard about the Blue Wall, the wide path to 270, the deer track to 270, the 95% chance of winning, etc.
I don't know if anyone else noticed but until California Trump was leading in the popular vote. That state was the flip over. I somewhat think that most people, regardless of their political leaning, wouldn't be too keen on California deciding elections.
He puts the D in Douchebag. He is truely a vile human being.
Agree with you on that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.