Trump does not have the majority

Clinton is beating him by 166k voters in the popular vote.

On top of that there are over 6m votes going to the independent. 3 times as many as 2012 and 6 times as many as in 2004.

Sad state of affairs.

Reply 1

AdvancedNothing

It's all to do with the Electoral College though which means he's guaranteed the presidency in January. The Electoral College could theoretically choose Clinton to be President if there were enough faithless electors (An electoral college representative that doesn't vote for the candidate that wins the popular vote in their state). A load of states have passed laws making it illegal to be a faithless elector, but they're pointless seeing as there's no way to link a ballot to an elector.

Reply 2

RogerOxon

21

That's the system though. It's rigged :wink:

Reply 3

Whitewell

8

Original post by yudothis

Clinton is beating him by 166k voters in the popular vote.

On top of that there are over 6m votes going to the independent. 3 times as many as 2012 and 6 times as many as in 2004.

Sad state of affairs.

Ironically, UKIP suffered similarly in the general election.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 4

A Mysterious Lord

20

It was the same with Bush/Kerry in 2004.

Unfortunately, that's the system.

Reply 5

NotNotBatman

20

That's because those people don't vote for the president. They indirectly vote, it's the electoral college who decides, same thing happened a decade ago.

Reply 6

yudothis

OP

20

Original post by A Mysterious Lord

It was the same with Bush/Kerry in 2004.

Unfortunately, that's the system.

I thought in 2004 Bush actually had more of the popular vote and 200 Al Gore had more?

Reply 7

yudothis

OP

20

Guys, I know what the system is.

I just called it a sad state of affairs...

Reply 8

Yaboi

17

Same guys complaining about this are the same one's that said it was a good thing when UKIP won so many votes.

It's ridiculously unfair.

Reply 9

username2752874

22

Original post by yudothis

Clinton is beating him by 166k voters in the popular vote.

On top of that there are over 6m votes going to the independent. 3 times as many as 2012 and 6 times as many as in 2004.

Sad state of affairs.

Would've been difficult for Hillary to enact too much of a change, given that she'd get vetoed to hell by the republican majority congress and Supreme Court. I think the Republican Party will keep a short leash on him; you've got to keep in mind that there many Trump antagonists that voted for Trump himself because he would advance republican beliefs.

Reply 10

yudothis

OP

20

Original post by GradeA*UnderA

Would've been difficult for Hillary to enact too much of a change, given that she'd get vetoed to hell by the republican majority congress and Supreme Court. I think the Republican Party will keep a short leash on him; you've got to keep in mind that there many Trump antagonists that voted for Trump himself because he would advance republican beliefs.

Oh yes.

I am actually not too unhappy about Trump. What irks me only really is how he won. He played to fears/biases and lies. But I think he will be a much better president than most people fear.

Much, much better, also considering as you said the controls they will try to enact.

Though I must be cheeky and say the Germans thought they could control Hitler when they made him Chancellor in 1933 :wink:

Reply 11

username2752874

22

Original post by yudothis

Oh yes.

I am actually not too unhappy about Trump. What irks me only really is how he won. He played to fears/biases and lies. But I think he will be a much better president than most people fear.

Much, much better, also considering as you said the controls they will try to enact.

Though I must be cheeky and say the Germans thought they could control Hitler when they made him Chancellor in 1933 :wink:

Well, the German thing happened because the Centre Party sold out to Hitler, and the rest of them abstained from the Reichstag bill of passing the Enabling Act (the power to rule by decree which gave Hitler all his power). It was basically cowardice on the politicians' part

When you end up with two main candidates that are both weak, everyone is just gonna vote for their party - since both Hillary and Trump didn't really do much to convince the other party to join them. I know some high-profile republicans condemned Trump, but I'm pretty sure they still ended up voting for him. As a result, since there a more republican supporters, Trump wins.

The 11,000 voting for a dead gorilla pays testament to how **** both of them are; if thousands don't feel the need to make a serous vote, how genuinely good are the candidates?