Want to abolish the Electoral College? Maybe you didn't know...
that Abraham Lincoln received just 39% of the popular vote, but won the presidency by a landslide, thanks to the Electoral College.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Adogslife · 61-69, M
The popular vote isn't a factor in the Presidential election any more than hits are in a baseball game. Runs are the single measure of a winner in a baseball game. The Electoral College vote is the only prescient factor in an election.
The purpose of the system is so that a localized candidate, backed by an area of population density, can't sway an election. That very fact is what Hillary lost sight of. That's simply poor management. Hillary won the State of California with over 60% of the popular vote. She won the CA popular vote by significantly more than she won the entire country. Therein lies the stupidity. She could've won 99% of the vote. It doesn't matter. The state has 55 electoral votes. You don't get s he more through dominating. You just inflate a stat that's irrelevant - the popular vote.
Trump managed his campaign better. Strike in states where there's something to gain. Don't spend too long where your guaranteed to win or guaranteed to lose. If the popular vote mattered, he would've adjusted his roadmap accordingly.
Hillary didn't. She stupidly focused her campaign on population centers neglecting a massive portion of the country. That's an egregious error by her manager AND her husband. He should've known better. They kept her too isolated to even fathom the potential of loss.
So, for all the Trump haters, I get it after that gut wrenching of a loss. But, that should make it self evident that Trump isn't stupid. He put a team around him with the single goal of winning.
In the end, he outsmarted all of the professional pundits and the D.C. elitists and politically entitled. He beat both parties at their game.
Hillary should be ashamed.
The purpose of the system is so that a localized candidate, backed by an area of population density, can't sway an election. That very fact is what Hillary lost sight of. That's simply poor management. Hillary won the State of California with over 60% of the popular vote. She won the CA popular vote by significantly more than she won the entire country. Therein lies the stupidity. She could've won 99% of the vote. It doesn't matter. The state has 55 electoral votes. You don't get s he more through dominating. You just inflate a stat that's irrelevant - the popular vote.
Trump managed his campaign better. Strike in states where there's something to gain. Don't spend too long where your guaranteed to win or guaranteed to lose. If the popular vote mattered, he would've adjusted his roadmap accordingly.
Hillary didn't. She stupidly focused her campaign on population centers neglecting a massive portion of the country. That's an egregious error by her manager AND her husband. He should've known better. They kept her too isolated to even fathom the potential of loss.
So, for all the Trump haters, I get it after that gut wrenching of a loss. But, that should make it self evident that Trump isn't stupid. He put a team around him with the single goal of winning.
In the end, he outsmarted all of the professional pundits and the D.C. elitists and politically entitled. He beat both parties at their game.
Hillary should be ashamed.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
katielass · F
You are exactly correct in your description of the two campaigns. Trump campaigned a lot in states that most repubs would have kissed off, believing they had no chance. But trump knew there were people in those states looking for change. hillary took them for granted, but I believe she did so because she felt she had to focus on getting the base out to vote. As it happens, they didn't come out to vote and she wasted her time.