5 ms·

I mean Trump currently does have the majority of votes.

kem 10y ago
The discrepancy between the EV and the popular vote is dangerous politically, in my opinion. Its significance is really underestimated, because you have the outcome unhinged from the actual vote result or sentiment; the popular vote has to overcome some structural feature that favors a different outcome. What we have now is, again, the prospect of a president who was not elected by a majority of the population. All these discussions interpreting popular opinion based on a Trump presidency are a bit moot to me because they equate the two when they're not the same. I don't disagree with a lot of the points being made here, because clearly something about voting for Trump resonated with a lot of Americans. However, if it turns out that Trump didn't win the popular vote, it is technically true that the president elect was disfavored by a majority of the voters. It's a dangerous, unfair trend and only exacerbates disillusionment with the political process.
- tlrobinson 10y ago
  Well, the majority of the population didn't even vote.
- sgc 10y ago
  But there is a valid reason for it. The US is a union of States, and they hold real power. I am not sure they should give up their power because it is too complicated for some people to understand. At the same time, I would prefer States to allot their electoral votes proportionally so that they could properly represent their population. Nevertheless, there would still be rounding errors.
Scarblac 10y ago
No, Clinton does. Just in the wrong places.
- mrweasel 10y ago
  Right now, Trump actually have the majority popular vote as well, with 700.000 more votes.
  - agrajag 10y ago
    Many votes are still left to be counted in the very blue states of CA, OR, and WA. Models such as the NYT upshot model give a high degree of confidence that those states will tip the popular vote balance to Clinton.
  - winstonewert 10y ago
    Majority means > 50%, neither candidate is going to have a majority.
ohwello 10y ago
Yes, but high population liberal areas like CA have yet to report.
Twisell 10y ago
Maybe time for the US to finally consider Universal suffrage... The scenario look like G.W.Bush first election over again...
- henrikschroder 10y ago
  The US does have universal suffrage, it's just that the President isn't elected by the popular vote. There are ways to achieve that though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta...
  - Twisell 10y ago
    Sorry I was lost in translation. I'm French and I shamefully forgot the most importa part of the expression. I meant direct universal suffrage.

kem 10y ago

The discrepancy between the EV and the popular vote is dangerous politically, in my opinion. Its significance is really underestimated, because you have the outcome unhinged from the actual vote result or sentiment; the popular vote has to overcome some structural feature that favors a different outcome. What we have now is, again, the prospect of a president who was not elected by a majority of the population. All these discussions interpreting popular opinion based on a Trump presidency are a bit moot to me because they equate the two when they're not the same. I don't disagree with a lot of the points being made here, because clearly something about voting for Trump resonated with a lot of Americans. However, if it turns out that Trump didn't win the popular vote, it is technically true that the president elect was disfavored by a majority of the voters. It's a dangerous, unfair trend and only exacerbates disillusionment with the political process.

tlrobinson 10y ago
Well, the majority of the population didn't even vote.
sgc 10y ago
But there is a valid reason for it. The US is a union of States, and they hold real power. I am not sure they should give up their power because it is too complicated for some people to understand. At the same time, I would prefer States to allot their electoral votes proportionally so that they could properly represent their population. Nevertheless, there would still be rounding errors.

Scarblac 10y ago

No, Clinton does. Just in the wrong places.

mrweasel 10y ago
Right now, Trump actually have the majority popular vote as well, with 700.000 more votes.
- agrajag 10y ago
  Many votes are still left to be counted in the very blue states of CA, OR, and WA. Models such as the NYT upshot model give a high degree of confidence that those states will tip the popular vote balance to Clinton.
- winstonewert 10y ago
  Majority means > 50%, neither candidate is going to have a majority.

ohwello 10y ago

Yes, but high population liberal areas like CA have yet to report.

Twisell 10y ago

Maybe time for the US to finally consider Universal suffrage... The scenario look like G.W.Bush first election over again...

henrikschroder 10y ago
The US does have universal suffrage, it's just that the President isn't elected by the popular vote. There are ways to achieve that though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta...
- Twisell 10y ago
  Sorry I was lost in translation. I'm French and I shamefully forgot the most importa part of the expression. I meant direct universal suffrage.