[johnk]

Good read. Pulls things together well.

[Rurudyne]

Progressives need to flock to California to ensure that future DNC candidates are able to repeat this claim, time and time again.

[ExTexasRedhead]

Good points, but never ever forget the voter fraud used by the RATs.

[Az Joe]

She did not “win” anything.

#1 - There is no certified popular vote.

#2 - She will get about 48% of the uncertified popular vote, which means 52% will have voted against her.

No majority of anything: Votes, States, Electoral votes, Counties, Congressional Districts.... any way anyone wants to look at it.

[Personal Responsibility]

Great, she won a game no one was playing. Well done, Hillary. Really smart.

[Red Badger]

Here’s my response:

So What? That and $5 will get you a latte at Starbucks................

[ArtDodger]

When some lib lamely brings up the popular vote thing, I just say, that no one is sure who won it as there is no system in place to accurately count the popular vote since it doesn’t matter in US elections. That usually shuts them up if they have any thinking going on. The mindless zombies that merely spout Slate talking points.. well, I don’t try to reason with them as they don’t have permission to be near me.

[LoneStarGI]

Can’t remember where I read it but another paper did a similar analysis. They basically said that Clinton got something like 4 million more votes over Trump in just California alone. However, if you completely remove California, and just count the popular vote in the other 49 states, Trump got something like 1.5 million more votes than Clinton. So basically, Clinton’s ‘popular vote’ win is really only due to one state, California. This is another example of why the electoral collage is critical.

[BitWielder1]

Absentee ballots were not counted where they could not flip the outcome. For the popular vote to be accurate, they would all have to be counted.

[stylin19a]

bottom line...52% voted for someone other than Hillary.

[Hattie]

Many of the states don’t even bother counting the popular vote after overwhelming votes for one candidate. If they did then we would know whether or not Hillary actually got more votes than Trump. Dems know that but some stupid people don’t.

[wdnhrse]

Hillary was one of four Candidates in the Election. If you consider her vote total, and compare it with the total combined votes of the other three Candidates. It becomes obvious that she had a greater number of votes against her then for her. To say she won the Popular Vote, one must use ALL the votes cast, not just the votes for two out four Candidates. With that said, she lost, any way you count it.

[marsmanmd]

Good Read! we have the tea party wave in many states. There is lot to say the all politic is local. Only presidential races have national flare.

[Mase]

Bookmark

[elpadre]

Regarding the popular vote: I have been led to believe over the years that popular vote totals in national elections are far from accurate as when states make a declaration for a candidate, the absentee and provisional ballots are unnecessary and therefore not counted.

Is that true?

[petercooper]

To that end, Donald Trump carried approximately 82 percent of all US counties

Common Core math! There are 3,141 counties in the United States. Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57. 98%

[drpix]

The simplest and clearest retort I've heard is the World Series:

The World Series is won by the team that wins 4 games and not the team that scores the highest number of total runs in all the games.

Similarly, the US Presidency is won by the candidate that wins 270 state electoral votes and not the candidate who scores the highest number of total votes in all the states.

Every contest has its rules - that all opponents agree to abide by.

Presidential candidates and baseball teams - who agreed to those rules before entering their contests - have no legitimate complaint when they lose by those rules.

Those who show such utter contempt for the rules should be barred from future competition - whether it be sports or politics.

[so_real]

This is the part that really makes me sad:

To that end, Donald Trump carried approximately 82 percent of all US counties, with Hillary Clinton's success being mostly limited to large urban, left-leaning populations.

Enslaving 82% of the nation to the whims of the highly metropolitan big city citizens is positively criminal. We citizens who choose not to live in livestock barns like San Francisco, Chicago, Los Angelas, etc are not the slaves to the citizens who do choose to live there. We are the majority. With 82% of all U.S. counties supporting Trump ... why was this election even close in the electoral college. It should have been a massive landslide. The real crime is that the electoral college is unfairly weighted toward metropolitan areas. I say : "one county, one elector".

[Fhios]

The best response when somebody tells you ‘but Hillary won the popular vote’ is to say “That’s why she lost”.

Hilarity ensues.

[Kickass Conservative]

As soon as CA secedes, no Democrat Presidential Candidate will ever win the Popular Vote.

[GOPJ]

Why not do what democrats do and change the rules after the game's been played?

The Chicago Cubs LOST because the 'new rules' are 'whoever's side drinks the most beer at a game' wins...

Trump won MORE STATES.

Let's change the law to 'whoever wins the most States' wins.

That works for me.

Or base the win on how many unicorns own cars in a State? More unicorns - fewer votes? How's that brain deal editors at the New York Times and Washington Post?