Donald Trump won the presidency, but Hillary won the Popular Vote by a margin of 206,379 or so.
That fact caused Simon Rosenberg, a veteran Democratic strategist and the president of the NDN think tank to moan about a Democratic Party in Crisis.
“We are the only democracy in the developed world where if you win more votes you don’t control the government and the legislature. There is not a wholesale rejection of the Democratic party and the Democratic brand, that’s not what happened last night despite the fact we now have less power than we’ve had since 1928.”
Let’s investigate Rosenberg’s complaint another way.
Geographic Landslide
Map courtesy of New York Times.
Geographically speaking, Trump won at least 80% of the Nation. The only states Hillary carried are Vermont, Massachusetts, and Connecticut.
Trump won every county in Oklahoma and West Virginia. Trump won all but one county in Wyoming, and Kansas. Trump won all but two counties in North Dakota, Kentucky, Tennessee, Utah, and Nebraska.
Nearly the entire state of Minnesota, Illinois, New York, Oregon, Iowa, Missouri, Ohio, Michigan, etc., went for Trump.
Geographically speaking, except for big cities and a few isolated areas, the country cannot stand Hillary.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
The whine “but … but … but … POPULAR VOTE!!!” is nothing more than a failure to accept that the US is a nation of FIFTY SOVEREIGN STATES. It should be ignored as the rantings of a 2-year-old.
The States are NOT SOVEREIGN. If they were they could have their own currency. Only the USA itself is sovereign. They are non sovereign like Greece and Italy have become through joining the EU. Big Mistake.
@Mish – nice visual, but misleading.
Imagine if Canada was part of the US. It is thinly populated and leans more to the Democratic side.
On a map like this, there would be very large swaths of blue. And, given it’s relatively larger land mass, it might visually come to counter balance that red, if not overwhelm it.
“Geographically speaking, except for big cities and a few isolated areas, the country cannot stand Hillary.”
Your basic point is already cooked up in the electoral college vote, which is allocated by state. Each country does not contribute an equal point towards how those state ecv are divvied up. It is a state wide popular vote count for most states, iirc.
I imagine this was designed to be so, as another check to prevent the “tyranny of the majority”, and recognizing that each state, within their own geography, has different interests that can be expressed this way, than a simple popular vote would represent.
Each county, not country.
Than a simpler, country wide, popular vote.
“Imagine if Canada was part of the US. It is thinly populated and leans more to the Democratic side.”
Are you judging which “side” geographic Canada leans toward based on Canadian popular vote?
Adding red-blue Canada to the graphic with similar granularity might emphasize the point as much as diminish it.
Check this out… change the red, orange, and light blue areas to blue, and the dark blue areas to red, out of this 2015 election map, and you will have a pretty good picture:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/vote-compass-canadians-predict-who-they-think-will-win-their-riding-1.3268561
The point is the visual weight of the area covered by a color gives the impression that it represents something “more”, especially labeling it a “Geographic Landslide”
It is as misleading as using nominal numbers vs inflation adjusted numbers.
It is as misleading as showing photos of the shadow side of steam clouds billowing out of exhaust stacks at power stations when talking of global warming.
From a constitutional standpoint, that is incorrect. The states are sovereign and the Federal government has only the powers designated in the constitution, which happens to include printing currency. That is why every Federal law and regulations governing the economy are premised on the commerce clause. Many people do not realize this because the powers designated to the Federal government have been interpreted so broadly, especially since the Depression, it seems like it is sovereign now.
The federal government is the child of the states, which started as colonies. The states can hold a constitutional convention and change the federal government any way they like.
Also, there’s 7-8% of total votes left to count. Trump may very well win popular too.
That fewer than 5% of the population were eligible to vote in Washington’s first election does tend to to decry the “Democracy” bullshit, No?
Geography doesn’t vote. People do. What difference does it make where people live? Except for the electoral college of course.
“Geography doesn’t vote. People do. What difference does it make where people live? Except for the electoral college of course.”
It makes a lot of difference. Without the electoral college, Hillary and Trump could have totally ignored the people of Iowa and a number of other states. Tens of millions of people could simply be ignored, because, who needs them?
Who needs upstate New York, if a candidate has the vast majority of New York City metro? A 55/45 negative split in the rest of the state won’t matter. Just ignore them.
Those people wouldn’t be ignored. That’s why we have the House of Representatives.
Here’s the difference.
Under a pure democracy, you end up with New York and California dictating to everyone else in the entire country. In fact, if you look at the district maps, you actually end up with three cities – New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco – dictating to the rest of the country.
