Posted on 11/22/2016 10:39:01 AM PST by Steelfish
Donald Trump Lost Most of The American Economy In This Election By Jim Tankersley November 22
In the modern era of presidential politics, no candidate has ever won the popular vote by more than Hillary Clinton did this year, yet still managed to lose the electoral college. In that sense, 2016 was a historic split: Donald Trump won the presidency by as much as 74 electoral votes (depending on how Michigan ends up) while losing the nationwide vote to Clinton by 1.7 million votes and counting.
But there's another divide exposed by the election, which researchers at the Brookings Institution recently discovered as they sifted the election returns. It has no bearing on the election outcome, but it tells us something important about the state of the country and its politics moving forward.
The divide is economic, and it is massive. According to the Brookings analysis, the less-than-500 counties that Clinton won nationwide combined to generate 64 percent of America's economic activity in 2015. The more-than-2,600 counties that Trump won combined to generate 36 percent of the country's economic activity last year.
Clinton, in other words, carried nearly two-thirds of the American economy.
Here's how the researchers, at the Brookings Metropolitan Policy Program, visualized that. You can see immediately what's going on: With the exceptions of the Phoenix and Fort Worth areas, and a big chunk of Long Island, Clinton won every large-sized economic county in the country.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Do any of these idiots think that just PERHAPS the density of population might be a MAJOR factor in such economic numbers?
They’re trying to imply that Clinton voters are responsible for economic activity, lol. Bank robbers go where the money is, same with socialists, wards of the state and Democrats, but I repeat myself.
HoGWASH!!! it is easy to cherry pick and write such articles. Look at the publisher of such drivel. One fact throws the article completely out of the water.
West Virginia has suffered immensely from Clinton and Co. (EPA closing down coal mines.) These people who have LOST their livelihood would certainly NOT vote for her, so a lost economy would not show in her column. Unfortunately for her the 90 million unemployed were not in her column either. Those who were in her column like wall street and Hollywood keep on making money regardless of the economic disasters OTHERS suffer.
So what, Trump won the food chain. Which is a more fundamental need? Good luck to all the ‘economic victors’ trying to eat their cash.
How on earth can the Clinton popular vote margin be more than doubled since a few days ago to 1.7 million? Are Democrats still voting - perhaps 100 times per voter?
And how can you create the illusion that Michigan's 16 EVs are still in doubt?
Clearly, you are deliberately fudging these numbers, just as we might expect from the WaPo.
Now as to your main point, that Clinton "won 64 percent of the economy," your method of calculation is inane. Of course, Clinton won just about all of the bigger cities, and most of the nation's bigger businesses are located in the counties that contain these bigger cities. So you are not stating anything more than the obvious when you divide the economy and wealth geographically in that way.
What you miss, though, is that many of the Clinton voters in those bigger cities and the counties in which they are located - counties which Clinton carried - don't contribute anything to the wealth of those businesses that are located there. And conversely, many of the Trump-carried counties are home to voters who make sizable contributions to businesses located in the bigger Clinton-carried cities and their counties.
What you get by this method is a rather distorted picture of the respective percentages of the wealth carried by each candidate. In fact, this is the first time in my life that I've ever seen any election analysis using this grossly defective concept.
Vote totals are updated as states count provisional, contested, mail-in, and absentee ballots, and correct math or reporting errors, etc. California, of course, counts its votes with Mexican efficiency.
Since the totals are state by state, a tracking site would have to spend a lot of time and energy to chart progress. Such as Cook at:
Election night 2012 saw Romney with 57 million votes, but he ended up with 61 million, so that can be a bit of a guide.
Excellent reasoning!
Hitlery got how many votes via voter fraud? 3 to 4+ million dead voters, illegals, RATs who voted mutiple times, and then there’s the rigged Soros voting machines!
Do the lefty celebs realize they'll have to watch Canadian reruns of (gasp) "Father Knows Best?"
The lefty Maliboobs are paranoid...they fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray, pay taxes, and live according to the Constitution.
It's gotten so bad, lefties may even have to drink (horrors) domestic beer, and munch heavily salted Lay's potato chips deep-fried in reused "cottonseed oil"....plagued by visions of slave plantations haunting their leftist heads.
Article makes sense. If the country’s policies are concentrating economic success in smaller and smaller geographical areas, which the article suggests has happened, it only makes sense the rest of the country will rise up against it. The article helps defend the concept of the electoral college in a way, with its focus on geography.
Yes, all the votes are counted. You’re spreading nonsensical debunked rumors. Michigan certifies their final count on the 28th and we’re getting close to everyone’s final counts being in. NO votes are left uncounted anywhere.
You might think they would like the single-payer, government run health care system in Canada, but I'm sure they would head back the US if they needed expedited specialized medical care.
Otherwise, Cuba might be much more in tune with their political ideology than Canada.
So? Trump won, get over it.
I don't recall this ever happening before in a POTUS election. But I did notice that after 2014 when I looked at the Cali election results for Congress like in December that dem margins had grown.
I don't trust that state, at all. Presuming these votes are real, how many are illegal aliens? And why is the counting so glacial? Do they have teamsters doing it.
They've pushed Clinton up to +2 million and they aren't done yet, for all I know they might still be counting come inauguration day.
But they can shove it, Trump get's 100% of the Presidency.
Why does 99.9999% of every recount, etc. ALWAYS favor the RAT? It’s not realistic, yet, outside of FL POTUS 2000, they get away with it.
Are you saying all absentee ballots were opened and counted?
I don’t think so, only if it would change the vote.
No state will admit not counting valid votes. Each state and official sources like the US military insist all votes meeting requirements are counted. That’s why the vote count is still changing.
On the day after the election, the national Clinton popular vote margin was about 200,000. Now you say it is 10 times that at 2 million. Doesn't make sense.
Some obvious questions:
(1) What was the Clinton % of the California vote on the day after the election, and what was the Clinton % of the California vote AFTER then? (I was under the impression that as a rule of thumb, absentee ballots in any contest in any jurisdiction should follow about the same percentages to each candidate as non-absentee ballots. If this is not the case in California, it requires a logical explanation. Otherwise, there is a strong suspicion of cheating.)
(2) What percentage of the vast increase in the Clinton national popular vote margin since the day after the election is attributable to California alone?
(3) How does the grand total of California votes as reported now compare to California's total of registered voters? If the the number of total votes divided by the number of registered voters in California is way above the national percentage, that's would be another tipoff that cheating is going on.
Yes, even if Trump is still President-elect, all this fraud and cheating must still be exposed when it exists, and the perps should be held accountable.
Strange that the 'Rats are now claiming that Trump might have won Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio due to hacking of electronic voting machines. I would assume that if any hacking was going on, it was done on behalf of the 'Rats. Unfortunately for them, their cheating this year wasn't quite enough to get the Witch over the top. Yet they are still projecting their crimes onto their opponents.
Dems channeling their Inner Josef Goebbells again... tell the lie often enough and soon people will believe it.
They’ll be pushing this bullsh*t to delegitimize Trump’s Presidency.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.