Broken system: Hillary won the popular vote but lost the election...

The New York Times: www.nytimes.com...

Google: www.google.com...=enn/p//0/0///////////

NPR: www.npr.org...

I havent checked the other sites but I would imagine that they too have the same results.

Hillary won the popular vote but lost the election...

Hillary's 59,323,520 votes (47.7%) to Trump's 59,152,992 votes (47.5%)

Its the year 2000 and a Bush victory all over again.

If in-fact we live in a democracy or the illusion of one, then the person with the most votes has to be the winner.

It is not a democracy when a handful of select individuals (the electoral college), determine the outcome of an election.

Sigh !
Get on with it and play the cards you have been dealt .

Stop winging 👍

originally posted by: gladtobehere
The New York Times: www.nytimes.com...

Hillary won the popular vote but lost the election... Hillary's 59,323,520 votes (47.7%) to Trump's 59,152,992 votes (47.5%)

If in-fact we live in a democracy or the illusion of one, then the person with the most votes has to be the winner.

It is not a democracy when a handful of select individuals (the electoral college), determine the outcome of an election.

The United STATES is just that. States. Elections are by state and electoral voters are from each state so each state has their own voice. There have been calls for change to a popular vote but the roots of the state by state election run deep and change would be difficult and is unlikely.
An analogy may be the world series. It is game by game regardless of the total score of each team.

Nope, the system is exactly correct, we live in a representative republic, quite ingenious.
Prevents mob rule don't you know?
Why should a very few populous areas be able to dictate to the entire country? Think about it.

originally posted by: sprtpilot
Nope, the system is exactly correct, we live in a representative republic, quite ingenious.
Prevents mob rule don't you know?
Why should a very few populous areas be able to dictate to the entire country? Think about it.

Exactly!

a reply to: gladtobehere

No, the system worked as intended. The popular does not elect Presidents. If the popular vote were all that mattered, then the election could be won by solely focusing on a handful of populous states while ignoring the needs of everyone else.

None of this would be an issue had the DNC done the right thing and backed Bernie Sanders. People can bitch and moan all they want but the fact is the DNC #ed themselves and the rest of the USA.

a reply to: gladtobehere


The system worked how it was designed to work.

originally posted by: gladtobehere
The New York Times: www.nytimes.com...

Google: www.google.com...=enn/p//0/0///////////

NPR: www.npr.org...

I havent checked the other sites but I would imagine that they too have the same results.

Hillary won the popular vote but lost the election...

Hillary's 59,323,520 votes (47.7%) to Trump's 59,152,992 votes (47.5%)

Its the year 2000 and a Bush victory all over again.

If in-fact we live in a democracy or the illusion of one, then the person with the most votes has to be the winner.

It is not a democracy when a handful of select individuals (the electoral college), determine the outcome of an election.

God, we all know how Bush left the country, it was a freaking mess and gas was almost $5 a gallon the housing crisis!! Oh well!!!! Hope to God he doesn't blow the country up ATS!!! Nice to see RUSSIA is the only country HAPPY!!! Yeah, all of you who said Putin and Trump weren't buddies, what the hell does that tell you??????

But it wa fine when bernie was winning the popular vote but super pacs gave it to clinton....

Whats your thoughts on that?

a reply to: gladtobehere

Fyi its happened 4 of the last 6 from what I remember.

Also, by ridding ourselves of the college the cities and coasts would be the only people represented.

Suck it up

originally posted by: sprtpilot
Nope, the system is exactly correct, we live in a representative republic, quite ingenious.
Prevents mob rule don't you know?

It's debatable if that's best. I'm on the fence with this one.

Why should a very few populous areas be able to dictate to the entire country? Think about it.

Well, would you define a "very few" as more than a dozen metro areas? I'm pretty sure rural and urban is split close to 50/50, and there's a hell of a lot more than a dozen urban areas in the US.

Me thinks you exaggerate to prove a point.

a reply to: gladtobehere

Just stop and go with it.
Trump is our new president.
It is what it is.
Beyond that - remember it's only rigged if Trump would have lost.

originally posted by: gladtobehere
It is not a democracy when a handful of select individuals (the electoral college), determine the outcome of an election.

It's not a democracy and it's not broken. It's a republic and it's working exactly as designed.
Sometimes it works in the Dem's favour, sometimes it works out for the GOP.

California gets 55 votes.

How can you ignore that?
55! That's equivalent to dozens of other states combined!
And they almost always vote the same way.

Hell they colored it blue before the votes were even over 30% counted.
I think that's the most disturbing aspect of the whole thing in itself!
55 votes and we all know where they stand before they even say so...

We're a democratic republic, not a true democracy. True democracy have mob rule, the system worked just as it should have.

originally posted by: WilburnRoach
a reply to: gladtobehere


The system worked how it was designed to work.

Really?? Wasn't it Donald himself that said it was a broken system????? Yes indeed it was!!!its okay now that he won though, isn't it?!?

a reply to: gladtobehere

It is not a democracy when a handful of select individuals (the electoral college), determine the outcome of an election.

Exactly, but it never was, and for that reason. It's a republic. True democracy is way too leftist for people here

I would rather it be a democracy. Is what it is I suppose.

That said, if Trump won the popular vote, but lost the election... I have a strong feeling Trump supporters would be crying foul and Dems would be telling them to suck it up (just like the members above are doing). Both sides would be guilty of this. The electoral college is only a problem for most people if it doesn't work in their favor.

originally posted by: muzzleflash
California gets 55 votes.

How can you ignore that?
55! That's equivalent to dozens of other states combined!
And they almost always vote the same way.

Are you not ignoring the obvious, that California has the rough population equivalent to those other states combined?

I do get your point, if it was a true democracy those individual votes would count, and go to more than one candidate.

No, this is how the system WORKS. Look at the map and then get back to us as to whether or not Hillary should have won.

www.politico.com...

Mind you, MI and MN will likely go for Trump too. But even if it's just one of those or even none of those - just look at the damn map.