Democracies end up devolving into violent anarchy because most people don’t like being dictated to by a concentrated mob. Statists love pure democracies because – as in the above example – you only have to control 3 large urban centers to dominate an entire country. You only have to run brainwash ads in three localities. You can ignore almost the entire nation by propagandizing a local core of true believers.
One could argue this is what happened in the election. The media in NY and LA got into an echo chamber where all they heard was themselves. They ignored ~50m people who used to vote Democrat. Those people rose up and threw them out because they got tired of being ignored.
That’s why an Electoral College works… because it forces the mob to pay attention to the little guy who would otherwise be ignored. It avoids straight-up mob rule. And it turns out to be more powerful than concentrated propaganda from a one-note national media under the control of one political party.
Pretty smart setup, actually.
No, New York and California would not be dictating anything. We have a House and a Senate where all areas of the country are represented. Simply having a popular vote does not constitute a pure democracy. In a pure democracy you could have a vote to repeal the 2nd amendment and if a majority voted for it it would be repealed.
The electoral college was created because the founding fathers didn’t think the people were smart enough to vote in presidential elections. It had nothing to do with people in the big cities “skewing” the results. Blacks couldn’t even vote back then so they weren’t worried about that like today’s conservatives are.
Clinton is the only presidential candidate EVER that has a plan B of getting a pardon….
Corrupt to the core.
Only the socialist cities want her for more socialism
The Electoral College is there to assure that all power isn’t concentrated in few states with the majority population. The Constitution was written in a way to assure that power wasn’t concentrated in a few areas or in a few offices. 200 years later, and I get astounded more and more as to how it all works so well still.
I thought it was there so that each state could decide how to allocate their electoral votes, and that is not necessarily by a vote of the people.
The Founders writings make it clear that their intent was to give us a Republic that is a confederation of the many states. As such, it makes sense that the leader of the confederation of the states would be selected by the states, and not “by the people.” Read a history book. The Founders sought to create a system via the Constitution whereby the federal would not have more power than the states. Originally even the senators were selected to represent the state’s interests at the federal level, rather than by direct election by the “the people.” “The people’s house” was limited to the House of Representatives.
Hamilton & the boys were brilliant.
The vote counting is not done yet. 3 states left last count. I don’t think the popular vote totals will remain to Hillary in the end. Take out California and she’s Millions behind.
Why the hell should we take out California?
Maybe some of Clinton’s voter margin was from that unique artifact of liberal metropolitan areas: the voting dead.
Trump ran against Wall Street and banks. Among today’s greatest gaining market sectors: the financial sector
Perhaps less gridlock is thought to mean that more deficit spending ensue, steepening the yield curve to the benefit of banks. Or perhaps rumors of another Goldman Sachs veteran at the helm of Treasury pleases the Street. Either way, the morning after features some real irony, and maybe foreshadowing.
I’d close with my usual NeverTrump, but I am now rooting for his (and hence our) great success, as should all Americans. In fact, I might never write that phrase again.
Mish, your post indicating you were wrong about the election forecast is wrong. You WERE right on the critical point missed by most: attitudes controlled; forecasts were mis-calibrated to an obsolete baseline . At a minimum, you were far more accurate than wrong.
I only hope you are also right that Trump proves to be an acceptable choice.
Thanks Bobby – I was indeed correct all along about attitudes. I said the same thing about Brexit. And I will say the same think about elections in Italy, France and Germany. Anti-establishment sentiment is massive.
If the governments of the world continue to break the social contract(public good) then the mood will get worse. And ignoring the entire Middle of the country and focusing on money centers was an insult to average Americans. A good message to Nannycrats and Globalists who rule for the wealthy only.
In Europe, it is partly anti-establishment, but I think, the divide between countries is also significant. National cultures and attitudes did not die. Multiply it by ten if you have a huge migrant problem.
Just want to add an angle that probably was not examined, yet: Theresa May will start her negotiation with the EU commissars with a different hand.
You should have included Alaska to scale to bolster you point!
And your point of course is: Trump did great in uninhabited places and he did pretty well where people are few and far in between. He only underperformed where most people actually live…
He did well where people live off of extracting and transforming low value natural resources into higher value goods.
Poorly where a minority live off the fresh printed loot generated by debasing the former, with the rest living as personal servants to that minority: Serving them food, selling them handbags, making them coffee, parking their cars, squabbling over which one of them “has the right” to what share of the loot, changing their bedsheets and giving them BJs.
