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.
Thank you for not doing that unlike all the other Hillary supporters who do it day in and day out, like this one. Once you start justifying one, it is a downward spiral and don't be surprised of BO is compared to a lower species. I don't like that too.
Another thing that galls me is the popular vote. It had no meaning and never will, unless the laws change. So bring it up time and again to justify Hillary's performance has no value. Trump had a overwhelming majority of the electoral vote and that is the game they played for and all that mattered. If she had also played the same game maybe she would have come close and maybe even won it. But winning big in NY, California or Texas does not make you a president. The in between states matter.
I don't want the democrats to die. If they become more main stream and get rid of wackos like Maxine Waters maybe they can be a force again. The first thing is to bury the past and get Hillary out of the way and to let the young fresh blood rise. The less we hear of Hillary whining and the more we hear from Gabbard and Webb, the more the people will see Democratic party as a true alternative nationwide.
The discussion is about who the people support. So yes, the popular vote does matter in that respect.
winning the electoral college does not mean you have the support of the people.
hypothetically, You could become president By winning California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, New Jersey, Georgia, and North Carolina and lose every other thats and have 270 electoral votes.
Those states have a population of 186.102 million people. or 53% of the population. and account for 55% of everyone who voted. but lets say you won each state by a couple of votes
You could have a President with 270 EC votes, but only 25% of the popular vote. losing to someone who has 70% of the vote.
The discussion is about who the people support. So yes, the popular vote does matter in that respect.
winning the electoral college does not mean you have the support of the people.
hypothetically, You could become president By winning California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, New Jersey, Georgia, and North Carolina and lose every other thats and have 270 electoral votes.
Those states have a population of 186.102 million people. or 53% of the population. and account for 55% of everyone who voted. but lets say you won each state by a couple of votes
You could have a President with 270 EC votes, but only 25% of the popular vote. losing to someone who has 70% of the vote.
I agree with what you have said but unfortunately rules are rules and one has to play by the rules. If they want to change that from electoral votes to popular let it be done legally and we can play by the new rules. Until then the notion of support of the people has no say or weight in the election of the president.
In my own case I have to taken an exam every few years to keep my license and job. There are 3 parts and I have to pass all the three sections in order to clear it. Even if I score 100% in the first and second and barely fail the third section I have failed the whole exam and have to take it again. Whereas a person who barely scraped though all three sections would have cleared the whole exam. He might have answered far fewer questions correctly than me but it does not matter. He passed and I failed. Those are the rules. Either I try to have it changed or I play by the existing rules.
I agree with what you have said but unfortunately rules are rules and one has to play by the rules. If they want to change that from electoral votes to popular let it be done legally and we can play by the new rules. Until then the notion of support of the people has no say or weight in the election of the president.
In my own case I have to taken an exam every few years to keep my license and job. There are 3 parts and I have to pass all the three sections in order to clear it. Even if I score 100% in the first and second and barely fail the third section I have failed the whole exam and have to take it again. Whereas a person who barely scraped though all three sections would have cleared the whole exam. He might have answered far fewer questions correctly than me but it does not matter. He passed and I failed. Those are the rules. Either I try to have it changed or I play by the existing rules.
I will say it again, We arent debating the rules or who won, the discussion is based on who the people support.
The people to the tune of 65.8 million, supported Clinton over Donald Trump.
Regardless of who won, Hillary Clinton was supported by more people than Donald trump. More people wanted her as their president than him.
We are discussing who the people support, not who won the election, they are not one in the same and i think most people cant mentally get passed the block of "he won so that means the people support him"
Hillary only won the popular vote because of California.
California is a freak of nature -- plus they hate America and want to secede.
So their votes don't count in my book.
On the GOP side, both Gingrich (who use to represent the district) and Rubio (who easily won the Primary in the district] have endorsed Hill who has been 3rd or 4th in most polls for the Republicans.
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.