Staggering Facts on final Popular Vote Total

[Jesse James]

Final tally shows Trump lost popular vote by 2.8 million | Daily Mail Online

 

[h=1]Final tally shows Trump lost popular vote by 2.8 million – but he BEAT Clinton by 3 million votes outside of California and New York[/h]

• Clinton won California by 4.2 million votes and New York by 1.6 million, running up the score in places where she would have won no matter what
  
• Outside of those two liberal states, Trump was 3 million votes ahead
  
• California alone accounted for more than Clinton's national popular-vote edge
  
• Newt Gingrich mocked: 'This is football season. A team can have more yards and lose the game. What matters is how many points you put on the board'
  

[Getslow]

Clinton won by 3.6 million if you don't count secessionist Texas. Imagine if we didn't count any of the states in the South.

 

... see how easy that is?

[Jesse James]

Clinton won by 3.6 million if you don't count secessionist Texas. Imagine if we didn't count any of the states in the South.

 

... see how easy that is?

 

To deny the facts of how much he won the flyover states will cause another loss. Write it down. And those Northern States such as Michigan and Wisconsin are getting redder all the time.

[PurplePride92]

To deny the facts of how much he won the flyover states will cause another loss. Write it down. And those Northern States such as Michigan and Wisconsin are getting redder all the time.

 

The same mistakes won't be made twice. Clinton isn't running again.

[Jesse James]

The same mistakes won't be made twice. Clinton isn't running again.

 

While Clinton was a flawed candidate she was not the reason the Democrats were rejected. Thats why I say the Democratic party still does not understand why they lost. And as long as they keep thinking like that they will lose. Write it down that I said it. You will see.

 

Look at it like this. Trump beat her. That should tell you there was alot more going on here.

[PurplePride92]

While Clinton was a flawed candidate she was not the reason the Democrats were rejected. Thats why I say the Democratic party still does not understand why they lost. And as long as they keep thinking like that they will lose. Write it down that I said it. You will see.

 

Look at it like this. Trump beat her. That should tell you there was alot more going on here.

 

I think the democrats know why they lost. Many have discussed it at length at this point. They know what they need to do but they still have to go do it. We also get to wait and see if Trump can deliver on his promises to those states. If he fails to deliver then those states will become democrat states again. People are fickle these days.

[Clyde]

While we're talking stats have we ever had a POTUS who had 10M less votes than his opponents? Gots to be a record, right?

[The Professor]

Clinton won by 3.6 million if you don't count secessionist Texas. Imagine if we didn't count any of the states in the South.

 

... see how easy that is?

 

The difference I would think is I doubt that Trump spent much money or campaigned in California or New York. If the election had been strictly a popular vote election he would have been in those states campaigning like crazy. But it's an electoral system and he didn't put much effort into those two. But the shear size of their populations is one of the reasons the popular vote was the way it came out. Who's to say Trump wouldn't have cut into that margin to a great degree if it had been only a popular vote election?

On the other hand. Clinton probably campaigned in Texas and spent some money and effort there.

[Getslow]

To deny the facts of how much he won the flyover states will cause another loss. Write it down. And those Northern States such as Michigan and Wisconsin are getting redder all the time.

 

Who the heck was denying facts? I simply did the exact same thing your article did, throw out a large state that went one way to make the result look more clear-cut than it was.

 

It was a divisive election with two massively divisive candidates. And no one knows better than I about the problems Democrats face in huge parts of this country, especially here in Kentucky.

 

What I was hoping to show was ridiculous is the notion that you just get to pick and choose which parts of America matter. Yeah, California and New York are overwhelmingly Democratic. Other parts of the country are overwhelmingly Republican. Why not throw those out? It's a ridiculous notion.

[Getslow]

The difference I would think is I doubt that Trump spent much money or campaigned in California or New York. If the election had been strictly a popular vote election he would have been in those states campaigning like crazy. But it's an electoral system and he didn't put much effort into those two. But the shear size of their populations is one of the reasons the popular vote was the way it came out. Who's to say Trump wouldn't have cut into that margin to a great degree if it had been only a popular vote election?

On the other hand. Clinton probably campaigned in Texas and spent some money and effort there.

 

Clinton was a fool, her advisors were fools and the campaign was a disaster on just about every conceivable level.

 

Don't lump me in with these recount losers. I'm furious about the results and I'm furious with all the right people.

 

But I'm not signing on for this absurd exercise in "look what happens to the numbers when..."

[PurplePride92]

Clinton was a fool, her advisors were fools and the campaign was a disaster on just about every conceivable level.

 

Don't lump me in with these recount losers. I'm furious about the results and I'm furious with all the right people.

 

But I'm not signing on for this absurd exercise in "look what happens to the numbers when..."

All of this. All of this right here. :thumb:

[UKMustangFan]

I'm gonna ask a question and maybe this has been covered, so please forgive me if it has.

 

Why do people keep harping on this whole, "Clinton only won the popular vote because of California" bit?

 

Are they not one of the 50 states?

 

Why should we discredit their votes and not the votes of say the extreme conservative states likes Texas & Oklahoma and Louisiana, etc?

[hidinout]

Threads like this make the Victory even sweeter , if thats possible .

[Jesse James]

Threads like this make the Victory even sweeter , if thats possible .

 

Thats why I posted it.

[Clyde]

I'm gonna ask a question and maybe this has been covered, so please forgive me if it has.

 

Why do people keep harping on this whole, "Clinton only won the popular vote because of California" bit?

 

Are they not one of the 50 states?

 

Why should we discredit their votes and not the votes of say the extreme conservative states likes Texas & Oklahoma and Louisiana, etc?

 

Because Mr Trump tweeted it out. That's why.