It was the producers versus the parasites.
the system is designed to prevent the tyranny of the majority and prevent urban areas from overrunning the rural areas. That is also why we have population represented by The House and States Rights(regardless of population) represented by 2 senators each.
I am not thrilled with it either sometimes, but when you look at geographics they represent industry. And cities should not control policy just because thats where all the money is. Farmers need to be represented and manufacturing (whats left) was in full revolt in Midwest. Mid Atlantic and West Coast service industry with financial(free banking money) and big government cannot dictate an entire economy or government…unless you want to split up the nation.
Technically the electoral college could reject a winner anyways, if he was that bad. And clearly Trump is not
This reminds me of the problem Thailand is having with government. The cities want one thing while the countryside wants something else. (Two different political parties.)
“You don’t have to be lonely at FarmersOnly dotcom.”
“City folks just don’t get it.”
Symptom or cause?
I believe that if it was popular vote, we’d see more voter turnout.
Mish,
Can you inform David Rosenberg that in Australia the party receiving the lesser amount of votes has won an election twice in the last 30 years.
Regards George Pappas Sydney
In December 2015 Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal slammed Donald Trump for proposing a ban on Muslim immigrants in the US until the government could alleviate security concerns.
Prince Alwaleed called Donald Trump a “disgrace” for his popular plan.
.@realDonaldTrump You are a disgrace not only to the GOP but to all America. Withdraw from the U.S presidential race as you will never win.
— الوليد بن طلال (@Alwaleed_Talal) December 11, 2015
Donald Trump responded to attacks.
“@Michael2014abc: @Alwaleed_Talal @realDonaldTrump Has your country, Saudi Arabia, taken ANY of the Syrian refugees? If not, why not?”
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 13, 2015
Trump was right.
Saudi Arabia has banned Syrian immigrants from its country due to security concerns.
Today Prince Alwaleed kissed Trump’s a$$.
President elect @realDonaldTrump whatever the past differences, America has spoken, congratulations & best wishes for your presidency.
— الوليد بن طلال (@Alwaleed_Talal) November 9, 2016
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/11/saudi-prince-called-trump-disgrace-kisses-trumps-butt-today/
The Saudi regime are some of the most reprehensible people on Earth.
If the prince ever gets to meet The Donald, he better not expect him to bow like Obama did.
One hopes that the Bush kisses are a thing of the past, too.
It may be the oldies saved the day and just in time, but the future belongs to the millennials who are more aware than many oldies think. In a sense their contribution in the future will be global in scale and while they bemoaned the Brexit vote, as many in the USA and here in Australia as well, as being isolationist, their time will come and a global community will rise but at the will of the people, not the elite. The internet has enabled this and they will guard it jealously.
During the vote I was glued to one such millennial’s you tube blog and found it fascinating while i watched the map fill in. I would recommend anyone to look at this blog.
styxhexenhammer666.
OMG. I have been following the same guy for months. I posted one of his videos from youtube on the last of Mish’s postings “Big Repudiation of Liberal Elite” The guy was spot-on all the way. I looked into him deeper last night during his election coverage and found he apparenty was a Satanist at one time and knows all about the occult. I haven’t read any of his stuff yet, so what goes with that, i don’t know. He calls himself Tarl Warwick (don’t know if that’s his real name), but he has a web site.
http://tarlwarwickbooks.blogspot.com/
If the US continues to use this uniquely bizarre electoral system, it will lead to a split of the nation, eventually.
Because they don’t teach you the philosophy the founders envisioned behind the Electoral College. They didn’t want rabble such as you and I voting for who promised the most. That philosophy lasted about as long as the “no political parties” thing did.
The moral of the story is no piece of paper is going to save a corrupt society.
Nothing bizarre about the Electoral College, if you know American history. It is very logical, and was absolutely necessary to bring all the states together and relinquish some of their powers. Simply was the only way to bring the small states into a confederation with larger more powerful states. Today it keeps the USA government from being run by urban NY, urban California, Philly, Chicago etc. to the exclusion of that vast geography holding different values.
I am not American and i understand this…funny how it is only ever an issue when they lose.
The electoral college is yet another of the many legacies from slavery that have been handed down. It was demanded as a compromise with slave states that didn’t want to be overwhelmed by populous non-slave states. The original idea was that slave states would benefit from the slave population (counted as 3/5s a white person) in the proportion of electoral votes even though the slaves themselves couldn’t vote.
The artifact of the electoral college remained even after slavery was abolished.
