Only retarded village dwellers voted Trump

only retarded village dwellers voted Trump

relevant cities all voted for Hillary

why retarded rednecks and edgy Sup Forums mental underages should decide about fate of the greatest metropolis on earth?

>47.4% white
>that will include the jews who live predominately in NYC

Only sub-100 IQ minorities or privileged college/rich city retards voted for Hillary

REAL America voted for Trump.

Immigrants and degenerate globalists city slickers voted for Hillary

>REAL America voted for Trump.
real america of poor uneducated retards?

nice america kek

>Cities would die without food, so let's alienate where food comes from.

Why are liberals so retarded?

>tfw college degree
>tfw country-come-to-town
>tfw Trump voter

>OP bez bolca dostaje pierdolca

for the left who like to pray to the bait
I am sharing this with as many of you “Clinton won the majority” whiners as I can. Our Founders in their infinite wisdom created the Electoral College to ensure each STATE was fairly represented and they accounted for population with the formula for the number of Electoral votes per state. They believed that one or two densely populated areas should not speak for the whole of the nation. This should finally put an end to the argument as to why the Electoral College makes sense over the majority ( it won't however Because liberals are insane):

- There are 3,141 counties in the United States.

- Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57.

- There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16.

- Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 2.5 million votes. In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan,
Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond). Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country.

- These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3,797,000 square miles. When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of
territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc) don’t and shouldn’t
speak for the rest of our country.

- Finally, Donald Trump campaigned as if to win 50 individual state elections as per the Constitution. He did it. So you want to say he doesn’t have a mandate from the States?

Meanwhile Clinton and her cronies continue to cry about Putin. Wah, wah, wah!!

Sorry. Not tired of winning yet!

yes uneducated poor retards should definitely be alienated

agriculture is increasingly getting automated and reliant on technology and nowadays countryside dwellers are the ones who have to go to a city when they want to do anything/buy anything/have entertainment, so actually these cucks are dependant on us

"Relevant cities" = niggers, spics, kikes, fags, & communists.

>real america of poor uneducated retards?


As opposed to the world's thinktank that is fucking Poland?

>Large, densely populated Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc) don’t and shouldn’t
>speak for the rest of our country.
No. But they are supposed to be treated equally. If they have more people, they should have more votes. People are equal. It's people what matters not area or number of counties kek.

...

>As opposed to the world's thinktank that is fucking Poland?
>muh world think tank jews controlling the world XD
kek its not like Americans have much to say in Poland anyway

But I very much appreciate EU money

>tfw I live in Suffolk County (it's that big red county on Long Island, east of NYC)
>always hated it here
>actually feel proud of it for once

>Implying entertainment is more important than surviving

Yup, pretty much done here. Also is right. Metropolitan areas should not be able to massively outvote the rest of the country.

When Trump wins 98% of the counties in the country, but loses the popular vote, it's arleady apparent that the system is skewed.

CA/NY shouldn't decide the direction of the country. There's 48 other states. Without the electoral college the union wouldn't last.

I also like the autist I am worked out a split EC system where popular vote proportion in each state divvies the states EC votes to each candidate, and even in this case, Trump still won, though by a significantly closer margin.

I think the current EC system is retarded because FPTP is stupid.

Thing is the only way democrats could win this election was through popular vote, and that's only because of CA and NY. In other states the votes were either disproportionately Trump, or very close.

Although, I already know this is b8 and my well articulated argument is falling on deaf ears.

If we are so retarded, how come we outsmarted the Clintons, pollsters, media, the NWO, and you slick city types?

>Cali overall IQ = 95
>Texas = 100

One massively voted for Hillary (and gave her the 3 million), and one Trump

SIOUAERIS PENINSULAM AMCENAM!

>Things have been looking up in the Mitten since we got rid of that Leaf Cunt as Gov.

>well articulated argument
>doesn't provide sources

>village dwellers
Only make up 15% of the population. You can thank the smaller cities and suburbs that make up 50% of the population.

ffs, this isn't a research journal.

