Posted on 10/19/2020 9:01:05 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
As the attacks on the Electoral College continue, we can see how important the Electoral College is from the 2016 presidential election results. Many observers have noted that Clinton's margin in California was greater than her plurality nationwide. Many observers have also argued that without the Electoral College, a couple or a few large states would dominate elections. What few if any have noticed is that in 2016, the Electoral College prevented 3 out of 3,141 counties with about 5% of the electorate and population from picking the president.
According to the New York Times election results, Hillary Clinton received 2,868,519 or about 2% more than President Trump out of the 128,838,731 votes the two major party candidates received. The county-by-county vote totals from the Times show that in 2016, the Electoral College saved the U.S. from one or a couple of state picking the president. In 2016, Clinton won Los Angeles County, Calif., 2,464,364 to 769,743, or by 1,694,621 votes. She also won Cook County (Chicago), Illinois 1,611,946 to 453,287, or by 1,158,659 votes. So Clinton's margin in just two counties, L.A. and Cook, was 2,853,280, just 15,239 votes short of her 2,868,519 vote plurality nationwide.
Now, maybe this story would be neater if Clinton's plurality came from just two counties. Still, the facts are that those 15,239 votes must be made up by a third county. There are a few counties with a Clinton margin greater than 15,239 votes in 2016, but the one with the third greatest Clinton margin in 2016 was New York County (Manhattan), New York, where she won 579,013 to 64,929 or by 514,084 votes. That means that Clinton won L.A., Chicago, and Manhattan by 3,367,364, or by 498,845 votes more than her nationwide 2,868,519 plurality.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Electoral College effect - bump for later....
What was Hillary’s vote margin with illegals?
What is it about big cities that turns people in to idiots?
RE: What is it about big cities that turns people in to idiots?
GOVERNMENT WELFARE CENTERS ARE ALL CONCENTRATED IN BIG CITIES, SO ARE MAJOR UNIVERSITIES AND THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY.
I don’t know that it turns people into idiots, as much as idiots are drawn to them like flies to ..... honey....
Nothing. Idiots just tend to gather in them.
LOL some truth there. There’s an old joke in LA that mpst waiters and waitresses in LA moved there from somewhere else, and are working in bars and restaurants waiting for their big break in show business.
Cities turn people into group thinkers and they lose self reliance...dependent on buses and trains. Much easier to manipulate the masses when they all live in a relatively small congested area. Infiltrate the media, the unions, bid EDU and it all goes from there.
That’s part of it, but people who grow up in a very liberal section of a big city will almost certainly be a liberal, whereas they more than likely wouldn’t be one if they grew up on a farm. Recall what Andrew Breitbart said about being liberal as the default factory setting where he grew up.
bkmk
Three completely corrupt democrat counties would appoint the president. The U.S.A would be Venezuela North.
What few if any have noticed is that in 2016, the Electoral College prevented 3 out of 3,141 counties with about 5% of the electorate and population from picking the president... The county-by-county vote totals from the Times show that in 2016, the Electoral College saved the U.S. from one or a couple of state picking the president. In 2016, Clinton won Los Angeles County, Calif., 2,464,364 to 769,743, or by 1,694,621 votes. She also won Cook County (Chicago), Illinois 1,611,946 to 453,287, or by 1,158,659 votes. So Clinton's margin in just two counties, L.A. and Cook, was 2,853,280, just 15,239 votes short of her 2,868,519 vote plurality nationwide... the one with the third greatest Clinton margin in 2016 was New York County (Manhattan), New York, where she won 579,013 to 64,929 or by 514,084 votes. That means that Clinton won L.A., Chicago, and Manhattan by 3,367,364, or by 498,845 votes more than her nationwide 2,868,519 plurality.
L.A. is a great big freeway
Put a hundred down and buy a car
In a week, maybe two, they’ll make you a star
Weeks turn into years
How quick they pass
And all the stars that never were
Are parking cars and pumping gas
Their argument gets too messy and goes to “popular vote” cases.
The best argument is just sticking to out of all the counties in the country, where Trump won 3,084 of the 3,141 counties in the election.
A country is not merely where most people are. It is the land, the places, the villages, towns, cities and counties across the country. To be President for the whole country needs to represent more of all that than merely a “popular” vote representing merely a bunch of very high population places.
The best argument is just sticking to out of all the counties in the country, where Trump won 3,084 of the 3,141 counties in the election.
The actual county numbers were 2,626 counties for Trump and 487 counties for Clinton in the 2016 election.
dvwjr
I relied on some link I found. I should have double checked,
Yet, even with the corrected numbers the argument still holds.
2,262 counties versus 487 counties demonstrates representation over a much greater share of the country.
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.