I was taught and agreed that the electoral college was an anachronism. Until 2000. Consider how long it would have taken to resolve the 2000 election if vote recounts and lawsuits were country-wide, not isolated to one state.
@Max Min
Easy-peasy, all it requires is a constituitional convention.
At the same time, we can take care of that pesky 2nd amendment.
So what? The map looked like that in 2000 and probably every presidential election since. It’s a reach to say that the map has any other meaning than to generally say that big cities vote Democrat and rural areas vote Rwpublican.
What surprises me is how low the turnout was: 3 million fewer voters than 2012 and 6 million fewer than 2008.
surprises me too
you would think that the MSM have been doing their damndest
to promote voter apathy, so that they dont all go out and vote for Trump
No surprise. Except for urban female Clinton voters, no demographic had much reason to get excited about their own candidate.
Omg…what a load of dogmatic hooey. The poll should ask if we want crooked crony capitalists and their GOP lackeys running the country?
I asked once before while you blame unions for everything even though they have relatively little power and you provided a really lame answer…. something about central banks, as if that told me everything I needed to know.
The bottom line is that’s votes that count in a democracy, not land mass.
The unions Mish has a hard-on for have a whole lot of fucking power , dumbass. But you would already know that if you actually read this blog.
And that “whole lot of … power” is why there is no shortage of well-paying jobs for everyone in the country, then, right ? (THANKS, auto companies !) Have some more cool-aid, it sure must be yummy.
Another dumbass that’s obviously never read this blog. It’s PUBLIC EMPLOYEE unions that are the problem.
Union membership has been declining for decades and their ability to strike and win has seen severely limited over that time, idiot! Additionally, the amount of financial firepower they have relative to their corporate opponents is a pittance and you’d know that if read anything other than hard right blogs and news which only supports your view the world.
I also read this blog a lot and I read a lot of other publications. Some right, some left, some center. All you have is hearsay and insults, dumbass.
“The poll should ask if we want crooked crony capitalists and their GOP lackeys running the country?”
The Dems are no different. Two sides of the same coin, both dependent upon bribes (aka, campaign donations) from whatever sector becomes dominant. The
de-industrialization meant a great reduction in unions and that was accomplished during both Dem and Rep administrations. I believe the financial, insurance, and pharma sectors are now dominant.
“The bottom line is that’s votes that count in a democracy, not land mass.”
The bottom line is that we are a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy.
@Glenn… Ummm, we’re not a democracy. We’re a republic.
Could have fooled me. The US always pitches itself as defender of ‘freedom and democracy’.
So Glenn, if “crooked crony capitalists and their GOP lackeys [are] running the country”, kindly explain to me why 96% of political donations from Wall St went to democrats?
“Unions… have….little power”? Really? You think that even though they are the BIGGEST donators to the democrats, that that gives them very little power?
You will just have to explain these contradictions to me.
won by 206,379 or so?…. like hell. In Orange County CA where I voted, (1.54 Million active voters) they have mail-in and provisional ballots of over 410,480 STILL TO COUNT, and don’t expect hard totals until at least Saturday. AND THAT IS JUST ONE COUNTY IN ONE STATE —. STOP blowing smoke up our butts !
Some people have no grasp of government. remember the electoral college was set up shortly after the inception of our nation. As territories were assimilated and population grew the electoral votes followed suit. It is in essence another in the checks and balances system that includes separation of powers. it prevents the concentration of power and authority to a small demographic, in a limited geographic area. For the uneducated WE ARE A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, NOT A DEMOCRACY!!!! take a government class if you doubt me.
Yes, the electoral college was setup at the founding of the nation at the insistence of slave states to ensure they wouldn’t get overwhelmed by the vote of non slave states. Slaves were counted as 3/5ths a white person for the purposes of the electoral college even though they couldn’t vote.
Seriously. We wouldn’t have the electoral college if it wasn’t for slavery.
Congratulations, Trump
although i hope he doesnt let this victory go to his head.
i’d assumed, as i usually do (i’m pessimist) that his defeat was such a surefire
certainty that it was not even in my interest to find out about the result until 24 hours later
(how could he possibly have won when Hilary Clinton was up by 13% just a week before
the election. you dont get that far ahead in the polls and lose, now do you.)
i understood that paddypower (bookmakers) had already paid out punters betting on a Clinton
victory; and i believe they did the same last year regarding the Greek referendum, when they paid out punters betting on a Yes vote (38.7% vote)
bookmakers such as paddypower, and MSM seem to be acting in collusion
Does anybody know why the mexican border is so deep blue in TX but not in other border states?