Do you have a counterclaim, or are you just going to molymeme is and say

>nod an argubent

...

Why're Cities alway so cancerous ? I dont get it.

I literally live in central Baltimore city, faggot, the most 'urban' place in America

he won
get over it already
its the (((concurrent year)))

You were the one who called it a well articulated argument, I simply called this statement into question.

>only retarded village dwellers voted Trump
Perhaps Hillary team should have worked to please them and try to win them over, instead of insulting them and wondering why they didn't vote for her?

Urban v Rural civil war. Who wins?

>Areas decide the president
>Not the actual people

Just like said, it's unfair and gives people living in certain areas more voting power for absolutely no reason. Everyone's vote should be equal, the Dems have essentially been handicapped because the Republicans only appeal to those living in rural areas.

I just want to point out that Right wingers in cities are so disenfranchised by the domination of the left that they don't even bother to vote and population wise that fucks with the popular vote a lot.

I don't think Republicans could've won in the leftist bastions but there were probably a good 10 million people across the various entrenched liberal states that would've voted if they lived anywhere else.

The same is true for right-wing states too, I think. How many Democrats are screwed across the many, many entrenched conservative states?

People are equal. All people's votes should count equally. If urban area has more people then it should be allowed to have more votes.

You are denying basic human rights.

The states decide the president, not the people.

That's correct, and how it should be.

When you consider that about half the nation are democrats, but they live massively in a few states, and think they should be able to impose their nanny policies on everyone everywhere else, the union wouldn't survive.

Flyover country would pull out of the union after it became readily apparent they would never get another policy that really helps them out at the federal level.

>village

go spear a tank

...

.

...

Unless you live in the rich part of town/have money, cities fucking suck.

Keep crying faggot, i am enjoying every second of it.

Poland added to cleansing list

Get a better proxy shill.

OP is about as effective as the antifa faggots beating up trash cans

ITT: Poles are scared that Trump will stop protecting them and the Russians will get their revenge for all the shit talk and barking from behind America's back.

Human rights are a sham.

Popular vote never mattered.

If you used percentage distribution for EC votes the final tally would have been 244 Clinton to 256 Trump.

So Trump would still win. Clinton still won the popular vote, but would still have lost the EC against Trump.

EC > Popular

And should remain so.

As pic related in states

I don't want to live under bullshit lefty nanny policies. See, I'm a thinking human being, and believe in personal responsibility, not projection and blame shifting.

...

enough, it's over, trump won, sick of these whining posts
Just fucking wit-cha, I will never get sick of these .

NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Kek to bad that Gif is on my phone but it is pretty funny

If everything was based on the popular vote, you would see major population centers having the vast amount of authority over everything. This is a fact, and you are being willfully ignorant if you think otherwise.

So do you honestly think that the majority of people who live in these urbanized areas know whats best for the people in rural areas? Do you think they would even care about anything other than themselves?

I'll answer this for you as well, in case you are still of the mind to be willfully ignorant. They will push America in a direction that caters to themselves as much as they possibly can with only a minority even having the mind to care about the opinions of others and because that empathetic group is a minority, as this is based off of majority rule, it won't ever matter. They would do this with such little regard for those in rural areas that eventually those in the rural areas would get fed up and try to leave or push back. Maybe you don't care and would love to see them enslaved to this broken system you devised? Then this is exactly why the current system is in place and is doing it's job as it did this last election.

New york (or chicago, LA, etc.) cannot survive without the rest of america. But the rest of america can certainly survive without new york.

Poland calling anyone retarded...

>If you live in these grey areas, your vote matters more

Anyone who shills for the EC is a massive faggot and would be saying the exact opposite if their candidate lost because of it.

>47.4% white
>relevant

If your city doesn't have a white majority you aren't relevant

Do you know why the EC was setup?

