She won the popular vote so how did she lose so badly? American politics are a joke...

She won the popular vote so how did she lose so badly? American politics are a joke. How can the one most people hate win?

Other urls found in this thread:

edition.cnn.com/election/results/president
cnn.com/election/results
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

YOUR PARTY SOLD YOU OUT, BITCH BOY

PACK

IT

UP

She needed more Photoshop

>The leader of your country should be decided by Commifornia

How about no.

Because she probably doesn't actually have the popular vote. They haven't counted all the votes yet and the ones that remain are from military members and red states.

Because our system is set up so rednecks in low population areas have more representation than the average citizen in the cities. (because otherwise waaa it wouldn't be fair)

If you don't know how our fucking electoral system works you shouldn't even be allowed on this board.

yeah because MI PA WI FL and OH are all low population redneck areas

This. It's within the margin of error anyhow so reporting that Clinton actually """"won"""" the popular vote is specious at best

she lost the popular vote, she lost because she is a demon worshipping pedophile coke dealing lesbian from Arkansas who is a straight up murderous liar carpetbagger

and everybody saw through it but the most retarded

people with no street sense

...

Hence why the still haven't counted the final votes for some reason

Thats because us rednecks build powerplants and grow crops that feed your baby ass.

Without power and food you would die.

we're not a democracy, We're a representative Republic. The Constitution is set up this way to protect against mob rule

this. you idiot

I somewhat agree, and I'm fully aware that in normal democracy popular vote is the most important way to elect someone.
But USA is a big country. How can you say "the majority say so" when there is distant and under-populated states that can't express themselves in this particular case ?
With USA, counting only popular vote means that you only take the vote of big cities, forgetting the rest of the population. I'm not for Trump, I'm not for Clinton, but I think that it is somewhat difficult to only take popular vote in consideration.
I don't understand american politics too, but as an american, you have to understand that this country is peculiar, especially because it is compound of different states with different laws.

See I don't understand this. the liberal ABSOLUTELY detest putin yet they themselves are essentialy communist yet say they hate it. Even though putin is an ex- communist but still. Liberals are hypocrites

Because most of her votes came from heavily Democrat areas like NY and CA and OR and WA.
Most of the Republicans didn't vote there because they knew it wouldn't matter due to how heavily outplayed they are.

This. Finally someone gets that the economy isn't a fucking game.

Nice

It's like (((they))) don't even bother to research before (((they))) bait

he electoral college system was a compromise in the Constitution meant to ensure that the President represents all the country and not just the most populous areas.

Under a popular vote, only a few states like New York, California, Florida and Texas, would decide every presidential election. The smaller states would have little say in choosing the President and would feel even more neglected by Washington than they already are. The electoral college ensures that the President must take the interests of the smaller states into consideration, regardless of the popular vote.

*The

get out of your little blue bubble

It feels unfair but it's there in order to allow more geographically wider audience to have a say to their governance. Like it or not, without such system, vast country like USA wouldn't stay intact because of demographic isolation. Globalization has lead to same problems in the history and is repeating itself today. USA hasn't yet reached it's geographical/governing limits and is at least trying to hold onto their best solution up to date.

If you can come up with idea that serves people's individual rights better without causing malfunctioning metastasis in the geographically and politically too isolated populations, you can tell us right here and receive the Nobel peace prize nomination tomorrow.

She didn't win the popular vote, the votes are still be counted and trump is project to win the popular vote desu edition.cnn.com/election/results/president

The small states get more votes than they should relative to their population.

The system is entirely fucked. She should have won. Nobody likes Trump.

>55 point handicap
>still lose

...

>implying geographical distributions means anything at all

We use the electoral college because we're a democratic republic, not a pure democracy. With the popular vote, LA and NYC alone would decide the winner every time, and candidates would have no reason to give a single fuck about anywhere else because that's not where the votes are. The EC allows the state governments to be represented, so candidates need to win over Bumfuck, Nowhere too and the people there won't get screwed by Californians and New Yorkers

The entire system is in place so more than just the people in densely populated cities can have a say in what policies are important to the American people. As much as I'm sure a lot of liberals would love that.

This. California has a ton of republicans but they don't vote because LA and the Bay Area control the election.

>we're just going to set some random shitty rules that advantage us for no reason

No, she won the popular vote, she'll be the next president.

