How did she end up with that much support? Her rallies were almost empty, even Pence's rallies were more packed...

How did she end up with that much support? Her rallies were almost empty, even Pence's rallies were more packed, her livestreams and social media accounts were almost empty compared to Trump's and even many of that "traffic" was us.
Yet somehow she got a lot more than I expected, did they actually rig it? Or were they the actual silent majority?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=AFa1-kciCb4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

jesus please count all the fucking votes already dammit I can't take this meme anymore

faggot OP, Hillary HAS NOT WON the popular vote yet, Arizona and Michigan WERE NOT COUNTED YET

did you even read the thread you dumb shit?

>Arizona and Michigan WERE NOT COUNTED YET

They were, they just weren't officially called. Once they do get officially called, Trump is expected to close the gap by ~95k votes, but he'll still lose the popular vote. Too many illegals with voting rights in Cali.

>Or were they the actual silent majority?

Lots of Trump supporters in deep, deep blue states didn't bother voting, pham, while lots of nigs and spics were bussed in to vote by the DNC.

>DNC and Hillary spends gorillion dollars rigging it
>still loses
Well thankfully they lost cause holy shit these fuckers are absolutely incompetent.

She won states and cities with larger populations. People forget that America is a pretty big place and the bulk of our population resides in only a few cities while the rest are dispersed through rural areas.

At the end of the day, Trump had the majority that really mattered, the States

because rigging, we knew it was going to happen

also since a lot of stupid minorites probably voted for her i bet they drove to different polling stations to vote, but this happened in california and new york which didnt matter

we know democrat turnout wasnt going to be the same as in 08-12, but you can see it did pass that

its easy to surmise that they rigged those numbers to work out that way

look at the number of votes King Nigger got in 2008

I heard that illegal aliens and dead people vote in America for some unknown reason.

Voter fraud and election rigging.

Her whole platform was pretty much "I'm not Trump, vote for me."

She doesn't have the kind of enthusiastic supporters Trump does. The only ones who were really invested in her were the "muh first female president" types. Everyone else was just voting for who they perceived to be the lesser of two evils.

...

People will vote even if they aren't excited about a candidate.

In our 2 party system, there are many people wjo vote the party line regardless of candidate

They rigged it to its absolute limits and it still did not matter.

Because people think this way:
>Yeah Hillary Clinton is corrupt and made some wars and EVERYTHING
>BUT TRUMP IS A MYSOGINIST, XENOPHOBIC, RACIST, WHITE MALE, WANTS TO MAKE WAR EVERYWHERE AND KILL EVERYONE
>so i vote Hillary because she is the lesser evil.
This is the answer, Fabrizio.

did you forget the whole people complaining that their trump votes automatically turned into hillary votes in multiple states across the country? shit was rigged in various places on all fronts and we still pulled through.

Holy shit, Trump's actually less popular than McCain was. That's more than a little concerning.

Normies

so how many votes for Trump got thrown out this year?

But so was hillary, which means a shit ton of people didn't vote

and romneydefinetely something fishy about the numbers


hillary has no support but still manages to get more votes than trump, that is laughable

but even discounting fake votes trump should have still had 60+

I admit I only read the first words, just fuck you I have a lot to do I'm at work

>12 million fewer people voted in 2016 than 2012
>2016; the literally most important election ever
>millions of newly registered voters
>and four years of population growth
Wew looks like Obama stole the 2012 election.

California. That place is a liberal cancer.

Hillary was NEVER part of the equation..

People voted FOR trump or AGAINST trump... and some people voted because they were democrats.


people never cared about hillary.

>But so was hillary

Yeah, but I still can't believe Trump got less overall votes than a toothless cuckservative like McCain. Either the shit's rigged to hell and back, or this doesn't bode well for 2020 and onward.

No, a lot of Hillary's support was composed of illegals, dead people, duplicates, and voting machine "glitches".

Despite ALL OF THAT, Donald Trump outmaneuvered her. In the end, he was smarter and more cunning.

This.

The DNC did try to rig it without a doubt. They just couldn't do it in high percentages without getting massive backlash, especially since O'Keefe proved they already planned to rig the votes.

This is the result of Trump supporters not heading to the polls out of intimidation in blue states, illegals voting in blue states, and immigrants and low information voters that had compiled in plurality of growing blue bases voting out of fear of Hitler 2.0.

And they still lost and for a reason, the real American people who still sees themselves as a nation rose to vote in strategic terms and we won.