>If everything was based on the popular vote, you would see major population centers having the vast amount of authority over everything. This is a fact, and you are being willfully ignorant if you think otherwise.
So? If the majority of people vote for a candidate, why does the minority get to override that? The loser just didn't appeal to the majority

>So do you honestly think that the majority of people who live in these rural areas know whats best for the people in urban areas? Do you think they would even care about anything other than themselves?
No.

Your whole post is just assumptions and trying to paint the other side as bad. You can't even look at this from a neutral stance. Everything you said can be said for those living in rural areas

Your whole post is also assumptions and not from a bipartisan stance

Cities are poison. They are not living a happy or true life. They, like you, have deluded themselves into thinking they matter more than the rest simply because there's more of them.

WE MATTER, WE HAVE MALLS AND SHIT.

Fuck off. We have citycucks moving out here in droves to our rural areas like the scum they are.

Yes, to allow for elites to rule. Just like only white men who had a certain amount of wealth and owned land were originally allowed to vote. Why it was set up doesn't matter at all when we live in an age of instant communication and can travel across the world in a day

They didn't decided the fate of Tokyo

>Democrat Party dies a slow death because its positions are only popular in cities
>Loses election
>Calls it rigged and blames everybody who doesn't live in a city

Even still, it sounds like it sucks.

That's why I don't get the wealthy baby boomers who want to retire to a place like Mexico or Belize.

Why would you want to live in a small little enclave of wealth surrounded by squalor, crime and people who hate you?

I would rather live in a poorer white area in Portland or Seattle than a wealthy area in Chicago or Baltimore.

>talks about rural america like they're lesser humans and stereotypes as lower intelligence

>chats shit about human rights

Fuck off Poland, globalist EU scum.

Fuck the shitskin filled cities.

Having a louder voice (more MSM attention) like NY and CA get shouldn't decide the date of the nation. In fact the major cities that voted Democrat are most largely composed of immigrants, who matter less than white people who've lived in America for generations. That's why.

That's why we have the electoral college. If we didn't the cucks would always have full control of the government.

Real Americans are white.

>Everything you said can be said for those living in rural areas
Except for the fact that rural areas are, by definition, less populated than urban areas.
>If the majority of people vote for a candidate, why does the minority get to override that?
This isn't about overriding anything. This is about making sure that everyone is represented. This is why america is a republic, and not simply democracy. Mob rule is incredibly damaging, and I've explained plenty as to why. It's funny that you say I'm biased, because you aren't even trying to see why the electoral college was made. There are very good reasons.

Is the system perfect? Well of course not. I feel like outside of divine direction or some sort of omnipotent artificial super intelligence to reign over us benevolently, there will always be imperfections. But reverting away from a republic is not going to fix things at all.

I am looking forward to the campagin promises he will deliver. You may laugh now, but what goes around comes around. He will surely show that this is the last time the Republican party will nominate such a joke as Donald J. Trump.

Let us see what he does these 4 years. According to all prior statistics (including his post-election popularity), it seems like he will be a very short one night stand.

>So do you honestly think that the majority of people who live in these urbanized areas know whats best for the people in rural areas? Do you think they would even care about anything other than themselves?
>I'll answer this for you as well, in case you are still of the mind to be willfully ignorant. They will push America in a direction that caters to themselves as much as they possibly can with only a minority even having the mind to care about the opinions of others and because that empathetic group is a minority, as this is based off of majority rule, it won't ever matter. They would do this with such little regard for those in rural areas that eventually those in the rural areas would get fed up and try to leave or push back. Maybe you don't care and would love to see them enslaved to this broken system you devised? Then this is exactly why the current system is in place and is doing it's job as it did this last election.

Everything you said about not being fair to the other side can be said for those living in rural areas. You're just making assumptions about the majority potentially being unfair the minority to justify giving them more weight behind each vote

>This isn't about overriding anything. This is about making sure that everyone is represented.
This is overriding the vote of the majority. If everyone were represented then they would have equal votes instead of saying everyone who lives in X has more voting power.

>Mob rule is incredibly damaging
It's not.