They trucked Michael J Fox to different polling stations all night to smash dat vote button

Check out CNN and see the truth, cuck.

It's somewhat 50/50 and votes are still be counted. Some people prefer Trump, deal with it.
I agree with you, but this is a different debate. We are talking about popular vote vs. electoral vote.
Some states has to much power, but seeing the results, I doubt that changing the number of electoral votes for some states (in a reasonable manner) should have changed anything.
Some democrat states should be lowered too.

North/South Carolina and Georgia are growing so rapidly, they're practically not even southern anymore. It's terrible.

Apparently it is in place to prevent a candidate that receives the most votes nationally from winning.

CNN PREDICTS TRUMP WILL WIN POPULAR VOTE!! cnn.com/election/results

>this is a different debate

It's not a debate. More people voted for her, she should be the president.

1. She barely won the popular vote. It's so close that Trump could even overtake her in with the little votes still being counted.

2. America is a federation of states. Nobody would be happy if California and Texas could bully the entire country. That is why we have the electoral college.

In a normal democracy yes. Not in a country that is willing to take small states in consideration. Do you know a country like USA ?
> It's not a debate.
Thank you for leaving pol. Come back anytime.

Checked. This thread will be posted 6 gorillion more times for the next month.

hundreds of thousands(millions?) of people in california and new york didn't vote knowing it was pointless. Other states who knew their states were going red or blue anyway voted 3rd party. Had these people known it would be a popular vote they would have voted differently.

You can't just assume she would have won a popular election had the rules been in place to work that way from the start.

This is like losing a game of spades, then saying you didn't lose because you would have won if you were playing hearts instead. No shit, but if we were playing that way from the start I would have altered my strategy and still won.

According to Democrats, Putin "hacked" all their base and influenced the election. He laid all their dirty laundry out for everyone to see. The content of those emails doesn't matter, they want to kill the messenger. They're willing to go to war over that shit; not willing to fight themselves, though.

>0.04% difference in votes
you're SO right. the 200k illegals that voted illegally should determine the POTUS

The electoral college was created for two reasons:

1. To prevent presidential elections from being decided entirely by high population states (which in 1789 were New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia) at the expense of low population states.
2. Back in 1789, most people had a grade school education, if that, so direct democracy wasn't desirable.

Today it's more a case of preventing big cities like Los Angeles rather than big states from determining elections. The higher vote total that Gore and Hillary got was largely because of NYC and LA.

I totally agree with you pal.

why are you comparing Hillary and Gore when Hillary is only like .05%up with votes to still be counted?

>She won the popular vote

She didn't...

She's just grasping at straws.

They always wait until days to weeks after the election to count Military Votes.

>More people voted for her
wrong, in countries with a voluntary election system, any eligible voters that do not vote are assumed to have been conceded to whoever wins as it is assumed they are content (or discontent) with all candidates to the point where they do not feel compelled to vote

>Dat proof doe

The Founders originally imagined that sectionalism would occur between big and small states. This didn't actually happen and it became North vs South.

You know what's a joke?

Anyone thinking they're leftist by supporting the woman who stole the election from Bernie Sanders?

>she won the popular vote
not yet nigger

>what is winner-takes all
>what is presidentialism
Kid u gotta learn stuff. I'll give u 1 more
>what is the constution
Yout answer is there

Let us begin:

Firstly:
Shillary: 59,588,878
Trump: 59,353,324
59,588,878-59,353,324=235,554
A margin of error considered acceptable is normally around 1%.
So, how many people voted?
59,588,878+59,353,324=118,942,202
So, 235,554 is what percentage of 118,942,202? 0.198%, 0.8% less than an acceptable margin of error. Therefore, Shillary's 'win' within the popular vote is likely not only a margin of error, it is well within the requirements for a margin of error.

Secondly:
That means as only 118,942,202 people voted and 177,232,466.52 didn't (as 24% of the population are below 18), 32.889% of the population shouldn't be complaining.

BTFO.

>Wasted votes are included in the general population.

Is there a way you can push California out to sea or somthing?

Don't underestimate how many votes the Democrats lost because of disillusioned Bernouts who believe they were robbed. I knew that was going to happen, they were going to stay at home just as Republican voters did with Romney.