>Democrap getting less than 60M
Talk about worse candidate ever

If Hillary's campaign had been:
"I'm a good alternative to Trump."
She would have won in a landslide.

Instead her entire platform was:
"I'm the only alternative to Trump."

So the result was mass apathy, people didn't want to vote for anyone. Trump won since he had more supporters who believed in a greater future. Hillary's votes are from fearful people who don't like Trump.
It was a dumb election, all memes aside.

>How did she end up with that much support?

She has a vagina. That's enough for 80% of women to vote for her.

Wow King Nigger really tore McCain and Palin a new one.

Apparently, dead people can vote.

Also, niggers and femshits get to vote twice. Because slavery and oppression.

And Commiefornia a shit.

many of her voters where "glitches" in the voting machines, illegal immigrants who were bused in, and also the fucking dead.

55% of woman voted for her
only 45% of white women

Illegals can vote in cali and there was likely a bunch of rigging with people voting multiple times, being bussed around and the voting machines messing with votes.

>CNN
>POPULAR VOTE
>92% REPORTING
>PROJECTED WINNER: trump

STOP RIOTING GO HOME

how does losing the popular vote and winning the electoral college work? i thought each state has electorates proportional to their populations?

do some states have too many? do some have not enough?

Losing the popular vote means nothing.

Electoral votes are everything.

nvm i get it now. super obvious now lol

>there is a world where hillary won and trump fans aren't payed by soros to chimp out

this.

mexicans voted for somone who would let more mexicans in.

>Protip: THERE IS NO NATIONWIDE POPULAR VOTE.
Its not called the United America of States for a reason

I don't get how people can be butthurt about Shillary winning the popular vote. Trump knew that certain states were a lost cause from the beginning (for example CA). With how the US election works why would he bother trying to get more supporters there? Say he'd have managed to flip 1mil voters in CA. He'd still lose the state and would have lost valuable time to campaign in other more important states. As long as the election works this way the popular vote is irrelevant, since the entire campaign and year/months leading up to the election is shaped by attempting to win the most electoral votes, not the most actual votes.

it was a fair and square election, give it up guys, buddy pal.

youtube.com/watch?v=AFa1-kciCb4

they try to rig with the votes of illegals and the dead, soros' voting machines, etc. You can only rig so hard though before it becomes obvious. It was probably more like 49-46 or something without DNC shenanigans.

Pretty sure she lost because democracy exists

They get a vote for each representative and for each senator. Therefore, each state is assured 2 from the start, and then everyone is given the rest proportionally (at least 1) from the other's left.

Therefore, as long as you are very popular in mutiple states, you can win the election without popular vote.

To give you an idea, the 10 largest states have slightly more than half the population of the lower 40. If all the top 10 voted for someone, and the other 40 voted for someone else, what is more just? Electing the guy chosen by most voters located in the smaller groups of states? Or electing the guy chosen by the greater number of states, even if the support in them is smaller than the other guy? If the first, what does the notion of a state matter? And if the later, how can you claim popular vote exists?

The compromise between the need of ensuring the states and the individuals are represented is to then make the smaller states have an assured number of votes while larger states can get more if they grow. So, you either win by being very popular, and thus getting all the biggest states and few small ones, or you win by having wide appeal at many different states and a few midsize ones, but being valid responses to the questions above.

Hillary got votes from women and minorities simply because she was a female and not Trump. These people didn't really give a shit about her or any of her politics, so they never bothered turning up to rallies to hear about what she plans to do or boring shit like that.

In comparison, Trump had a large amount of dedicated support that was interested in him being president, not simply some Republican or man or other trait.

>intimidation
Aren't you voting anonymous in the US? How do they intimidate the voters? Can't you just say you're voting for Hillary, and then vote Trump. Or is it actuality as bad as in African "democracies" where they stand over your shoulder with an AK47 when you cast your vote.

Yep. The electoral college ensures that the candidate that wins must have what I call "concensus appeal", where it isn't neccesarily the one who is most popular, but rather than one that the support is strongly spread (case point, Trump winning more states by larger percentages than hillary). However, this can get skewed and thrown about by the FPTP system they currently have, where all the votes are given out to the absolute winner

Actually, remove California. If you remove California, Trump wins by over 2 million votes. I haven't done a turnout analysis of the different states, cause that information is to far spread out, but I think it's interesting to note a few facts:

California's registered voters are only 76% of the total elegible voters, and in this election only 51% of the registered voters even voted. That means that the actual turnout of california is 39%, which is 11% lower than the general election turn out. Make your own conclusions of that.