Look again. All of the CA border is blue. Most of AZ border is blue. Only other state is NM which is partly blue. There are no urban areas in southern NM.
I am not blind. The rest of the border is not *nearly* as blue.
Looking at the popular vote is interesting but not relevant. Under our current system each political party’s candidate for president focuses almost exclusively on just 6 to 12 swing states. If you change the rules, eliminate the electoral college, and base the result on the popular vote then the campaign focus would change. Or said differently, if we went back in time and changed the rules on the last election to be based upon the popular vote then the number of votes for each candidate would not have been the same and most likely the candidate that won under the old rules would still have won under the revised rules.
Here is the beauty of our electoral college system and the foresight of the founders of the USA.
As of now, almost 120 million votes were cast for Office of the President. Clinton has 200,000 more than Trump. This equals just 0.17 % more votes. Less than 2/10s of 1%.
She gained this advantage from just 3 states, Calif, NY and Illinois. She got just over 5 million more votes than Trump in those three states alone.
One of the things that the Founders wanted to prevent was the large states being able to dominate the small states. The same reason we have 2 houses of Congress with one of them equal regardless of state population.
Way to go gentlemen.
Popular vote means nothing. The founders created the electoral college to make sure all parts of this large country are heard. It is about states rights. Each state matters. That is what makes our constitution so strong. The way it integrates federal and state rights. The tension between the two creates the American political system.
I think rural people voted against environmental regulations. There are definitely other differences between rural and urban areas (jobs growth and demographics are big ones), but every rural community wants to be able to make their own decisions about how they can use their own land. The last 8 years have seen huge growth in environmental regulations that directly impact land owners. Trump promised to reduce regulatory burden. Hillary promised to add more regulations.
In a way, this was a vote against the EPA’s constant power grab.
Bev Harris of blackboxvoting.or has followed voting fraud, particularly electronic fraud, for over 20 years. She recently released her report on Fraction Magic electronic manipulation of results. http://blackboxvoting.org/fraction-magic-video/
Before the election she said that Trump would win but Clinton would win–through theft. In this post-election interview she explains why what Mish shows in the above map was crucial to Trump overcoming the manipulation. https://youtu.be/is5GrQwevhg?t=2m6s
She explains how you can’t manipulate every county, there aren’t enough people to station in every small precinct. The manipulators focus on dense urban groupings of voters. Then, they delay the vote there until the results come in from elsewhere, so that they know how many “votes” to release (what Mayor Daly supposedly did in Chicago for Kennedy in 1960, waiting until the downstate vote came in before giving out the Chicago tally). She talks about inexplicable delays in counting in specific precincts.
BUT the problem for the manipulators was that Trump so thoroughly thrashed the competition in the small counties, that they couldn’t create enough votes to overcome his totals there–that is, without going over 100% of the voters 🙂
“We are the only democracy in the developed world where if you win more votes you don’t control the government and the legislature.”
We are a Constitutional Republic. We are not a democracy. Democrats should quit lying.
Without the electoral college, virtually all that presidential candidates would have to do is campaign in New York City, Chicago and Los Angeles. 99% of the rest of the country could be ignored. The electoral college forces elite politicians to have to go to Iowa. It gives the rest of the people a voice. It is also equality. The farmer, the mom and pop shop keeper becomes just as important as the banker.
In Europe, 3 un elected people run the EU. In Britain, the people who lost the Brexit referendum are trying to overturn the vote.
Democrats actually hate democracy, unless the vote is in their favor. Then they run to the court to have the vote overthrown. That is not democracy. That is dictatorship.
“We are the only democracy in the developed world where if you win more votes you don’t control the government and the legislature.”
Incorrect!!
In the UK, the British use a ‘first past the post’ system. An elected government can and has often won the FPTP, but lost the popular vote. Those that lose, often bitch about losing even though they win the popular vote. But that has worked for both Labour and the Conservatives, so no one wants to change it.
In fact they often say that having won an election, they have a ‘mandate’, even though they might have 51% of 50-60% of the population, hardly a mandate IMO.
I know Italy uses the popular vote, and the voting chaos there is often used as a reason not to use it. You may find the rest of Europe doesn’t use the popular vote.
The democrats, and many supporters are behaving like spoiled children.
“Do we really want unions and socialists in big cities directing all of US policy?
The premise of your poll is ridiculous. Do you really think UAW members (the union) were in favour of seeing thousands of auto worker jobs being shipped to Mexico? Do you think that real socialists, not the white wine globalists you think are socialists, are interested in uncontrolled mass immigration that causes rising housing costs, lower wages, and higher unemployment for their own children, families, friends and neighbours?
