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.
Libs go on about the popular vote but in an EC system the popular vote is a spurious concept. It almost delegitimizes the notion of the popular vote. Candidates win states, not individual votes. We don't have one big giant national election, we have 51 separate elections.
Only a couple of times. There were numerous highly rated polls, which had HRC ahead for many months. The only change was how much she was ahead.
IBD and the LA Times had Trump ahead just a few times. LA Times isn't a highly rated poll because of its methodology.
Fivethirtyeight.com, which runs algorythms based on polls, gambling odds, and historical results, had HRC ahead consistently through much of the year, as well. That is computer based. The head guy even decreased her odds of winning for a couple of human reasons...but she was still very much ahead in odds of winning....always.
Weeks prior to November 8, FOX, CBS, ABC, Reuters, Monmouth and other might have had an excuse for showing Hillary up by 4-6% since she was apparently leading in the early and highly fraudulent absentee voting. But to be still predicting a sizable Clinton win on November 7 is professional pollster malpractice.
I've voted Democrat many times in my life, including for Obama, but even I know that the Dems seem to work overtime getting the numbers, no matter how they do it.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if getting the popular vote was a result of a lot of votes from dead and illegal citizens.
I've voted Democrat many times in my life, including for Obama, but even I know that the Dems seem to work overtime getting the numbers, no matter how they do it.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if getting the popular vote was a result of a lot of votes from dead and illegal citizens.
Don't most come from CA? Which gives further the point that a popular vote would always be decide by the most populous states?
THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN... She was way ahead........... These #s arent as all surprising!
There is definetly dark forces behind Trump!
trump was up in the popular vote, until they stared counting california. only then did clinton take the lead there, but once again the national popular vote is just a number with no meaning what so ever.
Don't most come from CA? Which gives further the point that a popular vote would always be decide by the most populous states?
California once was a republican strong hold, but that has been changing, and likely irreversibly.
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.
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.
*