Get a grip on what the world really is outside of “markets”.
Hilary did not win the Popular vote that was Vote Fraud, proved by Jim Stone on his page.
Trump was always 85 percent.
You realize that these democrats, hollywood ect are complete and total satanists and it was even proven in leaked pictures and emails.
Ask the Bernie Bros about the popular vote. This is a lame complaint coming from the Super Delegate Party.
Thought experiment: what kind of raving would we hear from all these Electoral College rationalizers if the situation were reversed? Exactly.
What a load of BS.
They’re right about one thing, though: this is no democracy.
please, unbelievable. We know fraud was extremely likely committed to give the Dem nomination to Killary (since Sanders lost by such large margins in states with no paper trail, but close or won in states with a paper trail), yet now we are to belive the results? You are a FULL OF S**T POS!
Here in Denver, people are protesting the Trump victory. That seems to be the way the democrats think – agree with me or else. If I don’t get my way, I am going to pout. We are smarter than everyone else. If you do not agree with us, you are “deplorable!” I saw on the news last night (assuming you can trust that), that several Hollywood types are threatening to move out of the country because Trump won. Wow. Another plus for the Trump win.
TRUMP MEANS HATRED, IGNORANCE AND RACISM
The United States is NOT a Democracy, it’s a Republic. The word Democracy is not mentioned one time in the entire Constitution. If this were a Democracy you would have been allowed to vote on your Senator’s and Representative’s salaries, medical benefits and retirement plans. Were you? No were not. Case closed. Ever heard of James Madison? Well, he is often referred to as, “The godfather of the Constitutions,” and this is what he had to say about Democracies, “Democracies have ever been at odds with THE RIGHTS OF PRIVATE PROPERTY, and just as violent in their deaths as they have been short lived in their lives.” Socialists don’t like the rights of private property, they like to believe they have a right to use their vote to confiscate what other men have worked for. That is what I would call, “theft by popular demand.”
Pingback: #Trump and the Autumn of Democracy | Paul Arbair
Do we want unions and socialists directing U.S. policy? If they win the election yes we do. That’s called “the people speaking” What the hell makes you think unions and socialists would be directing any policy anyway? That would only happen if they were the majority of Americans. Socialists certainly don’t make up a majority. And there aren’t as many union people as there used to be due to the right wing’s intense hatred of working people, or as they call them “takers” “moochers who think the government owes them a living”
“Geographically speaking, Trump won at least 80% of the Nation. The only states Hillary carried are Vermont, Massachusetts, and Connecticut.
Trump won every county in Oklahoma and West Virginia. Trump won all but one county in Wyoming, and Kansas. Trump won all but two counties in North Dakota, Kentucky, Tennessee, Utah, and Nebraska”
So? What the hell does that have to do with the fact that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote? Absolutely nothing. Your statement is not only absurd it is a lie. Hillary didn’t just win Vermont, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. She also won California, Colorado, Deleware, D.C., Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington. She won 21 states, not just 3. She also won every county is Massachusetts and Hawaii, all but 1 county in Deleware, Oregon and Vermont, and all but 2 counties in Connecticut and Nevada
What the hell makes you think unions and socialists would be directing any policy anyway?
LOL – Is that a joke?
Look at all of California, Chicago and NYC
Actually look at police and fire departments and the weight they carry nearly anywher
No, it’s not a joke. Most people aren’t socialists, and that includes the blue states. I know you cons are unable to comprehend that but it’s true. As for unions the rightwing’s hatred of working people has done so much damage to the unions they certainly won’t be running things no matter how we count the vote. They might get stronger and more powerful, which would be a good thing, but they wouldn’t be running things.
If we had a popular vote the ones running things would be the people. All the people, including the ones who people like you think their votes shouldn’t count.
When a big city with several hundred thousand voters gets several hundred thousands votes but a small town with only a few hundred voters only gets a few hundred votes that’s not a problem that needs to be fixed. That’s the way it’s supposed to be. The only reason conservatives are so gung ho about the electoral college is because it gives an unfair advantage to conservatives. They don’t care about the people.
Reblogged this on 70news and commented:
TRUMP GEOGRAPHICAL LANDSLIDE! America voted for Trump – except for bi-coastal Democrat states, sanctuary cities and the usual Democrat-run big cities.
Translation: America voted for Trump…if we ignore those who voted for Hillary.